Recent reports indicate significant disruptions in mobile data services across Iran, with many residents finding it increasingly difficult to maintain online connectivity. Individuals attempting to avoid censorship via virtual private networks are encountering failures, which complicates communication both within and outside the country. Alimardani, a key observer on this matter, highlights the challenges faced by families, noting that some who departed Tehran today only regained internet access approximately 200 kilometers away in another province. Connectivity issues are prevalent, particularly among those reliant on home broadband Wi-Fi, which has shown signs of instability.
In the past ten years, governments worldwide have resorted to the drastic measure of shutting down internet access, either fully or partially, during times perceived as crises. Data from Access Now, an internet rights organization, reveals a record-high 296 shutdowns in the previous year alone. These actions are often associated with authoritarian regimes aiming to stifle protests, limit free communication, and impose control during conflicts. Additionally, some governments deploy shutdowns as a means to curb misconduct in educational settings.
Hanna Kreitem, director of internet technology and development at the Internet Society, highlights the crucial role of the internet in crisis situations. As connectivity in Iran plummeted starting June 13, Kreitem received reports from individuals with relatives in the country experiencing severe slowdowns. The internet serves as an essential lifeline in conflict zones, enabling individuals to secure information, request assistance, and maintain contact with family members. It similarly offers those outside the country a glimpse into the unfolding events impacting their loved ones.
Countries employ various technical methods to restrict internet connectivity. In Iran, a long-standing effort to create an intranet system known as the National Information Network (NIN) has gained traction. According to Freedom House, this approach introduces different tiers of internet access, permitting the government to enforce censorship and promote domestically developed apps, which may lack robust privacy and security features. Freedom House has classified Iran as “not free” concerning internet freedom, highlighting ongoing shutdowns, escalating costs, and a push for users to gravitate towards regulated domestic platforms.
Amir Rashidi, a digital rights and security expert at the Miaan Group, notes that increased domestic program promotions coincide with the recent shutdowns. He reports that many people, in desperate circumstances, are resorting to insecure applications to stay connected, pointing out that the messaging app Bale is gaining traction due to its ability to function even during outages, as it is hosted on the NIN.
This trend of restricting internet access is not unique to Iran. As Lukasz Olejnik, a cybersecurity consultant, explains, many other countries—including Myanmar, India, and Russia—have invoked security-related justifications for implementing similar blackouts. The uptick in global internet shutdowns over the last decade raises concerns regarding governmental claims of security, particularly as such measures do little to mitigate actual state-level cyber threats.
Olejnik elaborates on the ineffectiveness of internet shutdowns in combating real cyberattacks, noting that crucial infrastructure typically operates on isolated networks, inaccessible from the public internet. While military operations may employ alternative pathways to launch attacks, shutdowns primarily serve to disrupt knowledge dissemination among the populace rather than thwarting sophisticated cyber operations.
Alimardani points out the ambiguity surrounding claims that internet restrictions are intended to bolster cybersecurity. He conveys that the overarching objective may be to enforce control over the population. Official narratives disseminated by state media often paint a picture of ongoing conflict with external adversaries, and unhindered media access could undermine these narratives. In a worst-case scenario, this could incite factions within Iran to resist, posing a direct challenge to the regime’s authority.
