LiveJournal cooperated with Russian authorities (Roskomnadzor) to segregate censored content by altering DNS A records for blacklisted blogs to a special host (208.93.0.190) that came online between February 10–17, 2014. Only 5 of 1,462 LiveJournal subdomains in Alexa's Top 1 million resolved to this address, all of which had been publicly declared in violation of Russian media law.

Monitoring Twitter, YouTube, Tor, and Google Public DNS across 10 Atlas probes spanning 9 ASNs cost 19,200 credits per day (under 1 probe-day equivalent), and Atlas's external queuing allowed measurement scheduling to begin within hours of reported blocks. The platform documented 6 distinct shifts in Turkey's filtering strategy and identified private-sector cooperation in Russia that would have been missed by platforms limited to DNS and HTTP measurements.

§3.2, Table 3 evaluation

Rostelecom (AS12389) performed network-layer redirection of blacklisted traffic rather than DPI-based filtering: 40 of 343 Russian probes returned SSL certificates attributed to Russian ISPs (State Institute of Information Technologies, Rostelecom, Electron Telecom Network). The interference affected all protocols and ports holistically across Rostelecom's downstream peers, consistent with BGP-level false advertisements or forwarding rules rather than application-layer classification.

§4.2 detection

Turkey's filtering of Twitter relied overwhelmingly on DNS manipulation over IP blocking: as of April 24, 2014, only 167 IP addresses were blocked versus 40,566 domain names. Users who received valid DNS answers could browse Twitter without further interference, making foreign DNS servers (Google 8.8.8.8, OpenDNS) an effective circumvention mechanism — reportedly graffitied across Turkey in protest of the ban.

§4.1 detection

When Turkish users shifted to foreign DNS providers as a circumvention mechanism, Türk Telekom escalated by rerouting traffic destined for Google Public DNS (8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4) to a local DNS server serving false answers (Event E, March 28), causing a rapid drop in Tor and YouTube availability across all Atlas probes regardless of DNS configuration. At least 6 distinct shifts in filtering strategy were documented within a two-week period.

§4.1 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

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

Both Firefox and Chromium leak cleartext DNS before establishing encrypted DNS connections: they first send an unencrypted UDP DNS query to resolve the DoH server's domain (e.g., doh.opendns.com). An in-path censor can intercept and poison this initial query, making encrypted DNS in browsers completely ineffective without additional circumvention of the resolver-lookup step. Additionally, Chromium always includes the SNI extension in the encrypted DNS TLS handshake (e.g., "doh.opendns.com"), leaking the resolver identity even after the initial lookup. No resolver requires SNI to be present for certificate validation when the resolver's IP certificate is configured.

2026-lange-towards §2.4, §7, §10 dns-poisoningsni-blocking

DNS censorship of encrypted protocols is inconsistent in both China and Iran. In China, Yandex resolvers are censored only when the SNI extension is present; omitting SNI bypasses censorship for these resolvers. In Iran, DoH requires SNI omission for Quad9, Google, Adguard, CleanBrowsing, and NextDNS resolvers, but works with SNI for Yandex and Cisco resolvers. These inconsistencies suggest resolvers have been accidentally missed by censors, highlighting the value of automated tools that trial all resolver-mode combinations rather than hard-coding a single strategy. The support evaluation found 47 resolvers supporting DoH, 16 supporting DoH3, and only 8 supporting DoQ out of ~65 tested.

2026-lange-towards §6.2, Table 2 dns-poisoningsni-blockingip-blocking

DPYProxy-DNS tested 8 circumvention modes against DNS censorship from vantage points in Iran (AS201295, Mashhad) and China (AS4837, China Unicom). In Iran, DoQ was entirely uncensored even with the SNI extension present; DoH3 worked for all Cloudflare and NextDNS resolvers. Iran's censor operates in-path (not on-path like the GFW), making the "Last Response" mode (wait 3s for the last UDP reply) ineffective in Iran but highly effective in China. Auto-mode averaged 12.32s (median 8.28s) in Iran and 13.78s (median 12.90s) in China to discover a working combination.

2026-lange-towards §6.2, §6.3 dns-poisoningsni-blockingip-blocking