Also...it's fucking Rockefeller's bill

[deleted]

Stop exposing the criminality of the government and in Lieberman's case (the Israel machine).

To control the people. Just like Obama shutting down oil drilling in the gulf and ruining the livelyhoods of 10's of thousands of americans isnt helping. WHen a big event happens, they will use it to shut down the internet and only let who they want on the internet to use the internet. All the conspiracy sites , especially this one, will go bye bye.

[deleted]

And you are right.

The government simply has to disconnect the root nameservers and the internet will have a very, very bad day. You can still route traffic... By IP address.

Very true. There are about 11 or 12 core DNS servers. But a lot of ISPs are not "immediate updaters" (for lack of a better term) and could take days to update their DNS to match. That is why domain name sellers put in the fine print "could take up to 72 hours" to propagate.

Then there are people like me who manage their own. :)

11 or 12 core DNS servers

This isn't the case anymore. Most are using anycast addressing to forward to different physical servers.

63 countries currently host root nameservers.

I was referring to the US DNS servers. But you are correct. Many countries now host root nameservers to prevent the US from shutting down their web access.

Now if they can only get ICANN out of the dirty mitts of the US government.

The US govt DIRECTLY controls 11 or 12 or so of the US root nameservers. I assume can could get control of the ones the telecoms/ISPs manage.

I don't think thats correct. I think its outside of US control now. http://www.isoc.org/briefings/020/

Something which the average American lacks the knowledge to do.

Anycast, baby.

Use in DNS

A number of the Internet root nameservers are implemented as clusters of hosts using anycast addressing. The C, F, I, J, K, L and M servers exist in multiple locations on different continents, using anycast address announcements to provide a decentralized service. This has accelerated the deployment of physical (rather than logical) root servers outside the United States.

This is a good thing. The US can't "shut down the internet".

The government doesn't have the ability to shut down the root nameservers ... no one single entity does ... the root nameservers are hosted by multiple organizations in multiple countries.

BGP peers ... etc ... you cannot "turn off" the internet

If you can send out BGP messages to the backbone you could shut down most of it (remember pakistan advertiseing a bad route for youtube a few years ago?)

Agreed. All it takes it flooding your servers with 0.0.0.0 to www.nowhere.com and Bind takes over propagating out to the world. It will still be possible to navigate with IP addresses, but if you know how and where sites are.

I am one of the few people who believe LDAP should replace the current DNS naming structure to prevent this. There are benefits to doing this but out of scope for this conversation.

CAching name servers and the dark net.

You just really need to know one ip address url to a valid hosts file that updates the ip adresses.

http://12.34.56.78/hosts.txt

Aren't there alternative DNS systems? Dark DNS or something, I forget the name.

It would be possible if every WAN and backbone router had some sort of standardised take-down protocol built into them that overrode the routers forwarding protocols and shut them down, but this would never happen and anyway you'd be creating a hackers holy grail. Then of course the US would have to replace every WAN and backbone router in the World and that's just not going to happen, the rest of the world would basically just tell them to fuck off for starters..

Therefore whoever is putting this rumour out is just completely full of shit and/or has no fucking idea what they are actually talking about.

There actually is, you disable the gateway router IP, then the router stops routing traffic. But you are correct. There is no way to mass order that do and with how paranoid companies are today, most do NOT enable automatic updates to any of their hardware, software, or deploy patches. Instead they test patches & updates in test environments to see what will happen.

It is be cost prohibitive and the vendors would have to agree to implement it.

This is just another story on a kill switch for the internet. I do doubt it will get passed, like the last few times I think they tried to attach some language to a spending bill or some shit, but I am not too concerned.

You could always employ a little man to run around snipping the cat 5 cables.

It will be rather easy to shut off the internet provided there is a"911 event".

After the "911 event" any ISP who isnt router/gateway blocking will "go to jail". You dont want to go to jail do you?

That's just inside the US though. Also, can you imagine the public backlash if they tried it, not a good look.

The public would be cowards if they weren't so stupid in the first place.

What about a global "911 event" that happens online? I bet US and half the EU would do it.

No hacker in their right mind is going to "bring down" the internet. The way the internet is designed, that is impossible and second, why would someone do that. You NEED the internet up to attack sites attached to it.

I would love to see what would constitute as a "911 event" online.

A huge DDoS attack, obviously perpetrated by the govt in a 911 false flag style of event.

But really they just have to take down routing to a few social networking sites, yahoo, google, bank sites, ebay, and then the net is basically "down". Which is all it would take to then shut the other 99% of the sites off.

Haha, take down facebook and google and 75% of the internets users would think the internet has 'dissapeared'

Anyway, I don't people can impose such draconican laws up on the internet ffs? It goes against the very ethics of the internet. Tim Berners-Lee will have a hissy fit!

I am shocked that Austrailia is censoring the internet. The only thing it does leave the technically uncapable unable to see the truth.

You would be able to get past the block any wouldn't you with a bit of knowledge? I am not a networking guru, I hardly know anything about networks. I am a code junkie, and nothing is ever unachievable (anything realistic) with computers.

Hissy fits would ensue, and half the nations would still actually go for the ban.

Then it would only be a matter of time before all other nations slid into the "internet2" network.

Want to quiet dissension? Pass laws. Look at what they did to people who want to take pictures. Its perfectly legal, but its about to be a crime. Once its law, good luck! All they need to do is pass a law saying noe one is allowed outside of inetrnet2, no networks! All other networks are considered "Terrorist" networks.

Then thats that.

I don't think a lot of nations would be happy about the ban.

I say viva revolution if anything like this starts to happen.

In the wise words of a friend of mine, "If they shut down the Internet, head for the hills."

Shutting down the Internet would be the first step in radically limiting the awareness of a variety of nefarious events.

It will be interesting. It look like this will be a war at some point.

I don't think thats correct. I think its outside of US control now. http://www.isoc.org/briefings/020/