What's At Stake

In just three hours, the sixth most-visited website on the Internet will transform from a vibrant, virtually unending stockpile of knowledge into a single, blacked-out page. I am 19 years old; since the day my eyelids first fluttered open, technology, computers, and the Internet have been a fact of life, growing at a speed that is incomprehensible to the very people that created it. Over 30 hours of video are uploaded to YouTube every single minute; historic events are now measured in Tweets per Second; Facebook processes more pictures in a single day than there are people on this planet; and the amount of information created, shared, and stored in this year alone is greater than the amount of information created since the dawn of time. I've watched as cities of information have blossomed overnight, built on the social structures of human interaction and desire for attention. I have seen technology connect people, improve lives, save lives, create and destroy relationships, even start and win a revolution. And yet I never imagined that my government, the same government that denounces censorship around the world and that fights for undeniable human rights, would bow to the pressure of the collective corporate world and attempt to pass a law that destroys the very vibrancy and freedom on which the world's network is built.

But here we are. We're at a period in technology history where we are effectively handing control of a network so complex it requires an army of experts to maintain, to elected officials who could be our parents. We are watching as they fumble about, unable to understand the technological marvel and complexity that allows this network to run. Most of these people could not define the word "domain," much less understand how such a trivial-sounding word comprises the structural integrity of the Internet. They are failing us because corporate studios in Hollywood are spending millions of dollars to convince them that a piece of legislature will solve the problem of piracy. Instead of focusing on the underlying causes, these corporations have managed to persuade many Senators and Congressmen to vote on a bill that will cause unimaginable damage to the integrity of the Internet as we know it.

A few years ago, I learned about the immense censorship that occurs in China. I saw two images, side by side representing Google Image results for the term "Tiananmen Square." On the left were the results as seen by Americans: bloody, gory images of a massacre. On the right were the results as seen by the Chinese: a few buildings, a monument, and a sunny sky. The fact that a government could actively suppress information from its citizens, especially information involving historic events, astounded me. I've continued to hear about the Great Firewall of China, a country-wide filter applied to the Internet access of citizens to prevent access to controversial information. And every time I read about this I was thankful that I live in the United States, a place where freedoms of speech and press are building blocks of this country. But today I am not so sure. It's hard to imagine living in a place like China; yet I fear if we wait long enough, without acting, we may someday learn.

SOPA would not censor political sites or hide information from the American public; it's a bill aimed at stopping piracy. Piracy is certainly a major problem that needs to be addressed. However, SOPA would put into place a simple and effective mechanism of shutting down websites without appropriate processes. For demonstrable evidence of this, just look at Wikileaks. With a simple phone call, our government turned pay processors and businesses against it without anything resembling a trial. If SOPA or PIPA passes, those in positions of authority will learn just how easy it is to destroy a website and eventually do just that. I am fearful that SOPA will evolve; it will turn from shutting down a few foreign websites for piracy into a massive effort to purge the Internet of compromising information or material "dangerous to national security." It wouldn't be difficult to convince a judge that a site should be banned and with a flip of a switch without due process, it would be.

Previous generations did not grow up with technology; they did not rely on it or start revolutions with it. But the innovations and amazing changes it has made are ours and our children's. I am not content with handing control of this massive, powerful part of our lives to individuals whose vote can be purchased. We as a nation of students and teachers, employees and employers, and businesses and users need to take back control of what we have created. We need to prove to our elected officials that they are voting with our interests in mind, not those of corporate media.

I am going to watch Wikipedia at midnight. I hope that those we have elected are watching also and that the strike made by a few websites is enough to voice our concerns loud enough for them to hear. I just hope they listen.

In an Effort to "Protect Us," Big Companies are Making Us More Insecure

One of the provisions of the oft-talked about SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) was (until yesterday when Lamar Smith was convinced to remove it) DNS editing to prevent access by American ISP subscribers to  foreign websites. Essentially, while the US does not have authority to physically remove a foreign site (at least theoretically), they can force US-based ISPs to block their domain name in the domain name resolution system, preventing people from accessing "somebadsite.com" and instead forcing them to use the archaic system of IP addresses. One of the biggest warnings from technology and security experts that came out of this provision was that people were going to begin using rogue DNS servers to access their content. News of how to bypass SOPA DNS restrictions would spread like wildfire, and soon, torrent-loving Americans everywhere would be using foreign-based, non-authoritative DNS servers to access content blocked under SOPA. This is a major security risk. It's something I think our elected leaders certainly failed to recognize (at least until recently). But it got make thinking of an entire market of services and applications where people are forced, because of the government or big-company regulations, to access the content they want in less-than-secure ways.

Rogue DNS servers are not a terrible problem at the moment. They certainly exist, but due to the current freedom and openness of the web, people are rarely forced to search for or even concern themselves with them. Under SOPA, this would certainly change. But today, millions of people are constantly bypassing security mechanisms elsewhere, and it is having a huge impact on the security of their devices. Think for a moment of smartphones like Android or the iPhone and the Market and App Store that accompany them. Many wireless providers like Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile have a fair amount of control over the applications that can be downloaded onto their phones from those app markets. This fact has been highlighted recently as tethering applications are continually yanked from the Market. It's quite clear; the carriers do not want those kinds of applications to be used on their networks. But in reality, do you think the average user looking to use a tethering app is just going to... give up when it can't be found in the Market?

Search Google for "tethering apps" and you will receive millions of hits. Almost every one of those hits includes links to APKs for tethering applications, the Android version of a .exe that allows the program to be installed on the device, bypassing the Market. These links usually include instructions on how to "side-load" the application. Side-loading is definitely a useful feature; developers use it constantly and it allows users to install applications otherwise blocked by the carriers. However, therein lies the security risk. The average consumer has no idea what side-loading is; they see it as a necessary step to get an app they want.   They have been trained to leave the protection (or quasi-protection) that the Market or App Store provides and instead search for the applications they want elsewhere. In an effort to prevent their customers from accessing blocked content, Verizon, AT&T, and other carriers have just taught their users to download the applications from a less-secure source. Anyone can upload an APK that does anything. If a consumer finds out that by simply Jailbreaking his iPhone, he can access all the Apps he wants, why wouldn't he, especially when all he has to do these days is visit a single website to auto-jailbreak the device?

This issue extends beyond just phones. People continually visit questionable, foreign-hosted sites to find TV shows, movies, music, etc. all because there is no legal, simple alternative. The RIAA and MPAA have a tight grip on the industry, but that grip is forcing people to turn to piracy and at the same time, insecure, often shady websites. The trend has become "if I can't do it legally or through my provider, search Google and blindly follow the instructions." This is bad. We have finally gotten to the point where most people are somewhat aware of banking scams, etc. But tell someone that they can watch the NFL online for free and they'll follow any steps necessary, including downloading malicious programs.

The point here is that such strict regulation by companies like Verizon, AT&T, Universal, etc., not only forces people into piracy, but also into insecure lifestyles, if you will. They are unknowingly trained by these companies to find round-about ways of getting what they want with little or no thought to the security implications involved. You may not "download a car," but I can guarantee that if you label a virus "car," someone, somewhere will download it.