
Canadian Company Netsweeper to Censor Bahrain’s Internet for $1.2M - kushti
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/canadian-company-netsweeper-to-censor-bahrains-internet-for-12m?utm_source=mbtwitter
======
kitcar
To make matters even more complex, Netsweeper appears to have received
subsidies / grants from the federal government of Canada ( see
[http://www.giantgoat.com/blog/2010/03/guelph-partnership-
for...](http://www.giantgoat.com/blog/2010/03/guelph-partnership-for-
innovation-breakfast-march-25.html) )

~~~
mfoy_
"Andrew Graydon: Chief Operating Officer of Netsweeper Inc. Andrew gave an
enthusiastic talk on the benefits that IRAP has had on Netsweeper; explaining
how they started out in 2002 with an IRAP YEP grant (Youth Employment Program)
and then moved on in subsequent years to get IRAP project funding that enabled
them to develop very innovative and what sounds like potentially very
profitable technologies in the Internet content filtering area."

Last line is pure gold in retrospect.

------
davidu
We say no to these deals because _the cost of doing them is too great._

Not only have we said no to these opportunities in the past, but we probably
said no to this specific one. Here is our documented anti-censorship policy:
[https://www.opendns.com/about/anti-censorship-
policy/](https://www.opendns.com/about/anti-censorship-policy/)

Even as a part of Cisco, it's easy to avoid these kinds of deals still today.
You simply say "No – The cost is too great."

~~~
charlesdm
I doubt you can get every technologist to say "no" to a million dollars. There
will always be someone willing to supply this technology.

~~~
davidu
Definitely. It just doesn't need to be me.

------
MisterWalter
Maybe I'm naive, but I just can't see how these NetSweeper people justify this
to themselves.

~~~
dmix
Demand <\--> supply.

Controls might help prevent this type of thing but often just pushes it
underground. In all likelyhood they'd probably just get it from some source
without public tenders. Then we'd know even less about their censorship
capabilities.

Or at best they'd get a less-capable software version from an amoral and less
technically savvy country - which may be easier to circumvent.

Bluecoat seems to still be operating fine despite doing similar things years
ago in the US.

~~~
gooserock
"Somebody is going to do this, so we might as well do it" is not a valid
defense for doing something that is immoral.

~~~
dmix
You mischaracterized my argument. To reiterate:

If somebody is going to do it anyway it is therefore often better to have it
done in public rather than pushed into black markets via controls (see: drug
war).

The additional condition I provided is where the black market options are much
weaker or limited than the possible public options, allowing the markets to
effectively circumvent or eliminate the negative utility of the black market
products - therefore making controls a valid option (see: nuclear arms).

------
karanbhangui
Shame on them, both as a Canadian and coming from a family who used to live in
Bahrain.

~~~
x5n1
Whatever 1.2 million is not much money. And if they don't do it someone else
will do it.

~~~
emptybits
One could justify the sale of any unethical product or service to any
despicable group this way, could they not?

Is there ever a role for principled commerce?

------
kazinator
Now if it also turned out that the money actually comes from the Canadian
government as some sort of aid funding for development projects abroad, that
would be perfect!

------
Zigurd
Netsweeper is creating a bigger national security threat than any so-called
subversives could. They are reinforcing a constricted, benighted, world-view
in a place that needs exposure to diversity of thought more than most others.

~~~
venomsnake
One of the cornerstones of international law is that a country's internal
affairs are their own.

------
eliteraspberrie
Keep an eye on this graph to see when it goes online:
[https://metrics.torproject.org/userstats-relay-
country.html?...](https://metrics.torproject.org/userstats-relay-
country.html?graph=userstats-relay-
country&start=2016-01-01&end=2016-12-01&country=bh&events=off)

------
Robin_Message
I'm appalled that someone would give up such basic principles for a million
dollars. A billion, and I could understand it being hard to turn down, but one
million?

If you're going to sell out, might as well be for a large sum†.

† Given they have to implement it, and there are probably more than a few
people involved, I can't see anyone getting more than 100 thousand out of
this. On the other hand, Judas was content with 4 months pay, so maybe some
people just don't care.

------
chvid
Maybe it is me but 1.2 mio dollars does not sound like much for doing
something like this.

But then the article doesn't really describe what exactly what censorship
entails.

