Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Censorship The Internet

Iran Shuts Down Country's Internet In the Wake of Fuel Protests (techcrunch.com) 46

Posted by EditorDavid from the widespread-outages dept.
"Iran, one of the countries most strongly identified with the rise cyber terrorism and malicious hacking, appears now to be using an iron fist to turn on its own," reports TechCrunch: The country has reportedly shut down nearly all internet access in the country in retaliation to escalating protests that were originally ignited by a rise in fuel prices, according to readings taken by NetBlocks, a non-governmental organization that monitors cybersecurity and internet governance around the world...

The protests arose in response to a decision by the state to raise the price of gas in the country by 50%. As this AP article points out, Iran has some of the cheapest gas in the world -- in part because it has one of the world's biggest crude oil reserves -- and so residents in the country see cheap gas as a "birthright." Many use their cars not just to get around themselves but to provide informal taxi services to others, so -- regardless your opinion on whether using fossil fuels is something to be defended or not -- hiking up the prices cuts right to ordinary people's daily lives, and has served as the spark for protest in the country over bigger frustrations with the government and economy, as Iran continues to struggle under the weight of U.S. sanctions.

Clamping down on internet access as a way of trying to contain not just protesters' communication with each other, but also the outside world, is not an unprecedented move; it is part and parcel of how un-democratic regimes control their people and situations. Alarmingly, its use seems to be growing. Pakistan in September cut off internet access in specific regions response to protests over conflicts with India. And Russia -- which has now approved a bill to be able to shut down internet access should it decide to -- is now going to start running a series of drills to ensure its blocks work when they are being used in live responses.
On Twitter, NetBlocks reported yesterday that realtime network data "shows connectivity at 7% of ordinary levels after twelve hours of progressive network disconnections."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Iran Shuts Down Country's Internet In the Wake of Fuel Protests More

Iran Shuts Down Country's Internet In the Wake of Fuel Protests

Comments Filter:

  • Sudden spikes (Score:5, Interesting)

    by alvinrod ( 889928 ) on Sunday November 17, 2019 @06:03PM (#59424082)
    It doesn't matter what it is, but a sudden 50% spike in the cost of anything is going to draw the ire of consumers. It was stupid for Iran to subsidize prices or keep them artificially low to being with, but even more foolish to remove all or a large part of it at once. Even more so when they should have been able to look at the protests which occurred (and I guess are still ongoing) in France starting last year when the government proposed increased fuel taxes. It's not quite as simple as that and there are other contributing factors, but that was the straw that seemed to break the camel's back as it were.

    We see the same thing in the U.S. whenever a drug company bumps up the cost of some medicine.
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • It was US meddling that produced two previous Iranian revolutions. Both disastrous for their people.

        • Frankly, both were also disasterous for anyone who has had to deal with them since.

        • Comment removed based on user account deletion

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by DNS-and-BIND ( 461968 )

            You are factually incorrect. Jimmy Carter and the US State Department greenlighted the coup against the Shah. See, he was a big meanie, and Carter didn't like human rights abusers. That nice man the Ayatollah Khomeni was a moral person, plus he totally pinky swore to keep Iran in the US orbit after the revolution. Then it didn't happen and the Islamists were bigger human rights violators! Oopsie! And the Iranian Leftists who hated the Shah and supported the Revolution were murdered afterwards. Useful

            • I saw an interesting documentary recently and I came away with the impression that Iranians were sick of the Shah and while they didn't necessarily want an Islamic Republic, Khomeini was someone who they could agree with when he criticized the Shah. And since he was exiled, but exiling him couldn't silence him, he was seen as someone to rally around.

              I don't know...

              But speaking of the Shah's "White Revolution" the Ayatollah Khomeini once said that the only white thing about this revolution was the influenc

    • Interestingly, the last news story I saw about the yellow vests was a couple of thousand people turning out which may sound like a lot but is a far cry from the hundreds of thousands that were protesting 6 months ago. I may be wrong, but I got the impression the movement is pretty much dead.

      Perhaps TPTB in Iran think this too shall pass. Weren't there protests in Iran a few years back that passed without regime change? But who knows...you can only push that so far. 40 years ago or thereabouts there were

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Iran is being hurt by western sanctions and cheap petrol is one way to help the citizens suffering as a result. Keeps the cost of living down a bit at a time when imports can be expensive.

    • The real problems are when you have LARGE tax or price increases. Governments need to do this slowly so as to avoid economic impacts.
      This is why I am trying to get American CONgress to SLOWLY raise fuel taxes by .01/gal each month for 48, 96 or even 192 months. This way, ppl will buy based on what they KNOW will happen.
  • and there should be methods to prevent or work around any government shutdown of the internet, because thats sounds like how modern societies never get their freedoms and continue to be ruled by tyrants, the Elon Musk and the other elite if they have any benevolent bones in their bodies they need to put up internet satellites to make the internet free and unstoppable by any government

    • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

      by nonBORG ( 5254161 )
      There are methods, but nothing is free. You can get satellite internet from pretty much anywhere in the world already. Imransat offer it and it is affordable especially for low usage. Probably plenty of others also, you could setup a microwave link even to another country in some places.

      If you are not happy with the options then instead of asking some random rich guy to help (Elon Musk.) Think of something that suits what you want get it funded and build it. Make a company and be the rich benefactor.

  • ?

    (I didn't have anything else important to add.)

  • Streisand on stilts (Score:3)

    by swm ( 171547 ) <swmcd@world.std.com> on Sunday November 17, 2019 @08:57PM (#59424486) Homepage

    No internet ?!?!
    I'm angry.
    And bored.
    Now I've got nothing to do but protest in the streets.

    We'll see how this turns out...

  • American economic warfare (Score:4, Insightful)

    by guacamole ( 24270 ) on Sunday November 17, 2019 @09:08PM (#59424516)

    This whole crisis in Iran is the result of open economic warfare that USA is waging against this country, the main focus of which being sanctioning anyone who buys Iranian oil. This is after Iran complied with all portions of the "Nuclear Deal" (JCPOE). It's not clear if anyone will ever trust USA with any similar deals considering this and as well as the annihilation of Libya and Gaddafi after he already gave up his county's nascent WMD program. The signal we're sending is "make sure you don't give up your WMDs, because if you do we will come and sodomize your with a bayonet".

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Aighearach ( 97333 )

      This whole crisis in Iran is the result of open economic warfare that USA is waging against this country

      Well then, don't threaten the US every day of the week.

      You seem to almost be implying that if the US didn't try to stop Iran from getting banned weapons, they'd have the banned weapons? That's an argument for the US position.

      If you're unhappy with the policy now, imagine how unhappy you'll be when the war starts? Unfortunately, you'll already have maxed out your hyperbole by then and you won't even be able to increase your complaint.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by blindseer ( 891256 )

      This whole crisis in Iran is the result of open economic warfare that USA is waging against this country, the main focus of which being sanctioning anyone who buys Iranian oil.

      Are you defending a nation that forces women to put bags over their heads and hangs gays by their necks from cranes?

      Here's an idea. Let's treat all the nations the same, if you treat the citizens of your nation well then we will gladly trade openly with you. If you choose to murder people for the "crime" of dancing in the rain then we will not open trade with you. Any economic crisis that occurs from a lack of trade is then only a fault of your own, because I do not want to be doing business with a natio

      • Re:American economic warfare (Score:4, Insightful)

        by DrMrLordX ( 559371 ) on Monday November 18, 2019 @02:08AM (#59425114)

        Let's be honest: no American Presidential administration would ever call for sanctions against Iran over their treatment of women or gays. All Iran has to do is stop threatening the US and Israel with violence, and relations could improve overnight. That's something the Iranians just don't get at all. They're so dedicated to whatever is their bizarre Mahdist philosophy that they refuse to bury the hatchet over Mossadegh's ouster or anything that's happened since then. Now they're locked in a regional power struggle with Saudia Arabia for who-knows-what reason.

        All Iran has to do is pack up all their forces in Syria, stop supporting the Houthis, stop arming Hezbollah, and stop trying to assert influence outside of their borders (including Iraq). Problem solved, sanctions ended. Iran would lose absolutely nothing from making such changes. Nothing! They have no real strategic interest in continuing to foment violence overseas. And yet, they keep at it anyway . . .

        • Where's the proof that US won't find another excuse to continue economic war on Iran after that? Like US itself meddles in other countries a lot, no way they would be against Iran doing it, unless they want monopoly on this. So I'd say sanctions force Iran to step up their efforts rather than stop them.

          • You can't prove a negative. Besides, the U.S. is usually driven by SOME kind of logic (even if it might be twisted at times). Right now with oil prices being low, the U.S. has no particular strategic need to control Iran's oil reserves. Surely you don't think they're trying to get British Petroleum back their assets that they lost to Mossadegh, do you? That was, after all, the initial reason why the U.S. organized his ouster (or tried anyway; jury's still out on why things went down the way they did).

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          They have two nuclear powers with well equipped and powerful conventional militaries on their case, one right on their doorstep. It's more than just rhetoric, they believe that they need to maintain a strong defence (of which the threat of painful retaliation is part, kinda like a precursor to MAD). They may well be right, look at what has happened to other countries that didn't do enough to deter an invasion. Again, Iraq and Afghanistan are right on their border.

          • Well, if Iran harbored Bin Laden the way the Afghan Taliban had, I don't think anything would stop an invasion or attack. There's also the possibility that the stronger their defense, the stronger the weapons used in an invasion are, if the motivation is high enough. After 9-11, there were a few calling for nukes, and that was against a nation with little more than rocket propelled grenades and AK-47s.

          • Arming Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis; and occupying parts of Syria, do nothing to improve their domestic defensive prospects. If one of the nuclear powers to which you refer is Israel, then Israel has no strategic interest in nuking Iran so long as Iran finally agrees to leave them alone.

            Iran's current behavior is not how you orchestrate a strategic defense on one's own homeland.

        • The invisible man who lives in the sky has ordered Muslims to kill each other. That's what's wrong with the Middle East.

    • If Obama had never offered them the not-ratified-by-the-Senate "deal" then Iran would have devolved into this sort of economic crisis ages ago, which would be highly desirable for anyone in the world except for Iran's sock puppets. With the money Iran got as a part of the "deal", they've backed the Houthi idiots in Yemen (causing the civil war there; you didn't think that was Saudi Arabia's fault, did you?) and they've made things in Syria a lot worse. Bankrupting Iran is in the best interest of most civi

  • ..you know the one, where a country opposed to the foreign invasions and destabilisations being perpetrated in countries surrounding them, and with a direct history of being a victim to that kind of behavior in the past, is a threat.

    From TV and Movies, to News, all played out over the decades, and now influential websites.

    It's almost as if there's a concerted effort to ensure people are misinformed and history is misrepresented.

    • Do you see much effort in people to resist misinformation? I don't. “Four legs good, two legs bad.” applies to every level of education.
      It is true though that sources who get things right, or at least offer a valuable view, get pushed more and more to the fringe where people won't be looking spontaneously because there's a lot of crap in that fringe area.

  • So what happens when satellite internet is accessible enough that a great number of people can afford them?

    Suddenly, you can't just "shut down the internet", modulo signal jammers - but it's pretty much impossible to jam a whole country...

    I wonder what that will do to the Great China Firewall too, though basically I presume if someone like Musk wants to keep selling Tesla cars there Starlink would have to comply... even though they are totally separate companies.

  • The raise is not 50%, it's 300%. From about 8 euro cents to 25 euro cents.

Slashdot Top Deals

To do nothing is to be nothing.

Close