Decoy routing places the circumvention service at transit routers rather than fixed-IP edge proxies, so the client addresses packets to any reachable decoy destination and the router hijacks the flow on the client's behalf. A single well-placed router may lie on paths to millions of destinations, making circumvention proxies appear ubiquitously deployed from an adversary's perspective. Blocking such a router requires disrupting ordinary traffic for large fractions of the Internet, qualitatively raising the cost of IP-address-based censorship.

An adversary aware of a decoy router's location can force decoy-routed flows to be unprocessable by fragmenting all packets below the size of a complete TCP header in the first fragment, preventing flow assignment and forcing the router into expensive reassembly. Alternatively, the adversary can use small-fragment attacks to grow the router's state table, analogous to NAT resource exhaustion. The paper identifies fragmentation-based denial as a harder-to-mitigate attack class than sentinel replay.

§4.2 detection

A preplay attack defeats the TLS-sentinel covert channel: the adversary intercepts each ClientHello, immediately sends a copy to the decoy destination before the client's copy arrives, causing the sentinel to be consumed and poisoned. The client can never establish a decoy routing session while ordinary TLS to the decoy destination continues to work normally, giving the adversary both blocking capability and forensic confirmation that decoy routing was attempted. The paper notes this vulnerability is specific to the TLS sentinel and that alternatives such as port-knocking sentinels may not share it.

§4.1 detection

TCP flow hijacking by the decoy proxy is practical under an asymmetric routing assumption: expected sequence numbers are recoverable from ACK values in client-originated packets alone, so the decoy router need not observe return traffic. The proxy forges a TCP RST to the decoy destination and mimics its TCP options (timestamp, window scale, SACK) to reduce detectability; these options are conveyed encrypted inside the sentinel's 28-byte TLS random field.

§3.3 defense

Clients embed HMAC-derived, time-varying sentinels into the 28-byte random field of the TLS ClientHello message, which decoy routers can scan at line rate. Sentinels are keyed to the current hour and a per-hour sequence number, providing freshness. This covert channel requires no out-of-band signaling and is invisible to passive observers who see only a normal TLS handshake toward the decoy destination.

§3.2 defense

The June 2025 Iran shutdown—carried out during the Iran-Israel war beginning ~June 19—did not use BGP route withdrawals as in 2019. Instead, authorities applied service-level restrictions at the national border: DNS poisoning of foreign destinations, protocol whitelisting permitting only pre-approved domestic services, and DPI to block circumvention-tool traffic. Iran's international traffic fell roughly 90% while the country's BGP routes remained advertised, making the shutdown invisible to BGP-based monitoring systems. OONI measurement volume, which totalled 121,333 in June 2025, collapsed to under 200 submissions on June 19-20.

2025-iran-shutdown-measurement Executive Summary / §2 dpidns-poisoningport-blockingip-blocking

Article 19 documents that Iran's National Information Network (NIN / SHOMA) was designed with explicit reference to China's Great Firewall as a model, with institutional mirroring: Iran's Supreme Council of Cyberspace parallels China's Cyberspace Administration of China, and both governments share a "cyber sovereignty" doctrine used to justify domestic content controls and cross-border technology transfer. The report frames Iran's filtering infrastructure as deliberately architected to replicate GFW capabilities, not as an independently developed system.

2026-article19-tightening-the-net §2, §3 dpisni-blockingdns-poisoningip-blockingbgp-hijackthrottling

Article 19 documents that Iran combines technical filtering with formal coercion of major foreign platforms (including Telegram, Instagram, and WhatsApp) to comply with content removal orders under threat of full blocking. The report notes that Iran's 2022 Women Life Freedom protests accelerated platform blocking when foreign operators refused compliance, demonstrating that the censorship system operates in two modes: coerce-and-allow for compliant platforms, block for non-compliant ones. Domain fronting via these platforms is therefore subject to sudden revocation if political conditions change.

2026-article19-tightening-the-net §6 ip-blockingdns-poisoningthrottling

Brussee measures a systematic pattern of Chinese government websites actively blocking access from outside China (the "reverse Great Firewall"), publishing a CSV dataset of affected domains (available at zenodo.org/records/18172145). The paper frames this outbound geo-blocking as a cybersecurity-motivated practice — Chinese authorities classify foreign access to domestic government infrastructure as an attack surface — distinct from the inbound information control goal of the GFW.

2026-brussee-reverse-great-firewall §3, §5 ip-blockingasn-blackholing

Brussee develops a conceptual framework distinguishing two logics of government geo-blocking: (1) information control (blocking inbound foreign content from domestic users) and (2) data sovereignty / attack-surface reduction (blocking outbound access by foreign actors to domestic systems). Chinese government site blocking of external IPs is motivated primarily by the second logic, creating an asymmetric internet topology where CN citizens cannot reach the outside world, and outside actors cannot probe CN government infrastructure.

2026-brussee-reverse-great-firewall §2, §4 ip-blockingasn-blackholing

ShieldShare demonstrates that an Android application can route all hotspot-client traffic through a VPN tunnel without root access by using a SOCKS5/HTTP/HTTPS proxy layer between the hotspot and the VPN, with per-client traffic accounting and quota management. The system works because Android's native hotspot does not forward VPN routing tables to connected clients; ShieldShare interposes a proxy that handles this. Released as open-source.

2026-edorh-shieldshare §Abstract ip-blocking