The beginning of 2012 saw the introduction of SOPA, a controversial bill aimed at amalgamating Internet freedom with the right to intellectual author. SOPA was met with strong opposition and was defeated, but some see its sister bill, CISPA as simply more of the same. To WikiLeaks, freedom and Internet security have largely been left to private companies, and has been regarded as a matter of piracy and intellectual property laws. Since then, however, governments have adopted a much more active stance against Internet activities, and raised questions about his land status of a no-man law.
Perhaps the most frightening manifestation of the level of "interest" that governments around the world are in this debate is the recent failure of the Internet, held in Syria. Despite claiming a coordinated terrorist attack, most likely circumstance seems to be that the servers were simply programmed to stop the transmission of data, effectively making Syria a free zone of the Internet. The advantage of this was that they had the cover of darkness. Apart from the reports of eyewitnesses, no one could tell what was going on in Syria. So they were irresponsible in the world.
Although most countries around the world can claim to have a sufficiently stable government for not using such tactics of brute force, it is undeniable that most have an incentive to restrict freedom on the Internet. A VPN provider may offer some protection to users. By hiding the location of the user, a VPN provider allows bypass certain restrictions in place to prevent access to the Internet. Content in many countries remains mostly unrestricted, but with the interest of the collection of international security online, this can not last forever.
0 Komentar