Internet Restrictions planned in Russia.

[55North]

Russia is considering doing a 'China' with the internet......
 
http://russophobe.blogspot.com/2008/01/another-original-lr-transation-kremlins.html

http://windowoneurasia.blogspot.com/2008/01/window-on-eurasia-kremlin-hopes-to.html

[wxman]

Governments all over the world have figured out the power of the internet. No longer do they fear the press, as that can easily be controlled. It's the internet they fear. The California nonprofit ICANN has directed traffic on the Web since 1998, and basically has control over all domain names. If the U.S. government wanted, it could take over ICANN and block Internet traffic to a nation that harbors terrorists. It could access the databases that house domain names and use the information to take down computers serving up anti-American rhetoric or locate state enemies. Always be wary when looking at your computer screen, you never know who may be looking back at you. 

[55North]

This would effect many Russians who, by definition of being internet active, are the more economically and politically sophisticated, and thus the proposals are unlikely to come to pass as intended.  It would be the proof to Russians themselves of the neo-Fascist (or neo-Soviet) nature of their state.
 
Of course, some will argue that that is the natural Russian condition since the Moscow developed beyond a village. 
 
Given that most here have already developed their personal position regarding the 'nature' of Russia, this is the choice bit for 'comrades' here.......
 
the legislation orders the blocking of all sites the authorities deem to be pornographic as well as online dating services, which the legislation says currently are “exerting a harmful influence on young people and having a negative impact on the demographic situation. 

[docetae]

Governments all over the world have figured out the power of the internet. No longer do they fear the press, as that can easily be controlled. It's the internet they fear. The California nonprofit ICANN has directed traffic on the Web since 1998, and basically has control over all domain names. If the U.S. government wanted, it could take over ICANN and block Internet traffic to a nation that harbors terrorists. It could access the databases that house domain names and use the information to take down computers serving up anti-American rhetoric or locate state enemies. Always be wary when looking at your computer screen, you never know who may be looking back at you. 

You should revise your work. Internet is a distributed network. Even blocking access to root name servers or dropping routes on US controlled AS will only make internet slower in these countries and make US hosted websites unreachable. But it will never bring down a computer in Iran or elsewhere... And for your knowledge, most of censure in China is done by routing dns queries to alternate servers...so what you suggest is more censure in US than blocking terrorist..

[wxman]

It's very easy for a government to take down any computer system it wants. There are so many holes in the network that government paid hackers can shut down electric companies, nuclear power plants and so on. So it's  easy to hack any domain, any IP, or any network, unleash a virus and render that system useless. Governments for years have been getting into each other's systems, snooping around, and leaving little trails, just to let that government know they can be hacked. Just recall Estonia about a year ago, when hackers got into their system and shut the banking industry down, the goverment down, and other systems. The internet was so overloaded, that in essence, computers were rendered useless for 3 days. It was traced back to hackers in Russia, most likely with the blessing of the Kremlin, since Estonia removed the Statue to the Russian soldier.  Over the past few years, the banking industry, power companies and other companies around the world have paid billions in bribes to hackers to prevent them from rendering their systems useless. A hush hush little secret, that they don't want the people to know. I wonder how many of those billions are going to supply terrorist organizations around the world. 

[Christian]

This would effect many Russians who, by definition of being internet active, are the more economically and politically sophisticated, and thus the proposals are unlikely to come to pass as intended.  It would be the proof to Russians themselves of the neo-Fascist (or neo-Soviet) nature of their state.
 
Of course, some will argue that that is the natural Russian condition since the Moscow developed beyond a village. 
 
Given that most here have already developed their personal position regarding the 'nature' of Russia, this is the choice bit for 'comrades' here.......
 
the legislation orders the blocking of all sites the authorities deem to be pornographic as well as online dating services, which the legislation says currently are “exerting a harmful influence on young people and having a negative impact on the demographic situation. 

Dear North55,

If I'm not mistaken in memory, the complant from Pres. Putin was that the US holds the gateway (I suppose as wxman has pointed out through ICANN).  What annoys the RF is the fact that illegal activity is propagated and disseminated world-wide without there being any controls that can be imposed from within by the RF.  Pres. Putin wants this ability now, but til now the US is not willing to grant it - but only sell it to the RF via a capitalistic, money making minded third and private party.

The restrictions that the RF could impose would indeed be quite helpful in putting the squeeze upon what til now legalizes crime through lawful, unregulated avenues.

It is highly improbable that the RF will blanket Russia in an Iron curtain Internet as the Russophobes fear (tremble on you ....).  In fact, it would defeat the purpose of Russia's economic stability and growth within the world market.

Finnally, Internet marriage agencies would not only benefit from such likely in the future government intervention that the safety and welfare of both parties would be by law safeguarded.

Cheers,

Christian