Saudi Arabia Set To Ban WhatsApp, Skype 122
Reuters reports that Saudi Arabia's government, after banning Viber within the kingdom, is poised to prohibit at least two other such communication apps: Skype and WhatsApp. Says the article: "Conventional international calls and texts are a lucrative earner for telecom operators in Saudi Arabia, which hosts around nine million expatriates. These foreign workers are increasingly using Internet-based applications such as Viber to communicate with relatives in other countries, analysts say." With fewer legal options, a wide-scale Internet censorship regime would be easier to implement, too.
Re:Not in the land of the Free (Score:5, Insightful)
What is this land you speak of?
Re:Not in the land of the Free (Score:5, Insightful)
Finland.
Re: (Score:1)
No, Finland is not free. They are under Copyright dictatorship.
Re: (Score:2)
I am not sure of the local MPAA/RIAA sock puppet name is in Finland.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not in the land of the Free (Score:5, Funny)
There's a very old joke.
Hijacker: take this plane to a free country.
Pilot: this is a airliner, not a fucking spaceship.
Re: (Score:2)
Iceland.
Re: (Score:2)
What is this land you speak of?
U \ {Earth} ?
Re: (Score:3)
Of course this could never happen in the land of the free
Well, that's true, it couldn't. Freedom is being able to be wiretapped in whichever app or service you chose...
Privacy, by the way, is the right to keep a lawful secret between you and the government.
I'm not the first one to point this out, but sometimes wonder if one way to read the two most famous dystopian novels is to read Brave New World as a prequel to 1984.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Privacy, by the way, is the right to keep a lawful secret between you and the government.
No, it is not. Privacy is the right to decide what to expose and to whom to expose it. Governments should find proof of unlawful behavior without having to break into an individual privacy sphere. I'm sure that with 24/7 surveillance we could find a lot of illegal behaviors such as . This does not mean that a gov of a free country should do it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Privacy is the right to decide what to expose and to whom to expose it.
Well, that clashes with obscenity in the general case.
Popularity (Score:5, Interesting)
My roomate is from Saudi and he has mentioned to me on several occasions that WhatsApp is incredibly popular there. Everyone he knows uses it, including older family members. Banning something so popular would upset a lot of people...
Re: (Score:1)
Actually the SA government care very much what people think at the moment, because they don't want the Arab Spring to spread to them. Of course the basket case that is Syria right now is a good reason for most people to be adverse to it.
The biggest users of these apps are the Pakistani migrant workers who can't afford to pay telco prices to contact their families. This will certainly hit them hard.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Popularity (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
...telcos here are not so happy about its popularity but luckily there is little that they can do about it.
Exactly. I don't really see how they think they can prevent people using Skype or Whatsapp.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> I don't really see how they think they can prevent people
That's easy:
Only cowards use censorship.
Surveillance state (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Surveillance state (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I am not sure if this is an attempt at censorship. This smells more like a case of the government helping out with corporate interests.
Skype has point and click NSA surveillance (Score:3, Interesting)
We now know that Skype is accessible from PRISM, and thanks to the Senator we know that they don't need a warrant, every analyst can spy on any phone the country on a whim. The same classification for voice intercepts is for VOIP content, and we also know that Skype surveillance is point and click from the PRISM leak.
So NO COUNTRY SHOULD PERMIT SKYPE, any NSA analyst can intercept it simply on a whim with a point and click.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us
Re: (Score:2)
I only use Skype for the communications which I want the NSA to listen into, to mislead them as to what I'm really up to.
Re: (Score:2)
After the demise of Saudi Arabia's current regime, within a foreseeable time now, the ensuing chaos will be unimaginable.
I don't really have any trouble imagining the supposedly unimaginable. From the rest of the world's point of view, it'll be a considerable disruption of global oil supply possibly with a bit of domino toppling of neighboring governments over subsequent years. In other words, the mid to late 70s revisited.
Re: (Score:2)
Meh, it's easy to imagine it. Just look at Arabia between 1900 and 1925. A mess of tribes all vying for control. And sooner or later one will get up and take over.
Re: (Score:3)
When a regime begins using such methods as these in order to keep sitting in the saddle, its days are counted. After the demise of Saudi Arabia's current regime, within a foreseeable time now, the ensuing chaos will be unimaginable.
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is not 'beginning' to use such methods. Repression is the rule there and always has been.
Why.. (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't see you yanks spreading freedom in the saudi?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Consider learning then. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia%E2%80%93United_States_relations [wikipedia.org]
They let the US build air bases there (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Army_installations_in_Saudi_Arabia)
They public support US, and the US has a good economic relationship with them. You want the US to invade over them threatening to ban an App? after they just sold a 60billion$ arms package to them! The US would lose soldiers to their own weapons, how do you
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see you yanks spreading freedom in the saudi?
That's because we're too busy suppressing freedom in our own country.
Ah, and because we like Saudi oil.
Re: (Score:2)
Because ... (Score:2)
The spice must flow ...
tech tax (Score:2)
looks like its time for another payment from Microsoft!
Isn't WhatsApp owner an ex SPY? (Score:2)
Skype with M$/NSA at the helm is not better.
Cat & mouse game will continue... (Score:5, Informative)
This has been going on for a long time - Skype was banned or crippled in the UAE for a long time, but recently unblocked:
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/business/technology/2013/04/08/Etisalat-unblocks-Skype-website-in-the-UAE.html [alarabiya.net]
At the time, it was more about securing revenue from the lucrative expat market than locking-down protest movements.
Of course, these latter do exist, but less so in Saudi & UAE than, say, Egypt.
I guess this latest move will just drive more interest in alternatives, which are often 'open' and perhaps more secure...
http://www.pidgin.im/ [pidgin.im]
http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/fed-up-with-skype-here-are-6-of-the-best-free-alternatives/ [makeuseof.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Those subversive open source alternatives! They keep cropping up - regimes around the world are going to have to ban open source!
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with the current open source alternatives is that while they cover all desktop platforms, they don't do mobile messaging, much less cross-platform mobile messaging.
Re: (Score:2)
pidgin, and libpurple(the underneath library), are simple multi-IM clients that let you use one, easy to use, powerful IM client on any network, with any protocol.
This is great because it puts you in charge, rather than your instance messaging services and allows for universal plugins and features, like encryption across platforms, both on your computer and services on the internet.
pidgin has been widely ported, and the libpurple(all the functionality, of pidgin without the interface), even more p
Re: (Score:2)
Does Pidgin have an iOS implementation or a BlackBerry implementation? I sure can't find a libpurple implementation in AppStore on a quick search (don't have a BlackBerry, so no idea).
> libpurple has an android port. So whatever interface you make, will have all the same back end as pidgin, and all the same features like an OTR plugin.
I am not sure what you are getting at here. Libraries are useless for consumers. They want apps. They are not going to make interfaces. Which libpurple based apps can I rec
Free and open source messaging alternatives (Score:5, Informative)
Apropos of absolutely nothing, here's some open source alternatives that also offer encryption (YMMV on how robust the encryption is).
- Jitsi [jitsi.org] (formerly SIP Communicator) is an audio/video and chat communicator that supports protocols such as SIP, XMPP/Jabber as well as a bunch of other protocols. Set up an XMPP server wherever you want and you're done. (I tried to set up Jabber to use with it on a Linux box on the weekend though and hit a few roadblocks, but more tech savvy people can probably power through them.)
- Mumble [sourceforge.net] - voice communications, intended primarily for gaming but will work with anything. Run your own voice servers and clients connect in, a la TeamSpeak/Ventrilo.
- RetroShare [sourceforge.net] - decentralised p2p file sharing and messaging system.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been writing my own. Not because I expect it to be used, but because it's a good way to learn how these things work.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been writing my own. Not because I expect it to be used, but because it's a good way to learn how these things work.
And easier than getting Ekiga properly configured.
Re: (Score:2)
My little project is actually quite fun. The clients authenticate each other via public key (4096-bit RSA), so there is no central authentication or identity server. The control packets are all essentially random if you don't have both the keys (sender's public and recipient's private) to decrypt them with, so even DPI couldn't identify and block the protocol. I need to get a real crypto expert to look through the design and make sure I've not missed anything obvious (Cryptography is an easy thing to do bad
Re: (Score:2)
Now THIS is an idea I have had for a while but lacked the skills (and time) to implement. Basically an IM client which does not log anything to disk by default (so there is nothing for anyone to recover about what was said or who was talking, great if you are in a country where the secret police like to seize the computers of suspected dissidents).
As difficult as possible to detect and block. Full end-to-end encryption with unique session keys (so even having the secret keys of all participants in the conve
It's all about thought control (Score:5, Insightful)
Q: Why would Saudi Arabia ban communication tools such as Viber, Whatsapp and Skype?
A: Because they have no control or access to the messages passed with these apps.
According to TFA, Viber was blocked for non-compliance, and that WhatsApp and Skype may be next on the list. What is most interesting is that the regulator issued a directive in March saying tools such as Viber, WhatsApp and Skype broke local laws, without specifying which laws.
What we do know is that in 2010, Blackberry was also banned by Saudi Arabia [techcrunch.com]. The reason behind the ban was because BBM did not allow their customers' exchanges to be monitored by government. The ban was lifted after BB made a deal with the government to share user data.
Skype, Viber and WhatsApp AFAIK do not share their user data (for now).
Why has Saudi Arabia become emboldened to act now? Because the disclosure of the PRISM program makes them immune from international criticism. They can rightly point out that the US government already has access to the data. It shouldn't take long for other countries to follow suit with similar demands.
Re: (Score:1)
They may simply be trying to protect their citizens from PRISM. At least some of who may be engaging in activities that would be embarrassing to the Saudis if the US found out...
Re:It's all about thought control (Score:5, Insightful)
QFT. Mod parent up.
Why has Saudi Arabia become emboldened to act now? Because the disclosure of the PRISM program makes them immune from international criticism. They can rightly point out that the US government already has access to the data. It shouldn't take long for other countries to follow suit with similar demands.
All countries involved with PRISM have waved goodbye to any moral high ground they ever had any claim to. They're monitoring private communications exactly like the worse of any repressive regime. And before anyone takes issue; I'm not saying they are as bad as a repressive regime, but that they have given all repressive regimes an easy and justifiable defence for their activities. Why should the US have access to data on their citizens that they don't?
Whether the governments of countries involved in PRISM care that they've lost the moral high ground is another matter. But you'd think their citizens would. Perhaps all governments are fine with the monitoring actions of the others. Universal monitoring would make all their jobs easier.
Re: (Score:3)
Just because we are citizens of a country whose government commits wrongs doesn't mean we should just ignore every wrong committed by every other government in the world. We can still condemn BOTH, you know.
Re: (Score:2)
My kingdom for mod points. It is rare that an item needs to be +6 or higher and this is one of them. :(
Re: (Score:1)
A: They encourage prostitution
Re: (Score:2)
Just FYI, the main law is being broken is that the VoIP providers are unlicensed telecommunications providers.
In order to be a licensed telecommunications provider, your company must meet certain ownership requirements and comply with government oversight.
Part of the government oversight is the tariffs charged. Part of the ownership requirements ensures profit for the country.
Since the infrastructure to provide the internet is subsidized by international minutes (remember where the content, and where Saudi
Re: (Score:2)
After banning some apps, then mobile phones, then tablets, then... from what point people of SA will start to complain?
Re: (Score:2)
Q: Why would Saudi Arabia ban communication tools such as Viber, Whatsapp and Skype?
A: Because they have no control or access to the messages passed with these apps.
According to TFA, Viber was blocked for non-compliance, and that WhatsApp and Skype may be next on the list. What is most interesting is that the regulator issued a directive in March saying tools such as Viber, WhatsApp and Skype broke local laws, without specifying which laws.
What we do know is that in 2010, Blackberry was also banned by Saudi Arabia [techcrunch.com]. The reason behind the ban was because BBM did not allow their customers' exchanges to be monitored by government. The ban was lifted after BB made a deal with the government to share user data.
Skype, Viber and WhatsApp AFAIK do not share their user data (for now).
Why has Saudi Arabia become emboldened to act now? Because the disclosure of the PRISM program makes them immune from international criticism. They can rightly point out that the US government already has access to the data. It shouldn't take long for other countries to follow suit with similar demands.
Or it might be to kill free competition for STC (the incumbent telephone company owned by the government...the government being the Royal family).
Re: (Score:2)
completely ineffective (Score:4, Interesting)
You can chat over any TCP connection. You can chat through HTTP on a web page. Short of banning all Internet connections and all web access, they can't even come up with a legal definition that kills online chatting, let alone police it.
Re: (Score:2)
You can chat over any TCP connection. You can chat through HTTP on a web page. Short of banning all Internet connections and all web access, they can't even come up with a legal definition that kills online chatting, let alone police it.
'You' in the generic sense can, 'you' in the 'a given user' sense is much less likely to be able to. 'You' in the sense of 'a given user who is using a locked-down device that he can't even add non-approved software to' is even less likely.
Absolutely effective bans are pretty hard. Breaking things hard enough to keep the clueless from having them is substantially easier.
There's much more to ban (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Other companies might have demonstrated how their messages and emails are exchanged and thus encrypted communications are now available to regional security agencies.
Decentralised messenger (Score:2)
They are not worried about (Score:5, Interesting)
So Anyhoodles (Score:2)
This impulse, that all money and resources were required to support one state-run system, and so outlawing competition was warranted, was commonly accepted throughout the West for much of the 20th century.
It still exists at the core of the promoters of single-payer medicine and public schools, where some dislike vouchers following students.
So don't lift your noses too quickly into the air.
Portal icon for this article is not quite right (Score:1)
http://imgur.com/lbzhxoE [imgur.com]
FTFY.
I am SHOCKED (Score:5, Insightful)
I am shocked that a country that forbids women to drive, kills young girls for fear they may be dressed immodestly [wikipedia.org], bans Barbie dolls [wikipedia.org] and amputates the hands of thieves [wikipedia.org] would stoop to such barbaric behaviour!
Re: (Score:2)
Terrorists don't use email except to misdirect the authorities.
Re: (Score:2)
If their telco's lowered the price of calls, then perhaps folks would not mind if Internet calling was less available.
The number of people who think this story is really about Saudi Arabia needing the telco income is asymptotic to zero.
Saudi Arabia (Score:1)
This is Saudi Arabia. Anyone who knows anything about how that government works should only be surprised that they didn't do this long ago.
Do I Understand This Correctly? (Score:2)
This is not about protecting SMS revenues (Score:1)
As to those posters who immediately link this to Islam. Grow up please. This is just a dirty old patriarchy and such censorship has
Saudi expatriates in USA (Score:2)
Perhaps we should actively obstruct their communications to Saudi Arabia? Sounds preposterous doesn't it?
Can we use WebRTC yet? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
"many" Islamic countries I'd agree with, but I'm much more dubious about "most". And as someone who has gone to a number of such countries in the past, who will do in the future, who has had to declare my religion (atheist) on government documents repeatedly (as well as surrendering my passport before going out to work), I pay reasonably close attention to such issues. Which is part of th
Re:kill them all (Score:5, Informative)
So, yes there are some evil Hindu and Sikhs, but it is not entrenched as a specific commandment in the religion like in Islam
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say a good number of the Islamic, Hindu and Sihk honor killings are due to the practitioners living in hugely patriarchal countries, the religion came second.. it would be like looking at the southern US and saying that all Christians are obviously end of times gun nuts.
Re:kill them all (Score:4, Informative)
I'd say a good number of the Islamic, Hindu and Sihk honor killings are due to the practitioners living in hugely patriarchal countries, the religion came second.. it would be like looking at the southern US and saying that all Christians are obviously end of times gun nuts.
You'd be wrong, check the linked article it is frequently carried out second and third generation Islamic immigrants in Western countries.
Re: (Score:3)
Could it be that the reason why the article is able to point out that they are carried out in western societies, is because;
1) Those western societies are unfamiliar with the practice, and thus find it abhorant enough to make it to the news
2) Said western societies actually have a news organisation to report these matters, instead of them taking place in some backwaters hill village in the middle of nowhere.
You will probably find just as many honour killings occur in the original countries too.
Absolutely, honour killings count as normal behaviour in Islamic countries. I was just refuting the assertion that people carried out "honour killings" because they came from backward countries rather than because they were following the teachings of Islam
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely, honour killings count as normal behaviour in Islamic countries. I was just refuting the assertion that people carried out "honour killings" because they came from backward countries rather than because they were following the teachings of Islam
He said "patriarchal countries" shit head not "backward".
OK, so you don't consider highly patriarchal countries to be backward. I do.
Just because a bunch of fucked up men twist around their religion, doesnt mean the entire population following it should be condemned nor the religion be disgraced!
Yes this is exactly what I said about their being some Hindus and Sikhs. I could also add Christians [guardian.co.uk]. However Islam is unique in that it is a command of the religion:
Sahi Muslim No. 4206:
“A woman came to the prophet and asked for purification by seeking punishment. He told her to go away and seek God’s forgiveness. She persisted four times and admitted she was pregnant. He told her to wait until she had given birth.
Re: (Score:2)
I dont see how you are any better than they are with regards to tolerance!
Because I don't advocate subduing those of other faiths, killing people who change faith, killing relatives for honour, etc.
Of course! You only condemn EVERYBODY following that faith. Sure u r totally not intolerant!
Of course I condemn everybody following a faith that calls for the subjugation and murder of others. I acknowledge that there may be some nominal Muslims who only call themselves that because of the death penalty for leaving, and I don't condemn these.
India is fourth most dangerous place in the world (Score:1)
India is fourth most dangerous place in the world for women
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/india-is-fourth-most-dangerous-place-in-the-world-for-women-poll/1/141639.html [intoday.in]
Re: (Score:1)
And why are those countries so hugely patriarchal? Why are women initially placed on a pedestal of purity, and in a moment dragged down and stabbed to death? Why are the majority of reported honour killings happening among Muslim populations across many countries (including the west).
Christ, the foundations of this practice are enshrined in Sharia when women are treated like chattel and punished for not seeing the world through cloth. Tell men that women must be subservient to them, and that women have litt
Re: (Score:2)
Honour killing is not mentioned anywhere in Islam, in fact it is forbidden. It's a cultural issue unfortunatelly. I challange you to find where it is endorsed in Islam... you won't, because it's not there.
I'll rise to the challenge:
Quran- 4:15
“If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, take the evidence of four (reliable) witness from amongst you against them; if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them. Or God ordain for them some (other) way.”
Sahi Bukhari: 8:6814:
Narrated Jabir bin Abdullah al-Ansari: “A man from the tribe of Bani Aslam came to Allah’s Messenger [Muhammad] and informed him that he had committed illegal sexual intercourse; and he bore
Re: (Score:3)
Aside from this basically being what the fucking nazi's were all about, it's an unbelievably retarded point of view to have given that the majority of muslims genuinely AREN'T trying to bother anyone. If they actually were, believe me you would fucking know about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Weren't the Nazis really more about killing or subjugating everyone who was not a Nazi? That actually sounds a lot like Islam as well, according to its 'holy books'.