South Korea operates DNS-based and router-based censorship simultaneously; sites blocked at the DNS resolver are a strict subset of those blocked at the router, verified by switching to an external DNS resolver and observing continued blocking at the router layer. Alternate DNS resolvers alone are therefore insufficient to circumvent South Korean censorship, in contrast to Malaysia, Russia, and Turkey where DNS-only bypass is adequate.

China's censoring devices send four spoofed RST packets per filtered connection with varying sequence and ACK numbers and TTL values corresponding to roughly the hop count to the Chinese border; the IP ID field increments sequentially per TTL group, strongly implying a small cluster of out-of-band machines co-located at each border router. Because the device is out-of-band, the actual server response still arrives at the client but is preempted by the injected RSTs.

§4.2 detection

China's censoring device is stateful: it inspects only the first HTTP GET request after a TCP handshake and ignores subsequent requests or those without a preceding handshake. After blocking a request, it records the (src IP, dst IP, port, protocol) tuple and denies all further communication between that machine pair for approximately 12 hours, even for traffic that would not independently trigger censorship.

§4.3 detection

Across 11 countries, censorship execution falls into at least six distinct categories: DNS redirect to localhost (Malaysia, Russia, Turkey), DNS redirect with warning page (South Korea), connection timeout with no notification (Bangladesh, India), spoofed TCP RST injection (China), spoofed HTTP 403 with warning page (Bahrain, Iran), HTTP 302 redirect (South Korea, Thailand), and spoofed HTTP 200 iframe response (Saudi Arabia). Four countries censor at DNS and eight at routers, with South Korea employing both layers simultaneously.

Table 3 evaluation

Thailand uses an out-of-band device to inject spoofed HTTP 302 redirect responses, so the destination server still receives and responds to the original request — unlike inline censors in Bangladesh and India where the request is dropped before reaching the server. Saudi Arabia similarly uses an out-of-band device to inject a spoofed HTTP 200 response containing an iframe warning page loaded from a separate IP address, allowing the warning page content to be updated without modifying the censoring module.

§4.2, §5 detection

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

TCP segmentation (splitting a DNS message into 20-byte TCP fragments) successfully circumvented DNS censorship in China for nearly all resolvers that support TCP. In Iran, TCP segmentation was only partially effective due to the censor's ability to reassemble TCP fragments when system load permits—some runs succeeded completely, others failed entirely across all resolvers. The "Last Response" mode (wait 3 seconds for the final UDP reply) was highly effective against China's on-path GFW injector for all resolvers except the fully IP-blocked Cloudflare 1.1.1.1 resolver.

2026-lange-towards §4.1, §6.2.1, §6.2.2 dns-poisoningdpi

TCP segmentation — splitting DNS-over-TCP messages into 20-byte fragments — successfully circumvented DNS censorship for 40 of 41 tested resolvers in China. In Iran, TCP segmentation is inconsistently effective: it succeeds in some scan runs and fails entirely in others, suggesting the Iranian censor can reassemble TCP fragments when processing capacity permits.

2026-niere-dpyproxy-dns §6.2.1, §6.2.2 dpidns-poisoning

Of 6,915,266 domains extracted from the 572 GiB Geedge Networks Leak (GNL), 298,955 censored domains (93.7% of all GNL-censored domains) appear in neither Tranco top-1M nor CitizenLab test lists. Measurements across China (Guangzhou/Nanjing), Myanmar, Pakistan, and Algeria confirmed censorship via DNS injection and SNI-based TLS connection termination. The GNL covers 25–62% of Tranco-censored domains across countries, showing substantial but incomplete overlap. This vendor-side ground truth reveals a censorship surface roughly two orders of magnitude larger than curated academic test lists.

2026-sheffey-geedge §4.1, Table 2 dpisni-blockingdns-poisoningmeasurement-platform

TTL-based path analysis showed that all censorship actions (DNS poisoning, HTTP injection, TLS resets) in the June 2025 shutdown occurred at the same network hop across all tested ISPs, indicating a single centralized national border gateway—likely TCI AS gateways—rather than per-ISP enforcement. Global BGP announcements were kept intact throughout, making the shutdown invisible to routing monitors while domestic connectivity collapsed.

2025-aryapour-stealth-blackout §4.5 dpidns-poisoningrst-injection