InternEzy

Authors:
(1) Vinod S. Khandkar and Manjesh K. Hanawal, Industrial Engineering and Operations Research Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, India and {vinod.khandkar, mhanawal}@iitb.ac.in. Table of Links Abstract & Introduction Related Work and Background Challenges in TD Detection Measurement Setup Development Case Study : Wehe - TD Detection Tool for Mobile Environment Shortcoming of Wehe on HTTPS Traffic TD Detection of HTTPS Traffic Conclusion & References VII. CONCLUSION Net neutrality violation detection is a need of an hour. As many of the ISPs are also content providers these days, they compete with each other, which can lead to one deliberately discriminating the services of the other to gain market share. However, users should have the freedom to choose services as per their wishes. Our work considered various challenges in the detection of traffic discrimination in HTTPS traffic. As a case study, we validated Wehe, one of the latest tools available to detect traffic differentiation. The described challenges helped us divide the entire tool into multiple interdependent components and validate them independently. Our validation using commercial traffic shaper revealed that traffic in Wehe setup may not mimic the characteristics of HTTPS traffic accessed from the original servers. Hence, middle-boxes may not subject them to intended discrimination. Thus, Wehe may not detect discrimination of HTTPS traffic. Our new method that uses the appropriate SNI parameter value in the initial TLS handshake message overcomes this shortcoming. Hence our work provided a mechanism to detect a wide range of possible discriminations on the Internet. REFERENCES [1] T. Garrett, L. E. Setenareski, L. M. Peres, L. C. E. Bona, and E. P. Duarte, “Monitoring network neutrality: A survey on traffic differentiation detection,” IEEE Communications Surveys Tutorials, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 2486–2517, 2018. [2] V. Nguyen, D. Mohammed, M. Omar, and P. Dean, “Net neutrality around the globe: A survey,” in 2020 3rd International Conference on Information and Computer Technologies (ICICT), 2020, pp. 480–488. [3] Ramneek, P. Hosein, W. Choi, and W. Seok, “Detecting network neutrality violations through packet loss statistics,” in 2015 17th AsiaPacific Network Operations and Management Symposium (APNOMS), 2015, pp. 404–407. [4] D. Li, F. Tian, M. Zhu, L. Wang, and L. Sun, “A novel framework for analysis of global network neutrality based on packet loss rate,” in 2015 International Conference on Cloud Computing and Big Data (CCBD), 2015, pp. 297–304. [5] M. Dischinger, A. Mislove, A. Haeberlen, and K. P. Gummadi, “Detecting bittorrent blocking,” in Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement, Oct. 2008, pp. 3–8. [6] M. B. Tariq, M. Motiwala, N. Feamster, and M. Ammar, “Detecting network neutrality violations with causal inference,” in Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Emerging Networking Experiments and Technologies, ser. CoNEXT ’09. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2009, p. 289–300. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/1658939.1658972 [7] R. Ravaioli, G. Urvoy-Keller, and C. Barakat, “Towards a general solution for detecting traffic differentiation at the internet access,” in 2015 27th International Teletraffic Congress, Sep. 2015, pp. 1–9. [8] Y. Zhang, Z. M. Mao, and M. Zhang, “Detecting traffic differentiation in backbone isps with netpolice,” in Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement, ser. IMC ’09. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2009, pp. 103–115. [Online]. Available: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1644893.1644905 [9] P. Kanuparthy and C. Dovrolis, “Shaperprobe: End-to-end detection of isp traffic shaping using active methods,” in Proceedings of the 2011 ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement Conference, Nov. 2011, pp. 473–482. [10] U. Weinsberg, A. Soule, and L. Massoulie, “Inferring traffic shaping and policy parameters using end host measurements,” in Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, 2011. [11] M. Dischinger, M. Marcon, S. Guha, K. Gummadi, R. Mahajan, and S. Saroiu, “Glasnost: Enabling end users to detect traffic differentiation,” in 7th USENIX Conf. Networked Systems Design and Implementation, Apr. 2010, pp. 27–27. [12] V. Bashko, N. Melnikov, A. Sehgal, and J. Schonw ¨ alder, “Bonafide: A ¨ traffic shaping detection tool for mobile networks,” in 2013 IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network Management (IM 2013), 2013, pp. 328–335. [13] A. Molavi Kakhki, A. Razaghpanah, A. Li, H. Koo, R. Golani, D. Choffnes, P. Gill, and A. Mislove, “Identifying traffic differentiation in mobile networks,” in Proceedings of the 2015 Internet Measurement Conference, Oct. 2015, pp. 239–251. [14] R. Narisetty and D. Gurkan, “Identification of network measurement challenges in openflow-based service chaining,” in 39th Annual IEEE Conference on Local Computer Networks Workshops, 2014, pp. 663– 670. [15] E. Balestrieri, L. De Vito, F. Lamonaca, F. Picariello, S. Rapuano, and I. Tudosa, “Research challenges in measurement for internet of things systems,” ACTA IMEKO, vol. 7, p. 82, 01 2019. [16] E. Karoly. (2000, Feb.) Qos performance validation in real life scenarios. [Online]. Available: http://archive.opengroup.org/tech/qos/ conference/q101/karoly.pdf [17] S. Molnar, P. Megyesi, and G. Szab ´ o, “How to validate traffic gen- ´ erators?” in 2013 IEEE International Conference on Communications Workshops (ICC), 2013, pp. 1340–1344. [18] G. Lu, Y. Chen, S. Birrer, F. E. Bustamante, C. Y. Cheung, and X. Li, “End-to-end inference of router packet forwarding priority,” in IEEE INFOCOM 2007 - 26th IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications, 2007, pp. 1784–1792. [19] R. Mahajan, M. Zhang, L. Poole, and V. Pai, “Uncovering performance differences among backbone isps with netdiff,” in Proceedings of the 5th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation, 2008, pp. 205–218. [20] (2008, Jun.) Ookla, measuring and understanding broadband : Speed, quality and application. [Online]. Available: https://www.ookla.com/ docs/UnderstandingBroadbandMeasurement.pdf [21] V. S. Khandkar and M. K. Hanawal, “Detection of traffic discrimination in the internet,” in 2020 International Conference on COMmunication Systems NETworkS (COMSNETS), 2020, pp. 677–679. [22] Tcpreplay: Pcap editing and replay tools for *nix. [Online]. Available: https://github.com/appneta/tcpreplay [23] W. Cui, V. Paxson, N. Weaver, and R. Katz, “Protocol-independent adaptive replay of application dialog,” in 13th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (NDSS), Feb. 2006, pp. 27–27. [24] R. T. El-Maghraby, N. M. Abd Elazim, and A. M. Bahaa-Eldin, “A survey on deep packet inspection,” in 2017 12th International Conference on Computer Engineering and Systems (ICCES), 2017, pp. 188–197. [25] M. AlSabah, K. Bauer, and I. Goldberg, “Enhancing tor’s performance using real-time traffic classification,” in Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, ser. CCS ’12. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2012, p. 73–84. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/2382196.2382208 [26] Z. Hu, L. Zhu, J. Heidemann, A. Mankin, D. Wessels, and P. Hoffman, “The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.3,” Internet Requests for Comments, IETF, RFC 7858, August 2018. [Online]. Available: https://tools.ietf.org/pdf/rfc8446.pdf [27] C. Zhou, C. Lin, and Z. Guo, “mdash: A markov decision-based rate adaptation approach for dynamic http streaming,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 738–751, Apr. 2016. [28] T. Joe, L. Eliot, M. Allison, K. Markku, O. Kumiko, S. Martin, E. Lars, M. Alexey, E. Wes, Z. Alexander, T. Brian, I. Jana, M. Allison, T. Michael, K. Eddie, and N. Yoshifumi. (2020, Sept) Service name and transport protocol port number registry. [Online]. Available: https://www.iana.org/assignments/ service-names-port-numbers/service-names-port-numbers.xhtml [29] G. Keinan. (2018, January) Optimizing enterprise networks through sd-avc (software define application visibility and control). [Online]. Available: https://www.ciscolive.com/c/dam/r/ciscolive/emea/docs/2018/ pdf/BRKCRS-2502.pdf [30] A. Rao, J. Sherry, A. Legout, A. Krishnamurthy, W. Dabbous, and D. Choffnes, “Meddle: middleboxes for increased transparency and control of mobile traffic,” in CoNEXT Student Workshop, ACM, 12 2012, pp. 65–66. [31] R. Liu and X. Yu, “A survey on encrypted traffic identification,” in Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Cyberspace Innovation of Advanced Technologies, ser. CIAT 2020. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2020, p. 159–163. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3444370.3444564 [32] F. Li, A. A. Niaki, D. Choffnes, P. Gill, and A. Mislove, “A large-scale analysis of deployed traffic differentiation practices,” in Proceedings of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication, ser. SIGCOMM ’19. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2019, p. 130–144. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3341302.3342092 [33] P. Srisuresh and K. Egevang, “Traditional IP Network Address Translator (Traditional NAT),” Internet Requests for Comments, IETF, RFC 3022, Jan 2001. [Online]. Available: https://tools.ietf.org/pdf/rfc3022.pdf This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. Authors: (1) Vinod S. Khandkar and Manjesh K. Hanawal, Industrial Engineering and Operations Research Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, India and {vinod.khandkar, mhanawal}@iitb.ac.in. Authors: Authors: (1) Vinod S. Khandkar and Manjesh K. Hanawal, Industrial Engineering and Operations Research Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, India and {vinod.khandkar, mhanawal}@iitb.ac.in. Table of Links Abstract & Introduction Abstract & Introduction Related Work and Background Related Work and Background Challenges in TD Detection Measurement Setup Development Challenges in TD Detection Measurement Setup Development Case Study : Wehe - TD Detection Tool for Mobile Environment Case Study : Wehe - TD Detection Tool for Mobile Environment Shortcoming of Wehe on HTTPS Traffic Shortcoming of Wehe on HTTPS Traffic TD Detection of HTTPS Traffic TD Detection of HTTPS Traffic Conclusion & References Conclusion & References VII. CONCLUSION Net neutrality violation detection is a need of an hour. As many of the ISPs are also content providers these days, they compete with each other, which can lead to one deliberately discriminating the services of the other to gain market share. However, users should have the freedom to choose services as per their wishes. Our work considered various challenges in the detection of traffic discrimination in HTTPS traffic. As a case study, we validated Wehe, one of the latest tools available to detect traffic differentiation. The described challenges helped us divide the entire tool into multiple interdependent components and validate them independently. Our validation using commercial traffic shaper revealed that traffic in Wehe setup may not mimic the characteristics of HTTPS traffic accessed from the original servers. Hence, middle-boxes may not subject them to intended discrimination. Thus, Wehe may not detect discrimination of HTTPS traffic. Our new method that uses the appropriate SNI parameter value in the initial TLS handshake message overcomes this shortcoming. Hence our work provided a mechanism to detect a wide range of possible discriminations on the Internet. REFERENCES [1] T. Garrett, L. E. Setenareski, L. M. Peres, L. C. E. Bona, and E. P. Duarte, “Monitoring network neutrality: A survey on traffic differentiation detection,” IEEE Communications Surveys Tutorials, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 2486–2517, 2018. [2] V. Nguyen, D. Mohammed, M. Omar, and P. Dean, “Net neutrality around the globe: A survey,” in 2020 3rd International Conference on Information and Computer Technologies (ICICT), 2020, pp. 480–488. [3] Ramneek, P. Hosein, W. Choi, and W. Seok, “Detecting network neutrality violations through packet loss statistics,” in 2015 17th AsiaPacific Network Operations and Management Symposium (APNOMS), 2015, pp. 404–407. [4] D. Li, F. Tian, M. Zhu, L. Wang, and L. Sun, “A novel framework for analysis of global network neutrality based on packet loss rate,” in 2015 International Conference on Cloud Computing and Big Data (CCBD), 2015, pp. 297–304. [5] M. Dischinger, A. Mislove, A. Haeberlen, and K. P. Gummadi, “Detecting bittorrent blocking,” in Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement, Oct. 2008, pp. 3–8. [6] M. B. Tariq, M. Motiwala, N. Feamster, and M. Ammar, “Detecting network neutrality violations with causal inference,” in Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Emerging Networking Experiments and Technologies, ser. CoNEXT ’09. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2009, p. 289–300. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/1658939.1658972 [7] R. Ravaioli, G. Urvoy-Keller, and C. Barakat, “Towards a general solution for detecting traffic differentiation at the internet access,” in 2015 27th International Teletraffic Congress, Sep. 2015, pp. 1–9. [8] Y. Zhang, Z. M. Mao, and M. Zhang, “Detecting traffic differentiation in backbone isps with netpolice,” in Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement, ser. IMC ’09. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2009, pp. 103–115. [Online]. Available: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1644893.1644905 [9] P. Kanuparthy and C. Dovrolis, “Shaperprobe: End-to-end detection of isp traffic shaping using active methods,” in Proceedings of the 2011 ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement Conference, Nov. 2011, pp. 473–482. [10] U. Weinsberg, A. Soule, and L. Massoulie, “Inferring traffic shaping and policy parameters using end host measurements,” in Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, 2011. [11] M. Dischinger, M. Marcon, S. Guha, K. Gummadi, R. Mahajan, and S. Saroiu, “Glasnost: Enabling end users to detect traffic differentiation,” in 7th USENIX Conf. Networked Systems Design and Implementation, Apr. 2010, pp. 27–27. [12] V. Bashko, N. Melnikov, A. Sehgal, and J. Schonw ¨ alder, “Bonafide: A ¨ traffic shaping detection tool for mobile networks,” in 2013 IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network Management (IM 2013), 2013, pp. 328–335. [13] A. Molavi Kakhki, A. Razaghpanah, A. Li, H. Koo, R. Golani, D. Choffnes, P. Gill, and A. Mislove, “Identifying traffic differentiation in mobile networks,” in Proceedings of the 2015 Internet Measurement Conference, Oct. 2015, pp. 239–251. [14] R. Narisetty and D. Gurkan, “Identification of network measurement challenges in openflow-based service chaining,” in 39th Annual IEEE Conference on Local Computer Networks Workshops, 2014, pp. 663– 670. [15] E. Balestrieri, L. De Vito, F. Lamonaca, F. Picariello, S. Rapuano, and I. Tudosa, “Research challenges in measurement for internet of things systems,” ACTA IMEKO, vol. 7, p. 82, 01 2019. [16] E. Karoly. (2000, Feb.) Qos performance validation in real life scenarios. [Online]. Available: http://archive.opengroup.org/tech/qos/ conference/q101/karoly.pdf [17] S. Molnar, P. Megyesi, and G. Szab ´ o, “How to validate traffic gen- ´ erators?” in 2013 IEEE International Conference on Communications Workshops (ICC), 2013, pp. 1340–1344. [18] G. Lu, Y. Chen, S. Birrer, F. E. Bustamante, C. Y. Cheung, and X. Li, “End-to-end inference of router packet forwarding priority,” in IEEE INFOCOM 2007 - 26th IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications, 2007, pp. 1784–1792. [19] R. Mahajan, M. Zhang, L. Poole, and V. Pai, “Uncovering performance differences among backbone isps with netdiff,” in Proceedings of the 5th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation, 2008, pp. 205–218. [20] (2008, Jun.) Ookla, measuring and understanding broadband : Speed, quality and application. [Online]. Available: https://www.ookla.com/ docs/UnderstandingBroadbandMeasurement.pdf [21] V. S. Khandkar and M. K. Hanawal, “Detection of traffic discrimination in the internet,” in 2020 International Conference on COMmunication Systems NETworkS (COMSNETS), 2020, pp. 677–679. [22] Tcpreplay: Pcap editing and replay tools for *nix. [Online]. Available: https://github.com/appneta/tcpreplay [23] W. Cui, V. Paxson, N. Weaver, and R. Katz, “Protocol-independent adaptive replay of application dialog,” in 13th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (NDSS), Feb. 2006, pp. 27–27. [24] R. T. El-Maghraby, N. M. Abd Elazim, and A. M. Bahaa-Eldin, “A survey on deep packet inspection,” in 2017 12th International Conference on Computer Engineering and Systems (ICCES), 2017, pp. 188–197. [25] M. AlSabah, K. Bauer, and I. Goldberg, “Enhancing tor’s performance using real-time traffic classification,” in Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, ser. CCS ’12. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2012, p. 73–84. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/2382196.2382208 [26] Z. Hu, L. Zhu, J. Heidemann, A. Mankin, D. Wessels, and P. Hoffman, “The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.3,” Internet Requests for Comments, IETF, RFC 7858, August 2018. [Online]. Available: https://tools.ietf.org/pdf/rfc8446.pdf [27] C. Zhou, C. Lin, and Z. Guo, “mdash: A markov decision-based rate adaptation approach for dynamic http streaming,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 738–751, Apr. 2016. [28] T. Joe, L. Eliot, M. Allison, K. Markku, O. Kumiko, S. Martin, E. Lars, M. Alexey, E. Wes, Z. Alexander, T. Brian, I. Jana, M. Allison, T. Michael, K. Eddie, and N. Yoshifumi. (2020, Sept) Service name and transport protocol port number registry. [Online]. Available: https://www.iana.org/assignments/ service-names-port-numbers/service-names-port-numbers.xhtml [29] G. Keinan. (2018, January) Optimizing enterprise networks through sd-avc (software define application visibility and control). [Online]. Available: https://www.ciscolive.com/c/dam/r/ciscolive/emea/docs/2018/ pdf/BRKCRS-2502.pdf [30] A. Rao, J. Sherry, A. Legout, A. Krishnamurthy, W. Dabbous, and D. Choffnes, “Meddle: middleboxes for increased transparency and control of mobile traffic,” in CoNEXT Student Workshop, ACM, 12 2012, pp. 65–66. [31] R. Liu and X. Yu, “A survey on encrypted traffic identification,” in Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Cyberspace Innovation of Advanced Technologies, ser. CIAT 2020. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2020, p. 159–163. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3444370.3444564 [32] F. Li, A. A. Niaki, D. Choffnes, P. Gill, and A. Mislove, “A large-scale analysis of deployed traffic differentiation practices,” in Proceedings of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication, ser. SIGCOMM ’19. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2019, p. 130–144. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3341302.3342092 [33] P. Srisuresh and K. Egevang, “Traditional IP Network Address Translator (Traditional NAT),” Internet Requests for Comments, IETF, RFC 3022, Jan 2001. [Online]. Available: https://tools.ietf.org/pdf/rfc3022.pdf This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. available on arxiv

Ensuring Fair Internet Access: Challenges and Solutions in Traffic Discrimination Detection

Authors: (1) William P. Wagner IV, Claremont Graduate University. Table of Links Abstract & Introduction Definition of Key Terms Fundamentals of Internet Operation Encapsulation Usage-Based Economic Models Net Neutrality Legal History Researcher Conclusions Areas for Further Exploration & References 8. Researcher Conclusions The research shows that there is sufficient evidence to support the idea of the “Virtuous Cycle,” that it is the activity by innovators, investors, and content providers along the edge of the Internet that drives network growth and innovation, and that this cycle should be protected. Further, this researcher finds that an economic system based strictly on usage of encapsulated packets is capable of responding to all the needs of the infrastructure market, while ensuring competition along the edge. The research also shows that the reverse is not true - the ISPs have an incentive and the opportunity to abuse their position with regard to competition and this would negatively impact the edge. The large ISPs have made no secret of their goals. In Verizon Oral Arguments Transcript at line 31 “I’m authorized to state by my client [Verizon] today that, but for these rules, we would be exploring those commercial arrangements...” Therefore, it is this researcher’s recommendation that the principles of encapsulation, capitalism and democracy would best be served by regulation of ISPs to ensure that the basic tenets of Net Neutrality (as defined at the beginning of this paper and codified in the 2015 FCC Order) are followed. These basic regulations would not restrict any technical decision making by the ISPs, however they would prevent the ISPs from using their often-unique position to restrict access based on content, removing the temptation to start down a slippery slope. This paper is under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 DEED license. available on arxiv

Net Neutrality: Balancing ISP Power for a Fair Internet

Authors: (1) William P. Wagner IV, Claremont Graduate University. Table of Links Abstract & Introduction Definition of Key Terms Fundamentals of Internet Operation Encapsulation Usage-Based Economic Models Net Neutrality Legal History Researcher Conclusions Areas for Further Exploration & References 4. Encapsulation All of this works through a process known as Encapsulation [Fig. 2]. All packets sent over the internet are encapsulated. In the TCP/IP Model, there are four layers of encapsulation on the Internet. 4.1. Network Access Layer The Network Access Layer (sometimes called Media Access Control or MAC) is the lowest layer, or Layer 1 in the model. This layer allows network activity at the most basic level and only for a single local network. It works at the network card level. 4.2. Internet Layer Layer 2 (RFC 791, Sec. 2.2.) of the TCP/IP stack, this layer controls network activity between networks and on a global scale. It defines things like IP addresses. 4.3. Transport Layer Layer 3 of the IP controls the transfer of data. After the previous layers have done their jobs of determining the address where a given packet should arrive, the Transport layer does the job of actually transferring the data and confirming it was sent and received correctly. 4.4. Application Layer Layer 4 of the IP is the Application Layer. This might be a web browser or email program, Facebook or Twitter, or it might be a wind sensor or a fitness app on a watch. 4.5. How It Works When an application is ready to send anything over a network or the Internet, it need only pass that data to the next layer down. Big pieces are broken into smaller pieces as necessary and each one of those pieces is then encapsulated – assigned some unique information that will allow it to be reassembled by the corresponding layer at the other end. Note that encapsulation does not include encryption which is a separate process. Now that the Application layer has encapsulated the smaller pieces, they can be handed off to the lower layers. Then the lower layers take care of their respective network duties, further encapsulating each packet at each layer. Until they are sent over the network and routed to their final destination. The process is repeated in reverse at the other end. Each layer peels off the encapsulation and passes the data up to the next level until all the data has arrived at the Application Layer of the receiving host. Here, the Application layer reassembles all the smaller pieces back in to a complete image, movie, email or anything else. This process means that an application programmer does not need to worry about the mechanics of the network layer, and the network engineers don’t care what language the applications programmer uses. There is a guiding principal that each layer should operate independently of the others. There are, however, situations that require one layer to utilize information from another layer. While there is an active effort to minimize this, there are certain security features and other functionality that requires the layers to interact. Any change of this magnitude requires years of research and consensus from the ISOC’s various advisory boards, specifically the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) via the Internet Advisory Board (IAB) and the Internet Research Task Force (IRTF), as well as input from many outside sources. One example of an upcoming change of this magnitude is QUIC – a possible new HTML standard (in the Application Layer) developed by engineers at Google, that is based on UDP instead of TCP (in the Transport Layer). All the discussion and development of any code or standards related to QUIC are available to the public to read/comment and/or contribute to in a public Github Repository[10]. This paper is under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 DEED license. available on arxiv

Layers of Encapsulation: Exploring the TCP/IP Model in Internet Communication

Authors: (1) William P. Wagner IV, Claremont Graduate University. Table of Links Abstract & Introduction Definition of Key Terms Fundamentals of Internet Operation Encapsulation Usage-Based Economic Models Net Neutrality Legal History Researcher Conclusions Areas for Further Exploration & References 3. Fundamentals of Internet Operation 3.1. Hardware Independence. As long as the hardware meets some basic technical requirements to communicate with its neighbors, there are no specific restrictions on hardware or communications medium. The Internet is Hardware Agnostic. All decisions about a given network’s hardware are left to the network administrator or owner to provide the best solution for their application. Copper, fiber, satellite or cellular – that decision is up to the network owner – the Internet does not care. 3.2. Network Independence. As long as the data packets arriving and leaving a network meet some basic technical requirements to communicate with their neighbors, there are no specific restrictions. The Internet does not care who the owner or administrator of a given network is or what topology that network employs – it will route packets based on “Best Effort” routing – the Internet is Network Agnostic. 3.3. Content Independence. As long as the data packets leaving a network meet some basic technical requirements to communicate with their neighbors, they will be prioritized by type not content or source. For example: A home user’s VoIP packet should almost always be more important than an FTP request from a big corporation, except on a subnet of only that company’s FTP servers. The Internet is necessarily Content Agnostic. This paper is under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 DEED license. available on arxiv

The Agnostic Nature of the Internet: Understanding Hardware, Network, and Content Neutrality

Authors: (1) William P. Wagner IV, Claremont Graduate University. Table of Links Abstract & Introduction Definition of Key Terms Fundamentals of Internet Operation Encapsulation Usage-Based Economic Models Net Neutrality Legal History Researcher Conclusions Areas for Further Exploration & References 2. Definition of Key Terms 2.1. The Internet It is relevant and helpful to a discussion on Net Neutrality to understand exactly what the Internet is – and note that there is little substantive difference in these definitions: The Internet is the global system of interconnected computer networks that use the Internet protocol suite (TCP/IP) to link devices worldwide. It is a network of networks that consists of private, public, academic, business, and government networks of local to global scope, linked by a broad array of electronic, wireless, and optical networking technologies. -Wikipedia An electronic communications network that connects computer networks and organizational computer facilities around the world —used with the except when being used attributively. - Merriam-Webster Dictionary The Internet is defined as a network of networks and there is no mention of hardware, network owner, or content provider. There is no single ruling body of the Internet. See Appendix A. In technical terms, we can say the Internet is by definition hardware, network, and content agnostic. These three ideas are fundamental to the internet to provide both forward and backward compatibility. The Internet does not care whether a given network uses fiber, copper or satellite. The Internet does not care whether a given user is using a Mac, PC, Smart Phone or an automated water sensor in a farmer’s field. And for purposes of prioritization, the Internet protocols treat all packets of a given type equally – regardless of content, source, or destination. This paper will use the following definition, which includes reference to the IP protocols that define the technical standards of the Internet: The Internet: A global system of public and private networks, a network of networks, which is hardware, network and content agnostic and based on the Internet Protocol Suite. 2.2. Net Neutrality And, of course the definition of Net Neutrality is seemingly fundamental to any discussion of Net Neutrality. Yet almost immediately we see variance in the definitions: Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers treat all data on the Internet equally, and not discriminate or charge differently by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or method of communication. - Wikipedia The idea, principle, or requirement that Internet service providers should or must treat all Internet data as the same regardless of its kind, source, or destination. - Merriam-Webster Dictionary In this researcher’s opinion, both these definitions seek to express similar ideals, but neither fully succeeds on a technical level. The Wiki definition includes a broad range of internet experiences that one might argue should not be included in a practical definition - like “user” or “method of communication.” Both these aspects are superfluous to a definition of Net Neutrality. By way of illustration, the current system already tiers costs based on the type of user (ex: corporate vs. consumer or private vs government) and it tiers costs based on things like satellite vs terrestrial communication methods. The Merriam-Webster definition hits much closer to the mark, however due to the technical nature of this discussion, I have changed the term “kind.” As discussed later, there is some prioritization of data on the internet based strictly on technical specifications of TCP/IP, and the use of the term “kind” may overlap with that discussion where the terms “type” and “kind” are often used interchangeably. Therefore, to avoid confusion, for purposes of this paper we will use the following modified definition of Net Neutrality (substituting “content” for “kind”): Net Neutrality: The idea, principle, or requirement that Internet service providers should or must treat all Internet data as the same regardless of its content, source, or destination. 2.5. Internet Society – ISOC The internet has grown organically, with standards that are open enough that anyone may participate, while being well defined enough that engineers can design hardware and software with confidence. Although there is no formal governing body of the Internet, the protocols that define the Internet are defined and agreed upon by an international consortium of groups, the largest of which is the Internet Society (ISOC). Within the ISOC and the other global standards groups are various open-membership advisory groups, standards groups, and definitive naming and allocation groups for things like domain names and IP addresses that require global consensus in order to operate correctly. See Appendix A. The group primarily responsible for establishing the technical standards of the Internet is the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) [9]. This paper is under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 DEED license. available on arxiv

Net Neutrality, the Internet and the Internet Society

The level of censorship in Pakistan escalated significantly during the period when authorities successfully banned , formerly known as Twitter. The authorities in Pakistan on February 17, when the rigging of elections throughout the country fueled the citizens to protest. The citizens wanted to take advantage of that opportunity to engage with each other on social media. They turned to increasing the usage of ( virtual private networks) to bypass the ban on social sites on the internet throughout the country. X started to block social media sites VPN An estimated report reveals that the demand for security software in the market has increased by up to 130%. There have been reports of numerous VPN apps suddenly failing, indicating that Pakistan's Censorship is getting more severe. These restrictions indicate citizens' difficulties in Pakistan, including inhibiting freedom of expression in the digital landscape. History of Internet restriction in Pakistan The process of blocking the internet or social media platforms in Pakistan is as old as the country. Citizens were facing these issues not only in this era but also each year in different forms. The PTA banned social platforms such as YouTube, Facebook, and Flicker in 2010. This was done after a competition known as Everyday Draw Muhammad Day. This competition may contain a bit of blasphemous material. In 2012, the Pakistan's most famous site, YouTube. That was a protest against a film released by the United States, "Innocence of Muslims." The process of YouTube restriction continued till 2016. During these years, many steps were taken regarding its usage and ban side by side. However, it was lifted in September 2016, when YouTube was launched as a local version for Pakistan. PTA blocked In 2020, the usage of due to the spreading of immoral content. TikTok in Pakistan was restricted In 2021, the interior ministry ordered the PTA to , Twitter, YouTube, and whatsapp throughout Pakistan. The reason for the temporary blockage of social media platforms should have been explained earlier. Later, that was described as related to security concerns as there was a worse situation due to Tehrik e back anti-France protests. ban Facebook Alarming condition of Pakistan's internet censorship in 2024 Lina Survila, Surfshark virtual private network provider spokeswoman, said 2024 may be a year of internet restrictions in Pakistan due to enhanced Censorship in Pakistan at an alarming level. The country faced digital darkness on five occasions in the first two months of 2024. When a political party, Pakistan's Tehrik-e-Insaf, organized online events that imprisoned former Prime Minister Imran Khan, they faced two strikes on the internet in January regarding all social media platforms. After this, the authorities hit the internet and plugged off all the social platforms, including X, on the day of the election, and the government named it a security concern. Through this blockage, they tried to consolidate the maximum potential vote manipulation. , internet watchdog Netblock, said," That day was a massive black day in democracy in Pakistan." Alp Toker One member of the Pakistan Senate presented a report to ban all famous social platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Instagram. etc. The citizens faced the shutdown of social media during the country's general election. The proposal states that these social media platforms are affecting the young generation, spreading damaging and malicious content throughout the country against the military millennials. This resolution develops criticism of the violation of the rights of people as citizens have the right to express their views freely. Experts say The threats to ban social media and the internet are still at their peak point in Pakistan. Blockage of X- platform A report against internet monitoring services by states that the senator submitted the proposal when citizens were already in a sensitive stage for blockage of social media platforms. After holding the February 8 elections in Pakistan, there was a great protest against vote manipulation. When Liaqat Ali Chattha, a senior Pakistani bureaucrat, revealed that he was involved in manipulating the vote, this claim was retracted after a few days. NetBlocks The PTI, Pakistan's opposition party, claimed that the general election had been thoroughly manipulated in counting. Party officials announced they would keep up their legal actions and street demonstrations to recover the stolen mandate. At that time, people throughout the country flocked to X or Twitter to express their voices and organize themselves to walk in the streets. Politicians  throughout South Asia kept a great eye on X to keep a view of what was happening in the country. This platform also offers the opportunity to express opposing views and criticize the current political establishment. That was when authorities took the step to ban the X entirely in Pakistan. The government began to block this platform's access without announcing any warnings or explanation. PTI called these tactics desperate tactics, which were developed by the imported government and recommended that citizens use safe VPNs to access all banned social media platforms. Ultimately, citizens have still been trying to overcome these unauthentic restrictions using virtual private networks. Investigation Over Censorship Strategies Advocates of digital rights investigate the censorship strategies of the government of Pakistan for all groups at Islamabad-based-bytes. After a proper examination, they concluded that Twitter's block uses HTTP blocking. Another report or expert opinion believes that an equal collaboration of content delivery networks and authorities could be achieved. The report reads like this: "For Pakistan’s telecommunication authority, it's possible to ban  access to Twitter usage by any method, like IP blockage or deep Packet Inspection rather than to block the content by specific content delivery network providers such as Akamai Technologies, which would be more challenging to control." Although digital platforms are affected by their policies at a harsh level, as in this era, it's impossible to keep citizens away from the social market; digital freedom is not the only victim of continuous internet blockage. Effect of Internet Censorship on Pakistan's Economy The effect of internet censorship on Pakistan's economy cannot be overwhelming. The internet shutdown adversely affects many small and larger scale businesses in Pakistan. A Technologies-driven company reveals that it faced a 36% drawback in sales volume. Another report states that the telecommunication sector suffered almost 2.85 million dollars lost. , an IT sector representative, said they faced 3 million dollars per day till the restrictions were lifted. P@sha Almost 1.3 billion rupees loss has been recorded in Pakistan's economy by the Pakistan Institute of Development Economics due to internet restrictions. A reveals that in 2023, Pakistan ranked third among the most restricted online nations. That cost may seem more significant this year as democratic values are disintegrating daily. study Solution of Internet Censorship in Pakistan VPN services motivate Pakistanis to come if they are on a quest to find a solution to the restrictions. The provider will guide you in getting rid of these internet shutdowns. Final Thoughts Censorship in Pakistan is on the rise, especially online. Limits on social media not only stifle free speech but also affect data access and democracy. During elections, government control raises concerns about citizens' rights. Many people turn to VPNs to bypass these restrictions. Internet shutdowns hurt Pakistan's growth and democracy. Supporting digital rights and using VPNs can help fight censorship in Pakistan. Frequently Asked Questions 1. What Is The Meaning Of Censorship? Censorship means the suppression of someone's voice, involving the ban on the freedom of the public to raise their voice against their issue. 2. Is there any Censorship in Pakistan? Yes, internet censorship is an example of Censorship in Pakistan. This means that some social sites, including X, are banned. This is also done to suppress the voice of citizens on digital platforms. 3. Why is the Internet Banned in Pakistan? The maximum filtering in Pakistan is intermittent. The Pakistan telecommunication authority has blocked the site, which they consider to contain content related to negativity, such as threatening, blasphemous, or anti-religious content. 4. What To Do If There Is Censorship On The Internet In Pakistan? If there's internet censorship in Pakistan, you can use a Virtual Private Network (VPN) to bypass restrictions and access blocked content. Additionally, you can advocate for digital rights and raise awareness about censorship issues. 5. Did Pakistan ban VPNs? VPNs are not banned in Pakistan, but their usage is highly restricted. The PTA allows some approved VPNs to be served.

Internet Censorship in Pakistan in 2024

Hey Hackers! We’ve got some exciting news  🥁🥁🥁 Web 2.5, HackerNoon’s documentary on the next-generation internet is now available on demand! ! Watch it here Web 2.5: A HackerNoon Film The Web 2.5 Documentary by HackerNoon centers on the internet’s evolution and complex history. In a light-hearted interview lasting just under half an hour, HackerNoon’s team interrogates the different phases of the Internet, from an era of dial-up modems to one slowly defining what Web 3 is. The internet is not a flawless, mysterious machine operating in a black box; it is a dynamic tool collaboratively built by users worldwide, and its evolution is a shared responsibility. As , HackerNoon COO, points out, the ball has already been dropped a few times. She identifies 2016 as a turning point for Web 2 and the tech ecosystem, highlighting issues such as weaponized ad-based tech algorithms, mass distrust in the government, struggling publishing industries, and pervasive misinformation as the straws that broke the camel’s back. Linh Dao Smooke “I think we desperately need a reimagined internet because somewhere along the way we lost the plot. We all wanted it to be a force for good but we ended up driving people further apart” The dialogue continues with the HackerNoon team further investigating the broken state of the Internet, questioning whether Web 3 is the solution, and discussing the company's commitment to keeping information on the Internet free, user-friendly, and easily accessible. “We live between social media and the traditional Forbes of the world, bringing you a high-quality tech story without all the noise,” said David Smooke, HackerNoon Founder & CEO. Is Web 3 really the future, or is it just a passing trend for people looking to make a quick buck? The HackerNoon team has its answer and now, they want to help you find yours. Watch the Web 2.5 documentary, available on demand now!

Web 2.5: HackerNoon's Vision for a New Wave Internet 

ওয়েব 2.5: একটি নতুন তরঙ্গ ইন্টারনেটের জন্য হ্যাকারনুনের দৃষ্টিভঙ্গি

Web 2.5: HackerNoons Vision für ein New Wave Internet

Web 2.5: La visión de HackerNoon para una nueva ola de Internet

Web 2.5 : la vision de HackerNoon pour une nouvelle vague Internet

वेब 2.5: हैकरनून का नए दौर के इंटरनेट का विजन

Web 2.5: 新しい波インターネットに対する HackerNoon のビジョン

웹 2.5: 뉴 웨이브 인터넷을 위한 HackerNoon의 비전

Web 2.5: Visão do HackerNoon para uma nova onda de Internet

Web 2.5: видение HackerNoon новой волны Интернета

Web 2.5: HackerNoon'un Yeni Dalga İnternet Vizyonu

Web 2.5: Tầm nhìn của HackerNoon về làn sóng Internet mới

Web 2.5：HackerNoon 对新一波互联网的愿景

Toppled power lines catalyze fires and electrical injuries amid an already upsetting hurricane. Natural disaster recovery is expensive and time-consuming, as its ferocity makes operations more complex. The time for resilient, modern infrastructure is now and that is visible in the planet’s extensive network of underwater cables. However, critical fixtures like these are prime targets for cybercriminals because of how much data travels through them. Are humans doing enough to safeguard them? The Importance of Undersea Internet Cables Undersea cables are as subtle as they can be despite worldwide. They are small in diameter and house impressively thin wires despite the immense pressures and climate of the deep ocean. Visualizing how much they impact the world’s day-to-day operations is challenging. However, they are deceptively critical for our productive, communicative planet, sending up to 224 Tbps (terabits per second). spanning 1.4 million kilometers Global Connectivity An estimated through hundreds of fiber-optic undersea cables. Disrupting this much communication and data transfer with careless cable management and security could uproot societies. 97% of Earth’s information passes The subsea infrastructure map describes international relations and what regions are responsible for the most information distribution and retrieval. Because this information is public, it’s straightforward for criminal syndicates to craft a profitable project. Economic Impact Nations connected to these cables have a more impressive global reach, signifying international economic prominence, expansion, and urban development. Unfortunately, cybersecurity breaches are expensive to isolate and recoup from, and prices balloon yearly. Critical infrastructure compromises have a price tag higher than any other type of breach, per instance. This is a culmination of essential businesses shutting down and becoming inoperable, labor required to contain the threat, and resources necessary to put everything back online and salvage extricated data. averaging around $5 million Technological Advancements Submarine cables are one of the backbones of digital transformation and tech development. These were and the Internet of Things because they deliver high-speed, low-latency connections to every area. The robust infrastructure makes communities more efficient and convenient, but its surface area means more entry points and potential vulnerabilities for hackers. critical in expanding 5G Physical Threats to Undersea Cables Cybersecurity risks are not all hidden within the digital ether — physical threats accompany those efforts. How do they appear and how can the world defend against them? Natural Disasters and Wildlife Seismic activity and oceanic storms threaten cable sturdiness. Additionally, sharks and other marine life add more stress. Severed cables leave gaps for hackers to tinker and fix the wires to work for them. Advocating for regulation to standardize the usage of strong materials that do not degrade under sand and water is necessary for keeping them out of harm’s way. Additionally, endorsing any legislation to reduce climate change impacts indirectly supports subsea cable health. Human Activities Consider how a heavy anchor could cut or smash an old cable. Threat actors are just as capable of this type of physical destruction to cyber infrastructure as they are of executing it within digital landscapes. Other destructive activities include drilling or fishing. Additionally, and could permeate any commercial industry with financially-susceptible interests. nation-state sabotage is not unheard of Aging Infrastructure New cables may hit ocean floors, but this does not mean old ones are getting the upgrade they need. Additionally, many of the most critical wires are in clumps, making it easier to attack a lot at once. Updates should include redistributing chokepoints for less concentrated attack surfaces. Even amateur hackers know antiquated technology stops receiving support, meaning vulnerabilities abound. Undersea transmission must be able to receive ongoing patches and updates to withstand novel threat variants. Cyber Threats to Undersea Cables The attacks within digital spaces are arguably more destructive. These are the most notable threat variants and ways humanity should protect cables. Wiretapping Tapping undersea cables has been , demonstrating the literal leagues people will go to impede and damage communications and information. This can happen by going underwater or tapping it from a landing station. happening since the First World War DDoS Attacks Interrupting internet connections is a lucrative venture, primarily when and health care rely on connectivity just as much as everyone else. Overwhelming submarine cables are an obvious way to extend the outage duration because remediation takes so long. essential services like finance Data Interception Instead of destroying or bombarding cables, why not place a small bug to capture bytes of sensitive data? Disrupting signals allows criminals to receive immediate information while redirecting or obstructing communication — a popular option for espionage. Surveillance threats are harder to catch, making them enticing to criminal outfits. Intercepting data may also occur through social engineering, such as manipulating an official to steal credentials to access subsea wire operating systems. Protection of Undersea Cables Dedicated upkeep makes these techniques viable for the long term. Next-generation remote monitoring and maintenance systems will be quintessential for identifying threat attempts, detecting backdoors, submitting updates, and gathering data. This calls for upgraded inventory management systems , as well as coordinate and record each cable with greater visibility. to cut costs and improve efficiency Education on physical and digital threats is vital for forging plans to make undersea cables secure. The International Cable Protection Committee is an example of the degree of commitment the planet needs. They submit calls to action from the most powerful entities, including recent events like involving hard-to-access, damaged cables. the compromises in the Red Sea Generally, international laws to deliver the coverage undersea cables demand. Writing contingency plans, filling out regulatory gaps, and completing more risk assessments require dedicated research into the resilience and distribution of the wires. This knowledge is limited, publicly unavailable or hard to access. need to be more holistic Advanced encryption and security measures based on the most up-to-date compliance frameworks ensure the industry’s best knowledge shields these cables. More digital and physical walls equate to better data integrity. Authorities must get into the habit of consulting with leaders like the ICPC and related organizations for informed guidance. This includes discussing industry threats and thoughtful operations execution with businesses like fisheries. Out of Sight, Out of Mind Ignoring the power and value of submarine cables allows their data and influence to fall into the hands of cybercriminals. More comprehensive and strict protective measures are crucial for withstanding the modern hacker’s constantly developing and subversive tactics. Global connectivity and sustainable development mandate it, which only happens with collaboration and awareness of how essential underwater infrastructure is.

InternEzy

internezy.com

-- employees

Since n.d.

COMPANY RANKING

INTERNEZY

EVERGREEN INDEX #5921

InternEzy WIKI

Apply to get your Tech Company News Page live on HackerNoon.com today!

InternEzy

internezy.com

-- employees

Since n.d.

COMPANY RANKING

INTERNEZY

EVERGREEN INDEX #5921

RELATED COMPANIESRANK

STORIES ABOUT INTERNEZY

InternEzy WIKI

Apply to get your Tech Company News Page live on HackerNoon.com today!