If Russia can block it, it’s not distributed…
https://therecord.media/russia-cracks-down-bluesky-internet
Russia appears to block social media platform Bluesky amid wider internet restrictions

Russian digital rights organization RKS Global told Recorded Future News that Bluesky had been added to the registry of banned websites maintained by Russia’s communications watchdog Roskomnadzor.

@benpate this is interesting.

Is there a *Sky in Russia, like Eurosky, Gander, Blacksky or Northsky? (I should know what these are called. I think it's more than a PDS, but maybe that's the right word.)

Trot-sky would be a sick name, but I don't think the pun would translate well.

@evan that would be hilarious, but I don’t think the Russians are into him much anymore
@benpate they could do it for me, as a favour
@benpate the reason I ask is that I wonder how well ATProto federation works across borders when there's this kind of lockdown.

@benpate ActivityPub might work well in this case, but also badly. For example, if the Russian government blocked mastodon.social, the server-to-server data works on the same protocol and port number as the end-user interface and API.

But on the plus side, there are 40,000 other servers, so you'd still could stay connected to a big chunk of the Fediverse.

@benpate that said, I was doing some data analysis on fedidb last night, and about 50% of Fediverse users are on the top 10 servers, so it wouldn't take a lot of work to really cut down on the addressable accounts.

@benpate

ATProto works differently, on another port I think. I think there's also some indirect ways to share data, although I don't know a lot about how ATProto works so I might be mistaken.

@benpate @evan

Different enough than what we know of fedi doesn’t apply.

Bsky is boats and fedi is trains

I think they could block access to the main relay of bsky, but someone else could host an appview and relay themselves and as long as your user isnt on the main bsky pds you’re fine


#Could-be-a-headache #but-different-than-fedi #but-just-like-fedi-you-can-skip-it

@evan

True… We are slowly centralizing.

I believe real data portability would address this. LOLA portability would even enable ā€œhot backupā€ servers in cases where your primary server goes down.

And, I think Mastodon is making some progress on their signup page that will reverse this trend.

Look at me doing all this comms for Mastodon… Andy is going to owe me a beer šŸŗ

@benpate @evan

So what are all the possible ways they can block things, I wonder now. Not an expert. Couldn't they simply block all of #fediverse based on content-type or other aspects of #ActivityPub network communication? Deep msg inspection, etc. They want to drag their population over to that state-controlled platform I forgot the name of.

@benpate @evan

PS. I address 'points/risks of centralization' in my social experience piece and call-for-reflection on fedi's future, see..

https://social.coop/@smallcircles/116379158584600016

@smallcircles @benpate I studied this last year, and @mallory worked on RFC 9505.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9505/

I think the hardware requirements for doing deep packet stuff are hard but not impossible. Don't forget, we use HTTPS.

If it were me, I'd download a list of the top 1000 fediverse servers from fedidb and block their DNS names and IP addresses. That'd probably cover 99% of user accounts.

RFC 9505: A Survey of Worldwide Censorship Techniques

This document describes technical mechanisms employed in network censorship that regimes around the world use for blocking or impairing Internet traffic. It aims to make designers, implementers, and users of Internet protocols aware of the properties exploited and mechanisms used for censoring end-user access to information. This document makes no suggestions on individual protocol considerations, and is purely informational, intended as a reference. This document is a product of the Privacy Enhancement and Assessment Research Group (PEARG) in the IRTF.

IETF Datatracker
@evan @smallcircles @benpate if servers are blocked, it would depend on how the boost/announce serves the original content as to whether users inside a cenosred context could see posts from a blocked server. This is one way a federated architecture is an improvement over a centralized one.
@evan @smallcircles @benpate or a user inside a cenosred context just needs membership with a server that is not blocked to receive content they follow.