

Three projects to create a government-less Internet, and why it is needed. - nika
http://www.datelinezero.com/2011/01/29/3-projects-to-create-a-government-less-internet-and-why-its-needed/

======
stcredzero
Here's what I think the citizens of countries in this situation need to do:

    
    
        - Coordinate activism without leaking information to authorities
        - Get the word out to the rest of the world about what is happening
        - Restore the ability to browse the rest of the Internet.  Make
          available the viewpoints from the rest of the world as an alternative
          to government propaganda.  
    

In order to facilitate these three aims, I propose the establishment of new or
adaptation of existing Open Source projects:

    
    
        - A DIY packet radio uplink kit.  
        - A one-click install for installing a Fidonet node on an older laptop 
          with a modem
        - Inexpensive WiFi-based "Text messaging" handsets.  
        - Open Source software to convert netbooks and smartphones into encrypted 
          communication devices
        - Weatherized WiFi communications cells which can be hidden, plugged in, and 
          abandoned (With some UPS capability to give immunity to power interruptions.)
        - A low cost "pirate cell tower" which can be used to re-enable SMS comms
          on conventional handsets when the government deactivates mobile service
    

In addition, I think it would be a good to found an international volunteer
organization which designs and prototypes relevant hardware, with the aim of
getting donations over the network through sites like Kickstarter and reddit
and using the proceeds to rapidly construct and disseminate such hardware to
affected citizens.

EDIT: Another hardware thing: A plan for acquiring 100's of cheap, outdated
GSM handsets which can be reprogrammed to implement secure encrypted messaging
over SMS.

EDIT: Yet another hardware thing: a drone suspended from a balloon, equipped
with a long-duration battery, an altimeter, wireless, GPS, and aimable
directional laser comms. Ideally, one would be able to give it the the
altitude and GPS coordinates of another "laser link drone" and automatically
aim the laser to establish line of sight laser comms to provide a long-
distance network link.

~~~
maeon3
The tower-devices will be broadcasting their presence and location, so hiding
them isn't as important as making them expensive and time consuming to remove
or highly mobile (on UAV's or back pockets) to run away from the government.

~~~
cosmicray
> The tower-devices will be broadcasting their presence and location

To a certain extent, yes. You could use highly directional 802.11 antennas
(yagi or shotgun) and disguise them. If they have minimal side lobe bleed,
they may be indistinguishable from the normal AP background levels. You should
be able to get 1-5 miles out of such a link. A few dozen such links could
criss-cross a city such as Cairo.

~~~
stcredzero
With a coastal city like Tunis, there's the possibility of setting up comms
with ships at anchor carrying hefty satellite equipment. Old fashioned
satellite dishes could extend the range of such links to many dozens of miles.

I wonder about combining this idea with my idea of a balloon drone with
equipment for aiming an antenna/laser link?

There was also a wireless networking technology developed at HP using the old
Ethernet protocols, but instead of a wire, a patch of ceiling illuminated by
infrared LED carried the signal instead. A network using such a technology and
the side of a skyscraper could easily cover a large swath of a city and would
be hard to detect.

------
jacquesm
A government less internet already exists, it's called Packet Radio AKA AX25.
It's a network that spans the globe with gateways to the internet at various
locations operated by radio amateurs using FSK modulation on regular HAM
equipment. Bandwidth is quite restricted.

The problem with creating a government-free internet for mass use is one of
resources and determination as well as some technical difficulties in
operating networks like this with large numbers of nodes. In rural areas the
problems will be the longer stretches without connectivity as well as all the
issues that come with routing packets around the world without network
congestion if the number of nodes should get large or if something exciting
were to happen.

On such a network the communications should be limited to the essentials, rich
media is pretty much out of the question.

On another note, the frequency spectrum is highly regulated, powerful base
stations operating as hubs could be shut down by triangulation and force and
operating transmitters outside of the alloted frequency ranges is forbidden by
law.

The only part of the electromagnetic spectrum that does not currently need any
regulatory before equipment can be sold or operated is as far as I know >
10GHz, and even then there are strict limits on power. Other options are UWB:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-wideband> and optical links (for instance
lasers).

In the United States the current frequency allocation chart looks like this:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:United_States_Frequency_Al...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:United_States_Frequency_Allocations_Chart_2003_-_The_Radio_Spectrum.jpg)

Setting up a 'government free' internet for a large number of users and
without using existing infrastructure is a serious technical challenge,
especially if you want to operate it without breaking the law.

~~~
wglb
First, radio amateurs are regulated everywhere more than the current internet
is.

Secondly, there is zero privacy in amateur radio communications. Encryption of
any form is expressly forbidden.

Thirdly, commercial use of the radio amateur service is severely restricted as
well.

~~~
jacquesm
Traditionally, in times of unrest and disaster radio amateurs were the last to
stay in touch and the first to come back in contact.

Yes, they're severely regulated and there are governmental registries of the
equipment they have. But I'd still put good money on HAMs being the last links
to an area engulfed in unrest or disaster.

~~~
wglb
I was suggesting that _A government less internet already exists, it's called
Packet Radio AKA AX25_ is not really true.

------
jws
In Greg Egan's[1] latest novel, "Zendegi", the uprising people use cellular
handsets reprogrammed into a peer-to-peer mesh network to continue email,
messaging, and phone calls when the authorities shut down the cellular towers.

The hardware is already deployed in people's pockets and purses. It just takes
a software download to make it happen.[2]

[1] Greg Egan is your man if you want to read a sci-fi book about, say, "given
that much of physics was derived by viewing the sun, moon, and stars, how
would a civilization without any knowledge of an external universe develop
physics?"

[2] You do have to take full control of the phone's radio, which is non-
trivial. They try to prevent that.

------
cletus
As much as we wax lyrical on the Internet being without borders and
transcending governments, it's sobering--and _important_ \--to see just how
quickly and easily a government can enforce its will.

Any networked system has a large number of vulnerabilities:

1\. Physical hardware. You combat this in three possible ways:

a) Make the hardware as cheap as possible;

b) Make the hardware dual-purpose. For example, behind the Iron Curtain, they
would modify radios beyond what the state allowed them to listen to; and

c) Use hardware that the state can not do without. For example, use of the
telephone network by spies in occupied Europe during WW2.

2\. Wired networks are inflexible and easily interrupted. It wouldn't take too
many acts of sabotage to almost completely disable the Internet in the US.
Wireless networks are subject to state tracking. You combat this in a number
of ways:

a) Use a medium the state can't do without (eg power lines, although in
extreme circumstances the state can and will cut the power);

b) Hide your communication channel (eg steganography);

c) Use a wireless medium where the transmitters are small, cheap and portable.

Note: in this context, carrying messages using people constitutes a wireless
packet-switched network with high bandwidth and high latency, which solves the
problems of cost and partially solves the problem of tracing as the state can
still use armed forces to limit movement.

It's worth discussing encryption in particular. It is _not_ a sufficient
protection but it can help. For one thing, an intercepted encrypted message
will be taken as a sign of guilt in extreme circumstances regardless of its
content.

Also, the distribution of encryption keys is an age old problem.

Lastly, encryption has a human element. You don't _really_ know who is
receiving your message and what they're doing with it. They could be a
government agent, a turncoat or simply surrender their secrets under duress.

So I'm not sure this is a problem that can be solved but it can be easier.

------
damaja
Has anyone been exposed to Wifi Direct? This is Wifi peer-to-peer sharing
without access points. Access points as they function now would be perfect for
connecting user handsets/devices but something like wifi-direct could be
modded to run on access points and to serve as a cheap backhaul link protocol
to interconnect APs.

The wifi spectrum is unlicensed, at least in this country (for now), so
modding cellular handsets to "mesh" with each, assuming that someone were able
to create a viable mesh protocol, would have handsets broadcasting in licensed
spectrum without permission from the FCC. Probably something to avoid...

------
Create
There are "regular" OpenWRT Wireless Battle Mesh meetings:
<http://battlemesh.org/BattleMeshV4>

------
mmb
Open source router firmwares like DD-WRT or Android handsets would be good
platforms for some kind of mesh network.

Having a wireless AP with a webserver and forum software would be a simple
option for communicating with your immediate neighbors (who could communicate
with theirs).

------
nodata
The global internet is not required to co-ordinate protests. Something
country-wide (or nearly country-wide) is.

It wouldn't even need to be fast.

------
DanielBMarkham
How about this: all wifi routers sold will have to also contain a low-
bandwidth public mesh interface that cannot be configured or turned-off.

That means that as people buy wifi routers, they also set up a very-low
bandwidth p2p net around their house. Any person with independent net
capabilities -- say those using a sat connection or packet radio -- would
naturally provide pass-through very low bandwidth to lots of other folks
without having to set anything up (Without being able to help it, actually)

Not a perfect solution, but something that can be done easily from this end
and it would cause a lot of consternation among those trying to totally
control information flow.

~~~
borism
or you can just walk those 50-100m (average WiFi coverage area) and ask your
neighbors for news.

------
maeon3
Scientific American had a piece on how to negotiate stable file transfer over
risky connections with redundancy. The problem of file transfer over ptp
cellphone is that you don't know which of your packets will make it through
and which ones don't. The transmissions need to be Asynchronous (transmit and
forget) because you don't know if the distant wireless device will hear you or
not. Scientific American magazine, "Using Smart Redundancy to send messages"

<http://i56.tinypic.com/332s5lv.jpg>

