Regulation, licensing and filtering in RuNet

Background

The legislative campaign that began in 2011 (otherwise it is difficult to call all the progress) aimed at “settling” any content on the network seems to be entering its most vivid and intensive phase in the near future. At least, this is the impression created, judging by the number of messages in the media related to this topic.

I would like to clarify some points and deal with the history of the issue - without this, it is difficult to fully analyze what is happening. Any predictions are based on historical data and, apparently, we now have such a story. Considering the success of our country in the field of “overcoming digital inequality” and the number of users in RuNet , equal to more than 50% of the total population, it becomes clear that the most serious and far-reaching solutions in the sense of consequences await us in the near future.

Confronting copyright holders, legislators and users

In general, the whole story with blocking, ideas on licensing and filtering traffic, is reduced to a fairly simple "love triangle": copyright holders, lawmakers and users.

Each of these three groups pursues its own goals in the context of network existence and interaction:
- Copyright holders want the content consumed by the user to be licensed, that is, paid.
- Legislators want the ratio of licensed (paid in taxes to the state) content to exceed the amount of unlicensed (so-called "pirated"), firstly, and the network ecosystem itself is controlled, secondly.
- Users want everything as fast and free as possible.
')

Site blocking as insufficient measure

Actually, in November 2012 we received the first swallow - the so-called. “Law on bloggers” in the form of 97-, with the help of which it was possible to block access to any (with some reservations) web page on the territory of the Russian Federation.



Against this background, the discussion and adoption of another law passed somewhat unnoticed: 187-FZ, which we now call it “anti-piracy”. With it, the circle is closed: sites suspected of distributing pirated content could be blocked as interim measures. There was no talk of any “registries” at that time.

Approximately then it became clear what is missing: user data and, in the extended interpretation, all user data, that is, a general analysis of “national” traffic. Therefore, the law obliges all “information dissemination organizers” to collect and semi-annually store information “on the facts of receiving, transmitting, delivering and / or processing voice information, written text, images, sounds or other electronic messages of Internet users and information about these users ... "

DPI and content filtering

Then it became clear that, after sorting out some of the “primary” questions, the lawmakers realized that their goals were somewhat different from the goals of the rights holders. As in the field of licensing and content filtering, as the operational control over it.

Already, the “dissemination organizers” cannot feel safe, since it is still very easy to “get” user content that violates one or several rules from an extensive list on its site. In the future, obviously, this regulation will be used not only to block (prejudicial or extrajudicial) resources that violate the laws of the Russian Federation, but also to hold responsible persons accountable by analogy with how it happens in Europe and the USA: with heavy fines and sometimes long periods of imprisonment.

Considering the above, a reservation should be made: so far, only a few resources, access to which has been restricted due to a violation or error, have been unlocked ( Lurkmore ). Most of the resources that are on the black lists remain there, from which providers of proxy nodes and VPN services see a large flow of registrations from Russian users, who do not like being restricted in some way.

In the end, it becomes clear that neither the legislators nor the right holders like this problem. But to solve it for a long time, consistently and discussing all steps with society seems unlikely. It is easier to make a decision that will save these two groups from thinking about the problem. And in this case, only one thing comes to mind, despite all kinds of counter-opinions .

Chinese version

In the light of the recently signed Russian-Chinese agreement on cooperation to ensure international information security, the regulation of the domestic segment of the network according to Chinese experience is becoming more and more obvious.

Everyone knows that in China, all traffic is filtered using a variety of technologies, united under the single name "Great Firewall". As in Russia, access to some resources is limited using a “blacklist” formed from individual IP addresses and URLs: it includes Google services (Gmail, Youtube), Facebook, Twitter, and many other equally large “distributors information. "

Also in China, private companies are directly responsible for the primary moderation, on whose pages the content is “generated” or distributed. Therefore, the search for an end user that violates a particular law and its subsequent “neutralization” is exclusively in the field of interests of the company, which is at risk of being blacklisted and losing most of its visitors.

In addition to this already “standard” model, anonymizers are blocked in China, Tor is under a legal ban. As soon as some service becomes more or less popular (which Chinese providers easily calculate using the methods of in- depth analysis of traffic ), it is blocked. At the same time, China has a limited number of VPN services, but they are also fully controlled by law, existing with the permission of local authorities. And, yes, through them you can go to a certain number of sites that are blocked in the "general" access in China.

Https

A separate story - the use of the encrypted protocol http, which has become the norm almost everywhere, primarily to protect user data from unauthorized interception and analysis. The Chinese authorities give the right to some companies that do not cause problems or suspicions to use it. As soon as there is a suspicion that such prohibited traffic on the resource may hide any prohibited content or attempts to distribute it - the site will be blocked.

Unlike Russia, which has been tackling these tasks and coming up with some solutions at the moment, China had not only time, but also enough funds to prepare. And the purchase of equipment for DPI, as well as the setting of QoS in such conditions, was carried out for a long time and painstakingly. Plus, the overall organization of traffic on the network allowed China to really control the most "thick" network nodes on each channel of communication with the global network.

And if in China there were few such channels, then by the current moment there are a huge number of them in Russia and, distinctively, they can be owned by small private companies that are much more difficult to control than national Internet access service providers. Even the instructions of Roskomnadzor are not carried out by all operators and with different speeds.

A year ago, it became known about the discussion of the draft law, which builds all operators into a certain hierarchy: only the largest of them will get access to international networks of the highest level, the rest will have to be bought up by traffic “from above”. In such conditions, further work on filtering user traffic is possible.

Effects

The fact that a number of resources will remain inaccessible, you can not even write. As well as the fact that any resource and even an Internet service (VPN, proxy, Tor) can be quite “easily” strangled, or controlled manually, as is done in China.

But what is more important, especially when considering the situation with the connection to the network of subscribers in China, is that in the country, due to all content filtering measures, there remains one of the world's lowest levels of data transfer speeds and response times (ping) . And now it is becoming a serious problem for the further development of the already powerful (650 million subscribers) segment of the country's real economy.

The fact is that the level of network quality (and this is both speed and stability in sensation for the user) critically affects all the numbers inside it. And these numbers are more than impressive. For example: the online retail alone grew by 49.7% in China in the past 2014

And most experts now agree that the Chinese authorities will have to stop at one thing: either filtering the network or stimulating its further growth. In the current configuration, growth will stagnate, since it is impossible to deepen control over an ever-expanding market without causing him any damage.

And since China is right now in a period of rapid, exponential growth, things are already starting to happen, directly hinting that something needs to be done with the regulation of the national Internet. If two years ago, only 15% of respondents reported on the negative effects of content filtering on the network about surveys of the Chinese Chamber of Commerce, then a year ago their number exceeded 85%. This is almost fivefold growth.

On the other hand, China still manages to capitalize on the lack of global competitors in the national segment of the Internet, this is how Baidu, Alibaba, and Tencent exist, feeling like, excuse the pun like a stone wall. But in 2013, Internet services and other business in the virtual space amounted to 4.4 percent of China's GDP. McKinsey analysts believe that this figure will soon increase to 7% without any difficulties, as profits come from apolitical or self-censored centers of gravity. Basically - online trading. The total contribution of the growth of virtual incomes and related taxes will soon be responsible for almost a quarter of the annual GDP growth - an indicator that not only and perhaps not so much the Chinese authorities are looking at with increased attention, but foreign investors.

Again, the integration of sales into social services is becoming increasingly obvious, and the line between “online retailers” and “distributors of information” is becoming increasingly blurred. And the integration of economic sectors in the Internet leads to the fact that the barriers should be as low as possible - only this way the growing positive economy of the enterprise is possible. Already, Tencent (the largest communications provider in China, the national operator) is making plans to integrate absolutely all sectors of the economy (especially the least efficient, such as healthcare, financial services and agriculture) into the Internet, looking at the latter as a universal “integration platform”.

In such a situation, the Chinese government will have nothing left but to look for compromise options - suiting both national and transnational corporations, as well as an internal political agenda. And that means coordinating current steps with business and society.