Perils in fighting the cyberwar
By Abdul Wahab Bashir
IS the Kingdom winning or losing the cyberwar? How realistic are attempts to filter the Internet for the country’s population? Are such efforts worth the time and money spent chasing and closing down sites? Especially when hundreds come online every day. And after all the trouble of finding the sites and denying access to them, we find that they can still be accessed through other addresses! These are some of the questions and topics discussed when the terms “Internet” and “dotcom” come into conversation. It has been only two years since the Kingdom decided to allow the Internet. In so short a time as this, the task of filtering the rapidly mushrooming Net and keeping undesirable sites out is a daunting and almost impossible one. Internet rules for blocking sensitive sites require web users to refrain from accessing sites containing subversive ideas, material contrary to the state or its system, news damaging to the armed forces, material damaging to the dignity of heads of states, false information relating to state officials and all slanderous or libelous material.
The task of censoring the Internet and blocking sites that Internet users might access has been assigned to the King Abdul Aziz City for Science and Technology (KACST). It is the Kingdom’s only recognized link to the international information network. Its job entails enormous sums of money and effort. KACST says it has found a way to censor the Internet but experts maintain the task of monitoring and blocking undesirable sites has proved far more difficult and time consuming than originally thought. Thousands of new web pages go onto the web every day; estimates are that there are in excess of one million new sites every month. One service provider said, “It is a futile attempt. You close one site and scores more will appear the same day. The blocked site can switch to any of the thousands of addresses available on the Net. It is a cat-and-mouse game.”
Just recently, KACST announced plans to block 200,000 new sites for moral reasons over a period of two months. This will almost double the total number of sites being banned by the city. The majority of the sites to be banned carry pornographic material; the others are of a political or social nature in violation of the country’s laws. The move has been viewed as pointless by many who point out that blocked sites can easily be accessed through other means that circumvent the ban and which leave virtually no traces. Instead, more effective educational measures should be used so that people become aware of both the advantages and disadvantages of the Internet and learn to act responsibly when using it.
Writing in Al-Hayat, a London-based Saudi newspaper, Daoud Al-Shirayan said, “KACST is perhaps the largest center for censorship and blocking of Internet sites in the whole world. It has undertaken a mammoth job trying to identify sites and chase away wily sneaks. Closing thousands of sites every month is not an easy task in terms of the effort and money involved when websites are multiplying like rabbits. This reminds us of the great epics of heroes and nations. What is being done by the city amounts to an epic in the strict meaning of the word.”
Internet censorship works in two ways. First approved web pages are cached in a huge memory storage system which allows the most popular pages to be accessed speedily without having to continuously check their suitability. In the second stage, the system receives requests for pages which have not been stored in the cache. The problem lies in the regular updating needed to maintain the list of banned sites, making it hard for the staff to keep up with the constant changes.
Experts say despite this huge effort, any Internet user can easily access blocked sites either by using a search engine or requesting the site itself from a different web location. The e-mail system can prove even more elusive since some sites can easily be surfed because they are attached through the system. This makes it almost impossible to track and locate those attachments because it would be unimaginable to hunt for every e-mail in search of undesirable sites.
Debate goes on as to how to respond to this “cultural invasion.” More and more young people in the Kingdom have easy access to information and the tools to access information which their parents and grandparents never dreamed of. The older generation is now struggling to cope with a universal phenomenon, wondering what measures should be taken to protect their families.
Scholars stress the need for education and self-censorship and for people to identify what is useful and what is harmful.
Radwan Al-Surouji, an Islamic scholar, said, “It (Internet) is a double-edged weapon. It has its benefits and disadvantages like all other great inventions of mankind. It is an achievement of great benefit to humanity if used in a wise and responsible manner. It could also be devastating if misused. It is unfortunate that the negative side has overshadowed the positive one. Many harmful programs are being deliberately aired through the Net to destroy people’s beliefs and morals.”
Others, like S. Jamal, see no benefit at all from the Internet and view the web as dangerous as satellite television where both are used to subvert Islamic values. “The Internet is as subversive as satellite television which airs everything harmful to the family and society,” he said. Many agree with him and insist on not allowing satellite TV into their homes, let alone the Internet.