China Wants US-Owned Hotels to Censor Internet

jp_papin writes "The Chinese government is demanding that US-owned hotels there filter Internet service during the upcoming Olympic Games in Beijing, US Senator Sam Brownback has alleged. The Chinese government is requiring US-owned hotels to install Internet filters to 'monitor and restrict information coming in and out of China,' Brownback said Thursday. 'This is an insult to the spirit of the games and an affront to American businesses,' he said. 'I call on China to immediately rescind this demand.' US State Department spokesman Tom Casey said he wasn't aware of those specific requests from the Chinese government, but Brownback said he got the information on Internet filtering from 'two different reliable but confidential sources.' The State Department is apparently continuing dialog with China about freedom of expression."

Re:seriously...

[Ngarrang]

Yeah, I have to wonder, as well. Maybe the world was so naive as to believe the Olympics would change China's way? China doesn't care what the world thinks and has proven this time and time again. What political expediency was hoped to be gained from this move has failed.

Happening already.

[martin-k]

How is that different from what's happening now? I stayed at the Hilton in Beijing (supposedly property of an American company) last year, and they of course filtered the net connection. No boobie pages, some political pages didn't work; even SSH connections were impossible for one whole day during my stay.

The Original Press Release

[value_added]

The press release can be read in its entirety on the official Sam Brownback [senate.gov] site.

Seems a fair enough position for a politician to take, given that he sits on one or more subcomittees that are involved with international/human rights types of issues.

On the other hand, he is a Republican.

And he's from Kansas.

If you're not prepared to fill in your own joke, the Wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] on him should give you some ideas.

Re:skeptical

[spooje]

Most filtering isn't done at the backbone level, it's done at the small ISPs that are located in the major apartment complexes. The government gives them directives and it's up to them to impliment them. This is why some complexes will have access to sites (like wikipedia) while others in the same city won't.

Re:The Original Press Release

[OS24Ever]

Having grown up in Kansas and voted against him every chance I had I don't like the guy, and the company he keeps.

That being said..

one of his children is adopted from China. he puts his money where his mouth is sometimes, and I respect him for that sometimes.

But ...

Just look at his voting record. He's voted to force the installation of the same software China wants to use. It seems extremely hypocritical and headline grabbing move to me, instead of something true.

We are no longer the land of the free and the home of the brave, and that's the way it is and we like it apparently, because no one will make any effort. We like being the land of the monitored and home of the scared. It's not a big deal, and it's to stop the terrorists.

China's doing it because they're mean. We're doing it to protect you, so we're ok. That's the politicians logic for you.

Re:Happening already.

[Stephan202]

If they only filter by port, you could open up port 443 (HTTPS) for SSH, in addition to port 22. It is unlikely that they block that port. I did this once for a friend who was in Armenia at the time. Worked for him.

Wow, this is hypocritical!

[Richard_at_work]

In February 2006, the Hotel Maria Isabel Sheraton hotel (a franchise of the Sheraton group) in Mexico City was ordered by the US Treasury Department to throw out a group of Cuban officials who were staying there, because their presence violated US law and the Sheraton Group was an American company. In complying with the requirement, the hotel broke local law and faced $500,000 fines before the situation was smoothed over.

Re:What would be cool is

[Phybersyk0]

This isn't too likely as many Chinese still do not own personal computers. Many obtain their access to the net via internet cafes. If you get your access at a cafe it kinds sucks because you are required to prove that you're 18 or older, which means you must present identification, which is recorded with the workstation you use and subsequently the IP address and time in which you used it.

For home access in larger cities like Shanghai, adsl is the way to go, and you purchase time, and you get a static IP. Also traceable to you.

I was in China for a couple of weeks immediately following the recent Tibet fracas (which is quite perplexing if you listen to all 3 sides of the discussion).

Based on my personal observation, The "Great Firewall" isn't so much a firewall (which in my eyes connotes address/port blocking) but it's more the corporate content filter. Too many keywords and your transmission gets squelched.

Example: The first day I tried to use myspace.com and I couldn't get a single word to load. The next day, Myspace would load, I could log in, but when I selected the option to update my personal Blog, I got half a page of unrendered HTML code. I didn't even bother after that.

Re:China wants hotels in China to follow Chinese L

[alan_dershowitz]

Why is this marked funny? Back in 2001 during their Beijing hosting bid, China promised precisely NOT to do this. They also promised total freedom of movement and reporting for international press, which they have also broken (see: Tibet.) China is hoping you all have short memories, but I forget nothing. I wish I could link to a news article with all the stuff they promised, but going back that far most sites charge for access.

Re:Following Chinese laws on Chinese soil?

[Nocturnal Deviant]

actually theres a section in the foreign policy act that pretty much says "if you fuck up in other countries your at their mercy" its honestly something like "all americans are required to follow the country they are visiting's laws and if they commit a crime they are subject to their laws and regulations" which of course means if we try to bring a gun into another country and they have anti gun laws your either going to get turned away at the border or arrested within the border then the only right you have is to alert the US embassy that your stuck there a lot of countries don't even afford Americans the right to an attorney. I've been arrested and released in Canada and Russia for crimes i didn't do, in Canada it took them a week to realize it was somebody else so i was put on immigration hold(aka i was almost deported), as for russia they locked me up for a month for a parking ticket, saying that i had violated some statute till the embassy got its act together and pretty much told them to fuck off and let me out...that was fun...i have to say american prison's are butterflies and bubblegum compared to russian ones...

âoeThe Connection Has Been Resetâ

[Jeremy Erwin]

From the March 2008 Atlantic Monthly [theatlantic.com]

In reality, what the Olympic-era visitors will be discovering is not the absence of China's electronic control but its new refinement--and a special Potemkin-style unfettered access that will be set up just for them, and just for the length of their stay. According to engineers I have spoken with at two tech organizations in China, the government bodies in charge of censoring the Internet have told them to get ready to unblock access from a list of specific Internet Protocol (IP) addresses--certain Internet cafes, access jacks in hotel rooms and conference centers where foreigners are expected to work or stay during the Olympic Games. (I am not giving names or identifying details of any Chinese citizens with whom I have discussed this topic, because they risk financial or criminal punishment for criticizing the system or even disclosing how it works. Also, I have not gone to Chinese government agencies for their side of the story, because the very existence of Internet controls is almost never discussed in public here, apart from vague statements about the importance of keeping online information "wholesome.")

Re:Following Chinese laws on Chinese soil?

[Zeinfeld]

Wow, an old-style Usenet kook! Here on Slashdot! Take a picture, quickly! See how he starts by rationally discussing the subject at hand in the first paragraph, before introducing an unrelated issue in the second that refers to a shared experience that nobody else had.

The second paragraph was a direct response to the first poster making an ironic reference to Americans expecting the right to keep and bear arms to extend to other countries. The great talk.politics.guns roadshow was anything but a singular experience. There must have been at least ten thousand people reading that particular thread.

There we were discussing the Archers and the Montana militia pops up to tell us we are living in a dictatorship [google.com] (the actual McVeigh posts were removed from the Deja Feed but you can see the flavor of the 'argument'). Then one of them goes off and murders 200 people.

The Internet is not like the regular news. In an Internet of a billion people you are going to meet a lot of kooks. But you are also going to find that there are a lot of people who have a direct connection to pretty much every major event. McVeigh spent his time between Wako and OKC building his bomb and spewing hate posts onto the Internet. He was not the most prominent gun nut, but he was pretty prominent.

The connection here that you appear to be deliberately avoiding is that it is not actually that rare for Americans to have somewhat peculiar notions about foreign countries. Such as the idea that a 'US hotel' operating in China does not have to follow Chinese law and that this is somehow a political affront to the United States as if every Hilton and Marriott in the world was a kind of US Embassy.

Re:skeptical

[quanticle]

Its probably not the VPN use per se. After all, China has lots of Western business people in it every day, and many of them will use a VPN to connect to their corporate offices. Most likely someone saw her browsing unapproved websites and mentioned it to someone who had the authority to do something about it.

Re:China wants hotels in China to follow Chinese L

[Anonymous Coward]

http://multimedia.olympic.org/pdf/en_report_299.pdf [olympic.org]

THEME 16: COMMUNICATIONS
AND MEDIA SERVICES
  Concept & Communication
The Beijing communications strategy is based on
a desire to provide greater opportunities for more
people to share the excitement of the Olympic
Games.
It was confirmed to the Commission that there
will be no restrictions on media reporting and
movement of journalists up to and including
the Olympic Games.

Re:seriously...

[sm62704]

AFAIK the US owns no hotels. Some US citizens may have privately owned hotels there but the US does not.

Sounds bogus

[hackingbear]

This news sounds bogus to me, exactly because the Chinese government is already doing the censoring:

1. The Great Firewall already blocks contents they don't like. So why would installing another filter at the hotel would work differently?
2. If they want to censor incoming/outgoing traffic, they can just do so right at the hotel's Internet service provider. That would be more effective, simpler and more reliable.
3. The hotel must have already logged each room's Internet activities. Why? If someone uses the hotel's connection to conduct frauds and criminal activities, the hotel must shield itself from liability anyway.

While I dislike China's censorship, I think this type of news looks bogus, attempts to get media attention, and has the exact purpose of exaggerating the situation.

Re:Following Chinese laws on Chinese soil?

[LoverOfJoy]

Just because Brownback is ultra conservative does not mean he's fine with willy nilly eletronic monitoring to "protect our freedoms" Why don't you read [thinkprogress.org] what Brownback [washingtonpost.com] has said about Bush's wiretapping? Maybe it'll cheer up that depression of yours just a bit.

Re:Following Chinese laws on Chinese soil?

[AndersOSU]

First, thanks for the information. Second, I'm astonished that Brownback isn't dutifully towing Bush's line. Since he is highly ranked in my list of least favorite senators, I assumed (my bad) that he couldn't possibly be even beginning to approach the right side of this issue.

That said, Brownback's criticism is very mild, basically saying we should hold hearings, and he voted yea [senate.gov] on the deeply flawed Senate FISA bill that grants the telecoms immunity for their illegal spying on American citizens.