36
Ronald Deibert and Rafal Rohozinski
of networks considerably more power to identity individuals connected to specifi c
devices.
The shift to mobile devices was outlined earlier, but the point bears repeating here.
At present and into the future, the majority of individuals will be accessing cyberspace
through a handheld device. Though constituting a part of cyberspace, and often connecting through the Internet, mobile systems employ a unique architecture of routing,
which offers an opportunity for network operators to build insularity from other networks, as well as to isolate users into segments in granular ways that previous devices,
like PCs, could not. As more cyberspace use takes place through mobile networks, a
new architecture may supersede and ultimately displace the existing one. When considered together, IPv6 and mobile ecosystems present probably the most important
watershed moment for cyberspace design.
Another looming set of issues concerns mounting pressures toward territorialized
Internet access. The trend toward cyberspace territorialization, which started with
national technical fi ltering, is now being reinforced by economic strategies. Countries
recognize that economic barriers can be just as effective, and offer a much lower political cost, than traditional censorship. Many are throwing state support behind national
cyberspace development projects, which are now defi ned as a critical economic sector.
For example, Kazakhstan and Tajikistan make available access to the Internet that is
restricted to the national domain at a lower cost than access to the global Internet.
Russia has determined that the construction of a national search engine is in that country ’ s strategic interest.
56 China Mobile Communications and Xinhua News Agency have
signed an agreement to create a homegrown search engine.
57 Iran proposed the creation
of a national e-mail system as a competitor to Gmail that, while not meeting much
support, shows the same strategic inclination.
58 National-level services and technologies like these can be justifi ed as being in the national economic interest while also
being easier to subject to political controls and regulations. They also complement the
emergence of linguistic domains, which allow governments like China and Russia to
control the registration of domains in national languages. Together, these further the
severing of nonterritorial networks around which cyberspace has been constituted.
While these mutually reinforcing drivers certainly hold out a daunting prospect for
the future of the cyberspace commons, there is a silver lining. With a deeply contested
space comes a crisis of authority, and the entire edifi ce of cyberspace governance is
thrown into question and laid bare for reexamination. A lid is lifted on the Internet,
allowing for a closer examination of what goes on beneath the surface, including that
which has been obscured by state secrecy or intellectual property concerns. Arguably,
as cyberspace contestation continues apace, a growing number of citizens worldwide
now can include in their daily lexicon issues of deep packet inspection, content fi ltering, encryption, and circumvention. What was once an arcane discussion restricted
to engineers, intelligence agencies, and a small segment of policymakers is being
Ronald Deibert and Rafal Rohozinski
of networks considerably more power to identity individuals connected to specifi c
devices.
The shift to mobile devices was outlined earlier, but the point bears repeating here.
At present and into the future, the majority of individuals will be accessing cyberspace
through a handheld device. Though constituting a part of cyberspace, and often connecting through the Internet, mobile systems employ a unique architecture of routing,
which offers an opportunity for network operators to build insularity from other networks, as well as to isolate users into segments in granular ways that previous devices,
like PCs, could not. As more cyberspace use takes place through mobile networks, a
new architecture may supersede and ultimately displace the existing one. When considered together, IPv6 and mobile ecosystems present probably the most important
watershed moment for cyberspace design.
Another looming set of issues concerns mounting pressures toward territorialized
Internet access. The trend toward cyberspace territorialization, which started with
national technical fi ltering, is now being reinforced by economic strategies. Countries
recognize that economic barriers can be just as effective, and offer a much lower political cost, than traditional censorship. Many are throwing state support behind national
cyberspace development projects, which are now defi ned as a critical economic sector.
For example, Kazakhstan and Tajikistan make available access to the Internet that is
restricted to the national domain at a lower cost than access to the global Internet.
Russia has determined that the construction of a national search engine is in that country ’ s strategic interest.
56 China Mobile Communications and Xinhua News Agency have
signed an agreement to create a homegrown search engine.
57 Iran proposed the creation
of a national e-mail system as a competitor to Gmail that, while not meeting much
support, shows the same strategic inclination.
58 National-level services and technologies like these can be justifi ed as being in the national economic interest while also
being easier to subject to political controls and regulations. They also complement the
emergence of linguistic domains, which allow governments like China and Russia to
control the registration of domains in national languages. Together, these further the
severing of nonterritorial networks around which cyberspace has been constituted.
While these mutually reinforcing drivers certainly hold out a daunting prospect for
the future of the cyberspace commons, there is a silver lining. With a deeply contested
space comes a crisis of authority, and the entire edifi ce of cyberspace governance is
thrown into question and laid bare for reexamination. A lid is lifted on the Internet,
allowing for a closer examination of what goes on beneath the surface, including that
which has been obscured by state secrecy or intellectual property concerns. Arguably,
as cyberspace contestation continues apace, a growing number of citizens worldwide
now can include in their daily lexicon issues of deep packet inspection, content fi ltering, encryption, and circumvention. What was once an arcane discussion restricted
to engineers, intelligence agencies, and a small segment of policymakers is being