• On BNET: 3 worst things about the iPhone 3G S
November 6, 2007 8:30 AM PST

Google and the wrongly jailed Indian Net surfer

by Chris Soghoian

On August 31, Lakshmana Kailash K. was arrested in Bangalore, India, and charged with posting insulting images of a revered historical figure on the Internet. The police claimed that he had uploaded disrespectful images of Chhatrapati Shivaji, the Indian equivalent of George Washington. Free speech, it seems, does not extend to that sort of thing in India.

No dissent allowed on Orkut.

(Credit: Skip The Budgie / Flickr)

Normally, this wouldn't be a press-worthy story. After all, India is not the first country to take a hard line against Internet free speech. The Thai military regime blocked the entire YouTube Web site earlier this year after a single video posted to the site depicted a woman's feet touching the head of the country's king. Likewise, Turkey also recently blocked YouTube for a video insulting the country's founder.

So what makes this interesting? First, Mr. Kailash was alleged to have posted the pictures to Orkut, Google's redheaded stepchild of a social-networking site. Once Google divulged the IP address of the photo-uploader to the Indian authorities, the police sought the customer's identity from Airtel, one of the country's main telecommunication companies. This is where things get interesting. It turns out that the ISP gave the police the wrong information, and after three weeks behind bars, Mr. Kailash was released.

A police spokesperson was quoted by the Indo-Asian News Service as blaming the ISP for giving out the wrong information. "It is not our fault and Lakshmana should take Airtel to court and not us."

When contacted for comment, a Google spokesperson told me that, "Google has very high standards for user privacy and a clear privacy policy, and authorities are required to follow legal process to get information. In compliance with Indian legal process, we provided Indian law enforcement authorities with IP address information of an Orkut user." This was the only comment that Google's PR people would give me in response to a lengthy set of questions that I sent over. In particular, I asked if they had received a court order for the information, or merely a polite request from the police. Their response leaves things very hazy.

So what are the lessons to learn from this incident?

Given that Mr. Kailash didn't actually post the photos, I can't provide him with any advice for protecting his privacy on the Internet. All I can suggest is that he hire a very good lawyer, and attempt to take Airtel to the cleaners. If we assume, however, that Airtel eventually handed over the identity of the real "criminal," then perhaps some advice can be offered.

Internet crackdowns: First China, India next?

(Credit: ItzaFineDay / Flickr)

Internet users: If you live in a country that does not respect freedom of speech and where you can get jailed for posting social commentary or otherwise subversive information to the Internet, technology can help you. Likewise, if you live in a country where the major telecom companies have willingly (and for a good profit) sold out their customers' privacy to large-scale illegal government surveillance, privacy-enhancing technologies can keep you safe.

The most important utility in any privacy-concerned Internet user's toolbox should be Tor, an anonymizing Web proxy. Based on technology originally designed by the U.S. Naval Research Labs, funded at one point by the Electronic Frontier Foundation and later by Voice of America, Tor has support from a strange yet wide variety of private and public groups. The EFF has published a guide to blogging anonymously, which is primarily based on Tor. Simply put, had the Indian Orkut user signed up for his account and posted the insulting photographs using Tor, neither he nor any other innocent Airtel customers would be locked up.

While this incident didn't come anywhere close to dissidents fighting for democracy, some strong parallels can be drawn between Google's decision to hand over IP addresses to Indian police, and that of Yahoo, which has handed over the IP addresses of pro-democracy activists to the Chinese authorities on multiple occasions. As a result of the company's snitching, Yahoo is facing a lawsuit, and a U.S. congressman has proposed legislation to make the company's actions illegal. Interestingly, the Global Online Freedom Act, which was proposed by Representative Christopher Smith (R-NJ) in 2006, could also cause problems for any future India-based snitching by Google, should it ever become law.

The bill, if passed into law, would prohibit any U.S. Internet company from providing any foreign official of an Internet-restricting country information that "personally identifies a particular user...except for legitimate foreign law enforcement purposes as determined by the Department of Justice." Companies that violated this prohibition could be sued in U.S. courts by those foreigners whose information they divulged. Fortunately for the Internet giants, the bill has been stuck in committee since 2006 and doesn't show any signs of life.

Christopher Soghoian delves into the areas of security, privacy, technology policy and cyber-law. He is a student fellow at Harvard University's Berkman Center for Internet and Society , and is a PhD candidate at Indiana University's School of Informatics. His academic work and contact information can be found by visiting www.dubfire.net/chris/. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network, and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
Recent posts from Surveillance State
YouTube's new 'nocookie' feature continues to serve cookies
Is the White House changing its YouTube tune?
Recovery.gov blocked search engine tracking
Obama's BlackBerry brings personal safety risks
White House expands use of search-blocking code
Activists call for a mashup-friendly Recovery.gov
White House yanks 'YouTube' from privacy policy
White House acts to limit YouTube cookie tracking
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (3 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
"Do No Evil" is an accidental punchline
by hammc November 26, 2007 9:01 AM PST
Google's founders are being revered as the purist thing since white light. I think it is time that our representatives wake up and start making US companies more responsible for their actions overseas. Have we learned nothing yet.. Cisco is selling security software to China to control their peoples' expression of freedom. Most don't think much about how much power these companies have in the aggregation of all of our information.
Reference story for cisco:
http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2005/07/68326
Reply to this comment
by servingindia March 1, 2008 8:59 PM PST
India is a country where there is 'RIGHT FOR SPEECH' according to the Constitution. If it seems to be wrong for insulting great leaders, then the insulting of religious beliefs (of all religions) are to be punished.
Reply to this comment
by harkdorse March 9, 2008 4:29 PM PDT
It's too bad all religions are the reason Freedom gets oppressed to begin with. It's also too bad that WHEN the U.S. Gov't puts regulations into effect, the business investors of America will simply move to china and india for the cheap labor and resource cost. Excessive regulation produces excessive cost for business, and when it comes to producing profit, big business doesn't give a rats azz about which country they do it in. We're headed for more than a recession and the root cause is simple human greed, the secondary cause is a general ignorance in EVERY country across the globe. Authoritarian-disciplinarians are the driving force behind ALL evil and injustice.

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross" -Sinclair Lewis
Reply to this comment
(3 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

Making sense of Windows 7 upgrades

faq The basics and the fine print on Microsoft's options for those eyeing the next operating system from Redmond.
• Full Windows 7 coverage

Road Trip 2009: Big Sky Country

CNET News reporter Daniel Terdiman takes his car full of gadgets to the Rockies and the Great Plains in search of tech, science, nature, and more.
• America's Fortress: Cheyenne Mountain

About Surveillance State

Christopher Soghoian delves into the areas of security, privacy, technology policy and cyber-law. He is a student fellow at Harvard University's Berkman Center for Internet and Society, and is a PhD candidate at Indiana University's School of Informatics. His academic work and contact information can be found by visiting www.dubfire.net/chris/. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Surveillance State topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right