Resultados 1 a 6 de 6
  1. #1
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    15,000

    Putin: Internet é um ‘projeto da CIA’

    Em discurso, presidente russo alerta que país deve lutar pelos seus interesses on-line

    MOSCOU – Em discurso nesta quinta-feira, o presidente russo, Vladimir Putin, classificou a internet como um “projeto da CIA” e afirmou que o país deve “lutar pelos seus interesses” no mundo virtual, informa a AP. O Kremlin vem tentando aumentar o controle estatal na rede mundial de computadores, usada por ativistas da oposição para promover ideias e organizar protestos.

    Esta semana, o parlamento aprovou lei que exige que sites de redes sociais que atuem no país guardem dados dos usuários por pelo menos seis meses, em servidores instalados em território russo. Além disso, investidores ligados ao presidente assumiram controle total do VKontakte, conhecido como o “Facebook russo”.

    Durante um fórum de mídia em São Petersburgo, um blogueiro reclamou ao presidente que sites estrangeiros e o Yandex, serviço de buscas que na Rússia é maior que o Google, estão armazenando informações em servidores estrangeiros, o que pode ser afetar a segurança do país.

    Como resposta, Putin mencionou pressões exercidas contra o Yandex nos últimos anos, sem entrar em detalhes, além de criticar o fato de a empresa ser registrada na Holanda, “não apenas por questões fiscais, mas por outras considerações também”.

    Em comunicado, o Yandex afirmou que a companhia foi registrada na Holanda “apenas por questões específicas à legislação corporativa”, não por causa dos baixos impostos e ressaltou que o negócio central está baseado na Rússia, onde a empresa “paga todas as taxas impostas”. Em reação às “pressões” citadas por Putin, a companhia afirmou que recebeu investimentos de fundos estrangeiros, “prática comum para qualquer start-up on-line em qualquer país do mundo”.

    http://oglobo.globo.com/sociedade/te...a-cia-12285303
    Última edição por 5ms; 24-04-2014 às 22:50.

  2. #2
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    15,000

    Saudi Arabia Plans to Regulate YouTube Content

    Content Code to Include Guidelines on Nudity, Sex, and Alcohol

    DUBAI—Saudi Arabia is planning tighter regulation of video content produced in the country for YouTube after an explosion of news, satire and comedy has made the kingdom one of the biggest per-capita global consumers of Google Inc.'s video platform.

    Viewers in Saudi Arabia watch three times as much YouTube as their peers in the U.S., according to Google, largely because the traditionally government-backed mass media hasn't produced enough content suited to the country's large population of young people.

    An array of Arabic shows are produced in Saudi Arabia by online content creators that have, until now, been given a measure of freedom compared with the traditional media in the conservative Islamic kingdom.

    But YouTube's popularity has brought it under the scrutiny of Saudi authorities, who plan to regulate all forms of audiovisual media, a move that could stifle creativity among creators who have increasingly pushed the boundaries of satire in the Middle East.

    The General Commission for Audiovisual Media will monitor the quality and quantity of content produced in Saudi Arabia on platforms such as YouTube via a code that will include guidelines on alcohol, tobacco, nudity and sexual acts, said Riyadh Najm, the commission's president. It will also promote private-sector-led investment in the media industry.

    "We will make them aware of what's acceptable in Saudi Arabia and what's not acceptable," Mr. Najm said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal. "Criticism is acceptable as long as it's professional and constructive."

    The growth in the YouTube production industry in Saudi Arabia has caught the attention of both Google and advertisers.

    Individual YouTube shows can average more than two million views in Saudi Arabia, where strict interpretation of Islamic law means diversions such as nightclubs and cinema are banned.

    Google in March conducted its first YouTube roadshow in the region to educate content creators on how to best monetize their shows and improve the quality to attract views. Google declined to comment on the plans for regulation.

    "I hope it will not be restrictive or stop creativity," said Kaswara Al-Khatib, chairman and chief executive of U-Turn, a Saudi-based network that produces 30 shows and has 15 million subscribers and followers on YouTube and social media. "We do not want to step back."

    The commission, which was established in September 2012, will issue licenses under the printing and publishing law to any production company operating in the kingdom, according to Mr. Najm.

    A new media law that will extend the old law's oversight to online and broadcasting is also being reviewed by the kingdom's advisory Shoura Council—a king-appointed body that is Saudi Arabia's closest thing to a parliament.

    Mr. Najm comes to his job from the Ministry of Culture and Information, where he was previously the deputy minister. The commission would begin issuing licenses before the end of the year, he added.

    "I think it's about security and making sure they control whatever content is out there," said Amgad Husein, a Saudi-based partner at law firm Dentons.

    Saudi Arabia's first attempt to regulate online expression with specific laws came in March 2009 when the Ministry of Culture and Information announced plans for a new electronic-publishing law to be applied to local news websites.

    The new e-publishing law wasn't passed until January 2011 amid criticism by many bloggers and online activists who anticipated that new sweeping regulations would put restrictions on free speech. In March, the ministry started blocking local news websites that didn't apply for a government license.

    Saudi Arabia said on Sunday that it had detained nine Saudis who had recorded videos critical of the government. Since March 22, about a dozen Saudis have recorded and posted YouTube videos of themselves criticizing the royal family or complaining of low salaries, corruption and unemployment.

    The autocratic countries of the Persian Gulf have become increasingly uneasy about social and online media since 2011, when the platforms helped fuel the Arab Spring uprisings across the region.
    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/...21463293165726

  3. #3
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    15,000
    The General Commission for Audiovisual Media will monitor the quality and quantity of content produced in Saudi Arabia on platforms such as YouTube ... It will also promote private-sector-led investment in the media industry.

    ...

    Saudi Arabia's first attempt to regulate online expression with specific laws came in March 2009 when the Ministry of Culture and Information announced plans for a new electronic-publishing law to be applied to local news websites.

    The new e-publishing law wasn't passed until January 2011 amid criticism by many bloggers and online activists who anticipated that new sweeping regulations would put restrictions on free speech. In March, the ministry started blocking local news websites that didn't apply for a government license.

    Saudi Arabia said on Sunday that it had detained nine Saudis who had recorded videos critical of the government. Since March 22, about a dozen Saudis have recorded and posted YouTube videos of themselves criticizing the royal family or complaining of low salaries, corruption and unemployment.

    Precisa comentar?

  4. #4
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    15,000

    Putin calls Internet a 'CIA project' renewing fears of web breakup

    Russian president's remark fans idea that has gained ground in Germany, Brazil and elsewhere after Edward Snowden's revelations

    Ewen MacAskill, defence and intelligence correspondent



    Vladimir Putin gave his clearest signal yet that he aims to break up the global nature of the internet when he branded the network a "CIA project" on Thursday.

    The Russian president told a media conference in St Petersburg that America's overseas espionage agency had originally set up the internet and was continuing to develop it.

    Putin has long hinted that he wants a Russian-run alternative. The idea of breaking up the internet has gained ground in Germany, Brazil and elsewhere round the world in the light of the revelations by whistleblower Edward Snowden about the extent to which the US National Security Agency has infiltrated social media.

    Snowden's critics say that an unintended consequences of his revelations has been to undermine the global nature of the web as well as playing into the hands of dictators. His supporters counter that it is the NSA rather than Snowden that has damaged trust in the service.

    During a recent national televised question and answer session, Putin batted away a question from Snowden – who won temporary asylum in Russia after having his US passport revoked – about whether Russia also intercepted and stored communications harvested from the internet, as the US did. "I hope we don't do that," he said to applause from the studio audience. "We don't have as much money as they do in the US."

    Putin acknowledged that there was surveillance of criminals and potential terrorists but denied there was mass surveillance of citizens.

    A purely Russian-run system could make it easier for the Russian intelligence services to monitor and control traffic. The Kremlin already has powerful tools in place for this, but nonetheless the internet offers a platform for Russian opposition groups denied a voice on the country's television and radio. At the same media conference, Putin also referred directly to the most popular search engine in Russia, Yandex – a reference that caused its shares to plummet.

    Putin's St Petersburg comments could herald the most serious challenge yet to the world wide web, which was founded by the British computer scientist Sir Tim Berners-Lee.

    Putin claimed the "CIA project" was still developing and that Russia needed to be protected from it. The nation had a duty to resist that influence and fight for its interests online, he said.

    His remarks come in the wake of a law passed by the Russian parliament this week requiring foreign social media websites to keep their servers in Russia. The law also requires them to save all information about their users for at least six months.

    Business executives close to Putin now control Russia's leading social network, VKontakte.

    Putin, in referring to Yandex, criticised the company for its registration in the Netherlands, "not only for tax reasons but for other considerations too". He was responding to a questioner who complained that Yandex was storing information on servers abroad, potentially compromising Russian security.

    Snowden has previously faced criticism from within America for accepting asylum in Russia but failing to speak out against the authoritarian nature of the regime. After addressing Putin last week, he was accused of putting a softball question to him.
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...p-internet-cia
    Última edição por 5ms; 25-04-2014 às 19:09.

  5. #5
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    15,000

    Putin’s Fear of the Internet

    Posted by Masha Lipman

    In the mid-nineteen-sixties, Brezhnev’s Soviet Union introduced a law aimed at stifling ideological dissent. Article 190, Part 1 of the Soviet Criminal Code criminalized “the dissemination of the intentionally false insinuations defiling the Soviet state and social order.” The post-Stalin regime was not the sort of dictatorship that exterminated its own citizens, but it insisted that public expression be in full compliance with the Communist Party line. It was not uncommon for people to be sentenced to years in work camps for “disseminating” three or four copies of underground literature.

    In the Soviet Union, dissemination was constrained by the limited capacity of the typewriter, the restricted use of copy machines, and the clandestine distribution of photocopies—factors that also remind us of the courage of those who distributed literature anyway, risking their freedom. Today, in an age of modern communication, anyone with a computer and an Internet connection has, in theory, unlimited dissemination capacity. And yet, almost half a century after the introduction of Article 190 and almost a quarter century after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Vladimir Putin’s regime is reviving the law in spirit, rapidly moving Russia toward isolationism and intolerance of any form of free expression—from civic activism to nongovernment media.

    In a meeting with government loyalists this week, Putin called the Internet a “C.I.A. project” that has “evolved in this manner”—that is, with interests opposed to Russia’s—ever since its creation. (Though the technical foundation of what became the Internet was laid with the help of the U.S. government, it has long since slipped from American, or any other government’s, possession.) Until recently, it seemed as though the very existence of the World Wide Web was a safeguard against a major crackdown on mass communication by governments. Even if traditional media has come under government pressure, the thinking went in Russia, the Internet remained a realm of free public exchange. But free exchange is the very reason Putin sees the Internet as a major threat.

    Putin’s ominous statement followed a continuous line of measures—laws, bills, and initiatives—aimed at restricting online communication in Russia. One recently passed law enables the government to block Web sites without a court ruling (a few have already been blocked). Another bill mandates that bloggers with more than three thousand followers bear the same legal responsibility as mass-media companies, meaning, for example, that such bloggers can be fined if they post inaccurate information. In the Russian legal environment, where court rulings in politically sensitive cases are commonly guided by instructions from, or simple loyalty to, the Kremlin, any unwelcome information will be easily categorized as “inaccurate.” A municipal legislator in Moscow expressed concern that “the special services cannot establish full control over bloggers.” She was especially outraged by bloggers who have voiced doubts over the Kremlin’s policy in Crimea following Russia’s annexation of the peninsula. The city legislature has suggested that such doubts be treated as provocative and “extremist,” a criminal offense commonly used against civic activists and protesters.

    Last month, Galina Timchenko, the editor of the news and analysis Web site lenta.ru, was fired by the owner. (David Remnick wrote about that case.) In a matter of just a few years, she had turned lenta.ru into the most popular online source of political news in Russia—a highly effective dissemination tool—and perhaps for this very reason a dangerous asset for its owner. Timchenko was replaced by someone seen as more loyal to the government. (Many members of the lenta.ru editorial staff quit in protest.)

    Russia’s largest social network, VKontakte, had been launched in 2006 by Pavel Durov, sometimes referred to as Russia’s Mark Zuckerberg. After what appears to have been a forced sale of his package to business structures loyal to the Kremlin, Durov left Russia; he has said that he has no plans to go back. Another recent initiative requires that foreign social-media Web sites, such as Google or Facebook, keep servers physically based in Russia and save all the information about their users for at least six months.

    While he condemned the Internet for being essentially hostile to Russia, Putin also criticized Yandex, the Russian search engine, for being registered in the Netherlands, “not only for the taxation purposes but for other reasons, as well.” Yandex, like VKontakte, should be an Internet success story. Launched by two Russian friends in the nineties, Yandex prides itself on having more traffic in Russia than Google—an achievement few national search engines can boast. But, in Putin’s current isolationist world view, Yandex is not nationalist enough: when the company was staring out, “they, too, were pressured,” Putin said at the same meeting, claiming that they were told “they had to have a certain number of Americans and a certain number of Europeans in their governing bodies, and they had to agree with that.” (In a statement issued in response, Yandex said that its first investment was from international funds and investors, but “this is a common thing for any Internet startup in any country.”)

    Amid the alarm caused by Putin’s reference to the Internet as a C.I.A. anti-Russian tool, @Euromaidan, a Twitter feed set up by Ukrainian activists, posted a photo of Allen Dulles. This was a joke with a history: Dulles, the C.I.A.’s director during the early Cold War, is commonly evoked by anti-Western forces in Russia as the mastermind behind the destruction of the Soviet Union. The photo was accompanied by the following lines: “We will need 54 years to prepare Euromaidan in Ukraine. To this end we will need to create social networks, And in order to do that we will need to create the Internet. And then we will proceed to develop it in this manner.”

    Russia’s expansionist and pugnacious stance has precipitated a flight of capital that, even according to Kremlin officials, may reach a hundred billion dollars this year; the Russian economy is entering a recession. After Putin’s statement, Yandex shares lost five per cent. Putin’s effort to protect Russia from pernicious Western influence will also affect the Internet as we know it. “It will facilitate the introduction of borders in the Internet, and lead to its ‘Balkanization,’ ” Andrey Soldatov, a Russian Internet expert, told me in an e-mail. Soldatov wrote recently that “One should keep in mind that Russia has already provided a cohesive, detailed and well thought-out blueprint for turning the Internet into a collection of national intranets.”

    With the annexation of Crimea, Putin is firmly set on an anti-Western and isolationist course, and on the goal of suppressing signs of disloyalty. He does not seem to care about the costs to Russia’s development in general—or its place in the tech industry. The days of clandestinely distributed carbon copies may not be as distant as they seem.
    http://www.newyorker.com/online/blog...-internet.html

  6. #6
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    15,000

    Why We Should Care About Russia’s Stance on the Internet

    by Andrei Soldatov

    How can we reduce American influence over the Internet? Is it possible to place boundaries on the global network and, if so, how? Today, in the aftermath of the Snowden revelations, these are among the most prominent questions in the global debate on Internet regulation.

    Surprisingly, it appears that it is Russia rather than China—the established world authority on Internet censorship—leading this offensive on the Internet. Given Russia’s successful experiments in censorship and surveillance, we must pay attention to the country’s role in discussions on global Internet regulation.

    Evidence of Russia’s exceptional role in challenging the rules of Internet governance includes two recent success stories. First, Russia’s country-wide Internet filtering system has proven to be highly effective in dealing with global online platforms and services. And second, as a result of Russia’s exemplary surveillance state, the Sochi Olympics were secure, calm, and controlled despite their proximity to the North Caucasus and the plans of many groups to stage protests during the event.

    Remarkably, the approach used by the Kremlin in both cases was not what one might have expected. In November 2012, when Internet filtering was introduced in Russia, national telecom operators and Internet service providers rushed to buy deep packet inspection technology. Experts believed that this technology would be the principal tool used to censor content on global platforms. Instead, the authorities turned toward much more direct measures.

    Since then, thousands of websites have been banned, ranging from those containing text taken from William Powell’s Anarchist Cookbook to the YouTube hit “Dumb Ways to Die.” Institutions that provide public access to the Internet—schools, libraries, Internet cafés, and even post offices—were raided by authorities to ensure that computers had been updated to prevent access to banned websites. The authorities did not hesitate to block entire services, and this had an effect on Internet giants. Now, it takes just a few hours to have Google, Facebook, and Twitter remove content deemed harmful by the Russian authorities. The success of this straightforward approach encouraged the Kremlin when it faced its biggest security challenge of the last seven years, the Sochi Winter Olympic Games.

    In 2013, Citizen Lab, Privacy International, and Agentura.Ru launched a joint project focused on investigating surveillance measures deployed in Sochi in preparation for the Olympics. We expected these measures to be substantial, given the country’s poor human rights record and the legacy of Soviet Union’s security agency, the KGB, which maintained totalitarian control over its citizens. In fact, the Russian secret service openly expressed their admiration of the security measures at the 1980 Moscow Olympic Games, which were boycotted by most Western countries.

    Our research found that the surveillance measures imposed in Sochi were exceptional in many ways. This includes the installation of 11,000 CCTV cameras, total communications interception, and the use of surveillance drones and blimps. In fact they were so impressive that Sochi’s electronic surveillance system has put Russia’s intelligence agencies in the spotlight of international media, propelling the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) and SORM (Russia’s system of lawful interception on communications) into the global debate over surveillance alongside the NSA, GCHQ, and the “Five Eyes” alliance. For example, on January 22, 2014, just a few months after The Guardian published our Sochi research, I was asked to provide testimony before the Committee of Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs of the European Parliament on SORM as part of the European Parliament’s investigation into mass surveillance of European citizens by US and British intelligence agencies.

    What struck me most was that many of the surveillance measures taken at Sochi were introduced almost openly. A headline on the pro-Kremlin Voice of Russia website aimed at English-*speaking audiences expressed it best: “Don’t be scared of phone tapping during Sochi. It’s for your own safety.” Indeed, the authorities seemed to flaunt their electronic eavesdropping capabilities.

    The explanation that I offer is that these measures were meant to send a message. Many activists appeared to be openly monitored, their apartments visited by police, and in the case of the punk protest group Pussy Riot, followed by dozens of policemen, plainclothes agents and the Cossacks, a group of predominantly East Slavic people who are members of democratic, semi-military communities, predominantly located in Ukraine and in Southern Russia.

    Meanwhile, most journalists who covered the small number of protests in Sochi were acutely aware that their contact with locals was absolutely known to security agencies. A prime ministerial decree made sure of that. Three months before the Sochi opening ceremony, a system of metadata collection on participants of the Games was decreed, and journalists were mentioned twice in the document. The goal was to impose self-censorship on journalists. This strategy was only partly successful since many global media outlets produced stories about the extensive surveillance and security measures in Sochi. Nevertheless, the general success of the Games convinced the Kremlin that a straightforward approach when it comes to surveillance as a means of pressure might be very effective. The key word here is pressure—whether it is aimed at journalists, activist groups, or global online platforms.

    Before the Snowden revelations, Western countries constantly rebuffed the Kremlin’s ideas of implementing national sovereignty on the Internet, most spectacularly at the International Telecommunications Union’s December 2012 meeting in Dubai. This is no longer the case. Like the Russian government, which is currently using the Snowden disclosures to justify bringing global online platforms and services under Russian jurisdiction, many countries are beginning to support the concept of national sovereignty in cyberspace. The first was Brazil when its communications minister, commenting on the Snowden’s revelations, said that local ISPs could be required to store data on servers within the country, adding that local control over data was a “matter of national sovereignty.” In October 2013, Germany’s Deutsche Telekom declared that it wanted to create a national Internet to protect Germany from privacy infringements. And in February 2014, German Chancellor Angela Merkel announced that she would talk to French President Francois Hollande about building a European network to avoid data passing through US servers.

    Some changes in Internet regulation seem inevitable. But as countries struggle to find a solution, one should keep in mind that Russia has already provided a cohesive, detailed and well thought out blueprint for turning the Internet into a collection of national intranets.
    About Andrei Soldatov

    Andrei Soldatov is an investigative journalist and an editor of Agentura.Ru, an information hub on intelligence agencies.
    http://www.cyberdialogue.ca/2014/03/...drei-soldatov/
    Última edição por 5ms; 26-04-2014 às 01:55.

Permissões de Postagem

  • Você não pode iniciar novos tópicos
  • Você não pode enviar respostas
  • Você não pode enviar anexos
  • Você não pode editar suas mensagens
  •