Spam-cloaked censorship measurements were correctly classified as spam by Proofpoint (the authors' university spam filter), validating surveillance evasion; separately, MX queries sent from a PlanetLab node in China confirmed that the GFW injected bad A DNS responses for both A-record and MX-record lookups for twitter.com and youtube.com, validating measurement accuracy.

Beverly et al. found that 77% of Internet clients can spoof source addresses within their own /24 and 11% can spoof within their own /16, with these characteristics holding across a wide range of countries and regions. The authors use this result to argue that IP-spoofed cover traffic — where measurement probes appear to originate from many hosts in the same AS — is broadly feasible in practice.

§4.2 defense

The authors argue that it is almost certainly impossible to eliminate — or even definitively quantify — the risk to users who perform censorship measurements, because surveillance system capabilities are rapidly evolving and in some cases unknowable; retribution in adversarial environments may not follow due process. The paper explicitly states that its techniques had not been deployed on real networks as of writing because "a better consideration of the associated risks is warranted."

§6–§7 policy

Surveillance systems are fundamentally more selective than censorship systems due to storage constraints: as of 2009 the NSA could store only 7.5% of received traffic across 592 tapped 10 Gbps links with only 69 10 Gbps backhaul links, and the authors' campus network retains non-alert metadata for ~36 hours and IDS alerts for ~1 year. Censorship systems by contrast are transaction-focused and retain only enough data to process real-time requests. This asymmetry creates an exploitable gap: traffic that does not stand out from the population is discarded before reaching human analysts.

§2.1–§2.2 evaluation

Analysis of two days of leaked censorship log files from Syria shows that 1.57% of the population accessed at least one censored site — a proportion the authors argue is far too large for a user-focused surveillance system to pursue individually. This implies that simply flagging all users who access censored content is not a feasible targeting strategy for surveillance.

§2.2 evaluation

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