TLS-based filtering (SNI blocking) was active in 41% of 70 surveyed countries during the June 2020–May 2021 measurement period and 44% historically, driven by the 82% global HTTPS adoption rate (Mozilla telemetry, Oct 2021). China took the unprecedented step of blocking ESNI traffic entirely, and the authors note that widespread ECH deployment could render this entire censorship category obsolete.

HTTP/URL/keyword filtering was the most prevalent censorship method both during the measurement period (49% of countries) and historically (69%), despite 82% global HTTPS adoption. The authors attribute this persistence to censors lacking technical sophistication to upgrade, and to uneven HTTPS adoption leaving older methods effective in underserved regions.

§4.2, Table 2 evaluation

IP and port blocking dropped from 30% of countries historically to only 9% during the study period (six countries), with the decline attributed to difficulty maintaining ephemeral blocklists, CDN collateral damage, and IPv6 expansion. Iran is a significant exception: it has implemented port allowlisting — permitting only ports 80, 443, and 53 — on multiple occasions, blocking all other ports entirely.

§4.3, Table 2 evaluation

Protocol fingerprinting — including DPI-based identification of VPNs, circumvention tools, and E2EE messengers — was active in only 6% of countries during the measurement period (13% all-time), but all confirmed instances came from focused individual studies, not from mass measurement platforms like OONI or Censored Planet. The authors flag encrypted traffic analysis (ETA) tools and next-generation firewalls (NGFWs) capable of blocking Signal or Tor Browser as an emerging threat to freedom of expression.

§4.3 detection

Residual censorship — where a censor detects an objectionable connection via one method and then blocks all traffic between the same 3-tuple (client IP + server IP + port) or 4-tuple (client IP + port + server IP + port) for a short duration — was documented in China, Iran, and Kazakhstan. This means a single detected circumvention attempt can trigger temporary IP-level blocking of the entire endpoint regardless of protocol.

§4.3 detection

The paper identifies a fundamental architectural vulnerability in single-IP circumvention designs: a relay must generate new observable flows (via DNS or TLS SNI) to reach end services after receiving client connections, creating a detectable server-and-client behavioral contrast. A relay accessing user-facing domains (news, social media) scores high on a Relay Suspicion Score (w=0.9) versus infrastructure domains (w=0.1). The paper argues this host-level signal is censorship-invariant and cannot be concealed by link obfuscation.

2026-almutairi-server §2.4, §4 traffic-shapedpisni-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

The report maps specific Belt and Road Initiative Digital Silk Road projects through which Chinese technology vendors have transferred censorship and surveillance infrastructure to Iran, including fiber backbone investments, data-center co-location agreements, and equipment supply chains. Specific vendors named include Huawei and ZTE as network infrastructure providers, with the report noting that equipment exports include filtering-capable hardware that Iran's ISPs have deployed at network choke points.

2026-article19-tightening-the-net §4, §5 dpisni-blockingthrottling

QUICstep successfully circumvents the GFW's QUIC SNI censorship (active since April 2024) in live testing. Using an Alibaba VM in mainland China as client and an AWS instance in North Virginia as server, a native QUIC client was blocked after several fetches of youtube.com SNI, while QUICstep consistently succeeded across 50 consecutive fetches. 7 tiktokcdn.com subdomains that were QUIC-SNI blocked were also reliably accessible via QUICstep. The approach routes only QUIC long-header (handshake) packets through a WireGuard tunnel; all subsequent short-header (data) packets travel the native path.

2026-lee-quicstep §4.3.2, §3.2.3 http3-quic-blocksni-blockingdpi

The largest single source of censored domains in the GNL is MESA lab's SNI monitoring dataset (E21-SNI-Top200w.txt) containing 57,362 censored domains, and E21-SNI-Top120W-20221020.txt with 36,467 domains—totaling over 93K domains from network tap data alone for a single country (E21 = Ethiopia per InterSecLab attribution). A separate Xinjiang dataset (XJ-CUCC-SNI-Top200w.txt) contains 13,604 domains. These datasets "do not seem to come from popular domain lists, and instead appear to be gathered from network taps," confirming that Geedge builds censorship target lists directly from passive traffic observation.

2026-sheffey-geedge §4.2, Table 3 dpisni-blockingmeasurement-platform

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