The eternal race between prohibitionists and censorship circumvention on the Internet.

Relatively similar processes of individualization and localization of Internet countries segments are currently taking place across most of countries. Likewise, efforts to block “hostile” content and services are emerging everywhere. This isn’t only happening in highly restrictive countries like China, Russia, Iran, UAE, but also in countries regarded as beacons of free speech, such as those in the EU. In fact, it’s hard to imagine modern elites who wouldn’t want to restrict the content of their “respected international partners” or less-respected internal opponents.

An original article by Aleksandr Shaman

Bypass web filters and DPI-based censorship systems.
At the same time, circumvention technologies are continuously and rapidly evolving. Not long ago, we had a meeting on the various ways to bypass different forms of Internet blocks to maintain access to content in Russia from an international media operator.

Since the meeting was initiated by individuals not deeply versed in the technical aspects, our team of tech experts presented their ideas in plain language, avoiding excessive technical parameters for the benefit of a broader audience and decision makers.

This information is not confidential, so I decided to share it here to illustrate that the process of bans and bypasses is ongoing, and there’s always a way to counteract any “slowdown” or Web-Filter/DPI (“TSPU” in Russia, “Halal” internet by NIN in Iran, The Great Firewall in China, etc) — as long as there’s a desire to access the content and curiosity to explore it, there will always be an opportunity!

As a result, we have the classic game of “cat-and-mouse,” where the “cats” significantly lag behind the “mouses.”

Key points and constraints.
Effective methods must be free and passive for users. Only such passive methods will help retain an audience.
Cost considerations. The cost of such solutions lies in maintaining server systems (regardless of the protocol) through which high-traffic data flows. Reducing costs is possible by limiting traffic types based on usage restrictions.
Drawbacks of direct VPN use. The installation of VPNs or other gateways by users leads to quick identification of service IP addresses and subsequent blocking by regulatory authorities. On the other hand, frequent dynamic VPN changes pose other risks, such as the blocking of regular mobile and Internet apps due to suspicious activity detected by security tools, which complicates the user experience by requiring frequent launching and disabling of bypass tools.
Free non-individualized apps. Some safety’s shortcomings can only be mitigated by using a specialized framework or a custom browser, or by adding extensions to existing browsers. In a future post, I will share how we started developing such a solution, as we haven’t yet found a fully suitable one. Although several solutions exist, they all have drawbacks or deviate from the core concept of passive bypassing censorship, as they were designed for other purposes. For example, Brave was designed more for Blockchain/Web3 purposes, which overlap with these needs but do not fully align with them.
Our main proposals
IP address management. Either cooperatively or independently, purchase and rotate a package of thousands of IP addresses monthly, using them randomly and automatically replacing them every 12–48 hours to avoid blocks.
Customized browser development. Develop a browser based on open-source solutions with built-in automatic detection and bypass of any bans and restrictions, while making it difficult to detect the system’s current IP address. Importantly, the primary function of the browser should not be disclosed — it should appear as just another browser, or better yet, numerous of browsers that will be have common platform on an engine (customized version of Chromium, Gecko for example).

Sandbox framework. Develop a sandbox framework for smartphones, allowing users to run applications that are blocked in their country. The framework would dynamically detect and alter bypass mechanisms without user intervention. A built-in packet filter could further reduce costs by routing gateway traffic only for specific services and IP addresses. This framework could run on any Android or iOS device, and it should behave like real malware, concealing its presence on the device and automatically deleting itself upon detecting suspicious events to protect the user.
TV apps. Develop a TV app based on open-source solutions, where circumvention mechanisms dynamically change to bypass restrictions.
By integrating these approaches, it would be possible to retain up to 90% of the audience for the next five years, possibly even gaining additional viewers, as blocked content would attract not only the current audience but also neutral observers who aren’t regular users.

Alternative proposals.
Developing a dedicated application. For those willing to use it, a custom application could be created. However, this is risky, especially in countries like Belarus, where even having “unauthorized” apps or content can lead to penalties or even to prison. The primary issue here isn’t just government action but the natural fear of people, who are generally unwilling to risk their safety for independent (or foreign) content.
Messaging services for content delivery. Partially manual content delivery via WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, or even Russian messengers like TamTam (local Russian messanger that have a deep connection with goverment), or via email. This old-school approach is fairly effective and difficult to penalize on the end-point user side. However, it’s easy to block and could be considered spam by messenger companies, resulting in mass reports and potential blocking.
Eternal links. This is a method used by “gray” and “black” online platforms (such as pirate streaming sites). They are extremely effective in evading blocks, and there is much to learn from them.
Dynamic video content delivery. Development an open-source application for video streaming that uses dynamically changing paths for content delivery. The content wouldn’t be hosted on platforms like YouTube, but it could be a highly effective way to circumvent restrictions.
While options 2 and 3 are relatively easy to implement and can complement the main proposals, option 1 is less reliable due to the fear many people feel in oppressive regimes about installing such apps on their smartphones. For example, consider being stopped by border guards and asked to show your phone. Many users also don’t like to install multiple apps on their smartphones, as the average user rarely uses more than 20 apps regularly.

To achieve the best accessibility and preparedness for potential restrictions, it’s essential to implement a full range of tools and use all available technologies in combination. At the same time, it’s crucial to monitor the actions of the “prohibitionists,” as their technologies are constantly evolving as well. And, of course, everything must remain within the legal framework!

An original article by Aleksandr Shaman