Saturday, June 02, 2012

U.N. takeover of the Internet must be stopped

 Must Eat Brains     

U.N. takeover of the Internet must be stopped

Res Ipsa Loquitur

    Democratic and Republican government officials warned this morning that a United Nations summit in December will lead to a virtual takeover of the Internet if proposals from China, Russia, Iran, and Saudi Arabia are adopted.
    “These are terrible ideas,” Rep. Fred Upton, a Michigan Republican, said during a U.S. House of Representatives hearing. They could allow “governments to monitor and restrict content or impose economic costs upon international data flows,” added Ambassador Philip Verveer, a deputy assistant secretary of state.
    Called the World Conference on International Telecommunications, or WCIT, the summit will review a set of telecommunications regulations established in 1988, when home computers used dial-up modems, the Internet was primarily a university network, and Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was a mere 4 years old.
    Unless the U.S. and its allies can block these proposals, they “just might break the Internet by subjecting it to an international regulatory regime designed for old-fashioned telephone service,” Rep. Greg Walden, an Oregon Republican said. [FULL]

Unless we stop this, we just have to bend over and take it from other

   Via Dvorak


Anonymous said...

How is that even possible?

Sure, they could clog a few of the Toobz, but "break" the whole thing?

*raised eyebrow*


Cheesy said...

Well, they pretty much broke our government, so....

Kristophr said...

The only way to screw it up would be if the US government allowed UN 'crats to run basic services like DNS, IP address assignments, certificates, encryption standards, and the like.

The world wide web itself was created using DARPA's original RFC ( request for comments ) system.

Allowing the UN to control DNS would enable them to silence anyone ... just remove their domain name, and most folks can't find them.

China is where the big push is for this. Their "Green Wall" fails because people in China can get around it by using DNS services based outside China.

Munch said...

Anyone can run a dns server. Its just convenience and convenion tha your computer uses the "official" dns servers.

I run several servers, the sofware (BIND) is free. A private company simply announces it is going to serve alternate DNS data (maybe starting with a snapshot of the present data) and administer it as a business, with no censorship full property and contrac righs to domain an IP holders, etc. If the UN or US govt passes laws making them do their bidding, move the company to Singapore, or HongCong or some tiney little island country that would like the revenue of hosting a free, hnest dns system.

UN takeover aint going o hapen. They are showing heir ignorance more than teir power.

Munch said...

sorry, stickey "t" key.

Anyway, look in your internet settings, there is a place to put the IP numbers of two nameservers. the alternate is to use "provider" or "sutomatically" selected. Everyone checks the provider seleced box so everyone gets the nameservers whoever connects them to the Internet selects (or suggests). If you want to use alternate nameserers, it is a few clicks of the Internet settings.

Anonymous said...

Anyone here ever read the book "Patriots"? There is the UN's end game.

Kristophr said...

Munch: That works OK for the moment, but eventually competing DNS services will start to diverge ... and expect would be censors like China to use third parties to poison independent DNSes by giving them conflicting data.

Some kind of trusted root DNS really is needed.

Shayne said...

That's a pretty accurate picture of our current FLOTUS.

leelu said...

Guys, guys,... I found an add-in for Firefox called "DeSopa" at It basically builds a list of IP addresses for the sties you visit. Browse to "", and the next time you select it, it will use the IP address. Check it out. And, if you have a Linux box floating around, you can set up your own DNS server. (Who would do it on Windows??)

leelu said...


As I understand it DNS 'poisoning' is substituting a different IP address for the one that is being looked up - say DailyKos instead of Boned Jello. Since large sites' I{ addresses don't change much, the issue is one of security on the DNS server end. DNS can't diverge, because divergence == wrong site addresses. And, as others have pointed out, its easy enough to change out a bad DNS provider for a good one.

Its all just a pain in the ass.

Kristophr said...

Easy if you have a clue.

Most folks are clueless, and will not know how to deal with it when a site that suddenly goes unaddressable.

Post a Comment

Just type your name and post as anonymous if you don't have a Blogger profile.