Wikipedia talk:Advice to users using Tor: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 23:45, 6 March 2007

Latest revision as of 11:05, 17 June 2020

(48 intermediate revisions by 27 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{oldmfd|date= [[2007-06-19]] |result= '''Speedy keep''' |votepage= Wikipedia:Advice to users using Tor to bypass the Great Firewall}}

''Please add new sections to the bottom of the page''

'''[[Wikipedia talk:Advice to users using Tor to bypass the Great Firewall/Archive 1|Archived discussions]]'''

==Problem==

This seems to work for editing a page, but it breaks my access to, for example, the mailing list archives. E.g. http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-October/031345.html. I get the following:

== Rewrite ==

Not Found

#I have removed the section on https servers; if China blocks them, not much point in listing them.

The requested URL /pipermail/wikien-l/2005-October/031345.html was not found on this server.

#I have corrected the section on the TorBlock extension; as I understand it, it is active on all wikis but the override is disabled. (That is, it was written to automatically softblock all exit nodes and override any local hard blocks. Only the override has been disabled.)

#Added IP block exemption.

#Modified the section on soft blocks. Hard blocks should be much less controversial now that IPBE has been implemented.

--[[User talk:Thatcher|Thatcher]] 16:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

==Why is it Wikipedia's job to help others circumvent the law?==

I have severe reservations about this article. In my opinion Wikipedia shouldn't state or support opposition of the law. I don't care if China's censorship of Wikipedia is wrong, we shouldn't support the circumventing of any law anywhere in any place. I will talk with Jimbo on this. If he agrees, this may need speedy deletion.--[[User:Ipatrol|Ipatrol]] ([[User talk:Ipatrol|talk]]) 19:19, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

: As long as these articles don't circumvbent [[western world|western law]], it won't matter. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/201.230.116.183|201.230.116.183]] ([[User talk:201.230.116.183|talk]]) 04:34, 8 April 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:I care very much about the fact that PRC is censoring WP. In my personal book of moral law it's illegal <i>not</i> to help the victims of inhuman dictatorships. [[User:Ryttaren|Ryttaren]] ([[User talk:Ryttaren|talk]]) 21:56, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.

::Ahh, so you're saying "My morality is better than your morality so I'll <i>dictate</i> what should be law..." Or to redirect, where I live people normally settle disputes by shooting each other; is my morality "better" because it has an effect of removing any additional violence due to a continued dispute as well as promoting the seeking of non-mortus ways of compromise? So again, your way of life is not the only way of life... it appeals to baser instincts and is very addictive, but it is not the MORAL way.

::I'd say there are many "Western Laws" people disagree with, 'drinking and driving' is an easy one. Many people argue that they are 'sober enough to drive, and have never gotten into an accident' and hence are being persecuted for a 'victimless crime.' Unfortunately the crime is only 'victimless' until there is a victim (accident.) Then people say 'why didn't you stop it to begin with.' Yet every advance to prevent drunk driving is met with "YOU CAN'T STOP ME, I HAVEN'T VIOLATED ANY LAWS YET!!!" We even have radar-detectors to specifically warn people that they should 'stop violating the law' for a short period of time.

::So if your book of "morality" says "The only morality is MY morality", my book says you're amoral. It is not, and should never be, Wikipedia's grounds to VIOLATE other countries laws, despite your AMORAL positions. [[Special:Contributions/173.168.30.119|173.168.30.119]] ([[User talk:173.168.30.119|talk]]) 20:36, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

:This rhetorical question is based upon the erroneous notion that there is such a thing as ''the law'' that may or not be circumvented by a person. To be clear: there is no such thing as ''the law''. Humans create [[civil law]], [[common law]], [[customary law]], [[criminal law]], [[administrative law]], [[admiralty law]], [[ecclesiastical law]] and [[international law]]. These laws apply only to a defined set of [[natural persons]] or [[legal persons]], [[property]], non-human animals, plants, woodlands and riverine systems, maritime systems, etc, in a stipulated [[jurisdiction]] at a given place and at a given time. The laws may be decided by [[referendum]], by [[statute]], by [[case law]], by [[royal prerogative]], by [[decree]]. As well as [[Act of Parliament]], [[Act of Congress]] or [[Act of Tynwald]], etc, there are [[statutory instruments]], [[regulations]], [[rules]], [[standing orders]], codes of practise, [[codicils]], [[national standards]], state standards, local government standards, [[memoranda of understanding]], [[building codes]], health and safety codes, fire codes, sanitation codes, waste disposal codes, hygiene codes, non-human animal codes, hospital policies, school policies, employment policies, sporting policies, contractual agreements, nuptial agreements etc that are subservient to the legal acts. The intended territorial applicability and legal extent of any given law, and all that given law's subsidiary consequences, created by one or more persons, may be limited to any person resident, or property that exists, in a [[manor]], [[parish]], [[diocese]], [[local government]], [[metropolis]], [[state]], [[nation]], or [[internationally]]. Usually, [[man-made law]] is not [[retroactive]] and does not apply to past deeds or to the dead. Nevertheless, laws can be retroactive and apply to every natural and legal person, and even to non-human animals, living or not. Many nation states, or states within a nation state, may try to overreach - insisting that they have [[exclusive jurisdiction]] over territory, resources, persons and the [[resolution of disputes]] to which other states may also lay claim. In conclusion, the [[naive]] assertion that there is such a thing as ''the law'' is not sustainable.[[Special:Contributions/58.165.105.140|58.165.105.140]] ([[User talk:58.165.105.140|talk]]) 01:00, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

-- Klortho

::That's all correct but unnecessarily pedantic. The short version is: There is no such thing as "the" law. There are particular laws, within particular jurisdictions, to which any given entity may be subject. Wikimedia Foundation and its projects are not subject to the jurisdiction and laws of the People's Republic of China, Turkey, or other countries that censor or block Wikipedia and its sister projects.<p>Furthermore (and to echo something the other anon said), just because something is "a law" somewhere doesn't make it {{em|just}}, or worth our consideration. Lots of nasty regimes create lots of laws that no reasonable entity would comply with (e.g. because they violate international-law concepts of human right) unless one would be directly subject to punishment for not doing so. WMF in particular has an explicit mission of providing unfettered access to information and tools to create and disseminate it, making it incompatible by definition with things like the Great Firewall of China. As for risks specific individuals may incur in evading things like their own jurisdiction's censorship systems, they are already aware of these risks and are doing it anyway on a regular basis. WP is not increasing their risk; this page tells people how to best interact with WP through Tor if they have already decided to take the risk of bypassing unethical governmental restrictions.<br /><span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''']] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] 😼 </span> 11:05, 17 June 2020 (UTC)</p>

== Are we still hardblocking Tor? ==

Try the updated configuration that I just posted -- [[User:Tim Starling|Tim Starling]] 19:47, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

And can anyone tell me why? I thought there was a system in place for legitimate users to create accounts and then edit via Tor... -- [[User:AndySimpson|AndySimpson]] ^{[[User talk:AndySimpson|talk?]]} 11:09, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

:Tor is hardblocked because we get an overwhelming amount of abuse from it. Legitimate users with good reason to use it can request [[WP:IPBE|IPBE]]. I've updated the page to reflect the status quo - the system for creating accounts is described there. -- [[user:zzuuzz|zzuuzz]] ^{[[user_talk:zzuuzz|(talk)]]} 13:19, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

== 3,000 diffs for new users in China ==

As of 20 April 2006, I can't access Wikipedia using 145.97.39.155 as is in the sample config file posting, but using 145.97.39.132 seems to be fine. Is this IP address 145.97.39.155 valid,or has Wikipedia changed the ip address of its load balancer in Amsterdam?

The project page states:

Confirmed, same here; .155 doesn't work, .132 does. It's possible that "they" found this page and blocked .155. [[User:LaloMartins|LaloMartins]] 07:51, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

:[[Wikipedia:WikiProject on closed proxies/Usage instructions|Ask someone outside of mainland China to set you up with an account]]

However, [[Wikipedia:WikiProject on closed proxies/Criteria]] states:

:Do you have over 3000 edits on Wikipedia?

How is someone from China supposed to make 3,000 edits in order to qualify? Is one supposed to make 3,000 diffs and e-mail them to a closed proxy operator? --[[User:Damian Yerrick|Damian Yerrick]] ([[User talk:Damian Yerrick|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Damian Yerrick|stalk]]) 14:39, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

:I've removed the 3000+ edits criteria for [[WP:WOCP]]. [[User:Ryttaren|Ryttaren]] ([[User talk:Ryttaren|talk]]) 21:48, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

==report from China==

::Thank you. I've also tweaked the wording of other criteria to make them consistent with the "Whether you need to have a Wikipedia account created" bullet point on /Usage instructions. But then how is "not including schools, educational institutions or public libraries" intended to intersect with people who live on campus or can't afford Internet access at home? --[[User:Damian Yerrick|Damian Yerrick]] ([[User talk:Damian Yerrick|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Damian Yerrick|stalk]]) 17:40, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

I use Tor in Debian in China. I have to use wikipedia's proxy because a lot of IPs which are Tor's exit node have been blocked by WP.

But wp's proxy is unencrypted, so now I can't edit any articles which is not liked by Beijing GOV in WP. The GFW will easily find what I do with WP.

Could you change the policy, then if I have login in, do not matter what IP I use.

Thank you. --[[User:Farm|Farm]] 12:20, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

== While HTTPS.wiki is availble in China now, does China issue still exists? ==

==Possible new workaround==

Another possible way to bypass the firewall is to use the Google translation service as a proxy by translating from english to english (or whatever language you wish). See [http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/h/4807 "Google free proxy!"] for the full description. This doesn't mask your IP address, so it can't be used to circumvent blocks on Wikipedia. Although using your real IP address on Wikipedia might be a problem for users in the more restrictive countries, this should be a non-issue if you register a username. // [[User:Pathoschild|Pathoschild]] 14:07, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

~ <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/202.38.70.7|202.38.70.7]] ([[User talk:202.38.70.7|talk]]) 10:30, 22 May 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Google translation service was also blocked when I was in Beijing.--[[User:Skyfiler|Skyfiler]] 14:43, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

== Proposal: Move to "Advice to users using Tor" ==

==What does this do?==

I'm hesitant about adding lines into Privoxy which I don't understand. What does this do? What is 145.97.39.155?

Tor is by no means only interesting for users from China. There are numerous other states that censor the web. Also, censorship is only one reason to use Tor, anonymity is another. So I propose to to move the page to "Wikipedia:Advice to users using Tor". --[[User:Church of emacs|Tobias]] <small>([[User Talk:Church of emacs|Talk]])</small> 09:43, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

:It doesn't matter now, 145.97.39.155 is blocked. I think we might be better off relying on independently operated proxies inside China now, such as http://wikipedia.cnblog.org . That should make it slightly harder for the authorities to get our addresses, rather than reading them off a web page they'd have to sniff the traffic. -- [[User:Tim Starling|Tim Starling]] 03:28, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

:Done --[[User:Church of emacs|Tobias]] <small>([[User Talk:Church of emacs|Talk]])</small> 10:39, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

::What did it used to do?

== „Highly exceptional circumstances“ ==

:::It used to be a live proxy, displaying the Chinese Wikipedia with URLs rewritten. It was running inside the firewall. -- [[User:Tim Starling|Tim Starling]] 15:15, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Before:

==Hysterics from SJMurdoch==

:“Registered users in good standing can ask for [[Wikipedia:IP block exemption|IP block exemption]] to be enabled on their accounts.”

After:

:“'''In highly exceptional circumstances''', registered users in good standing can ask for [[Wikipedia:IP block exemption|IP block exemption]] to be enabled on their accounts.” (emphasis: Babelfisch)[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdvice_to_users_using_Tor&type=revision&diff=703454885&oldid=689528910]

This new version flatly contradicts what is at the top of the project page:

:“Tor users should be met with [[WP:AGF|good faith]], as there are good reasons to use anonymity networks. In countries that [[Censorship of Wikipedia|censor Wikipedia]] or block it completely, it is one of the few ways of accessing Wikipedia. Additionally, in light of [[List of government surveillance projects|governmental surveillance programs]], users may choose to use Tor in order to exercise their [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia is anonymous|right to anonymity]].”

Consider:

:“I am a strong supporter of people using Tor to edit Wikipedia, and I think the current situation is quite unfortunate. There are complications to be sure, but the idea that admins can use Tor, while ordinary users can not, does not strike me as particularly appropriate. Anyone who is a normal trusted editor ought to be able to use Tor if they like... and why not?--Jimbo Wales 19:22, 9 July 2007 (UTC)” (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Archive_26 User Talk: Jimbo Wales, Archive 26])

[[User:Mike V|Mike V]], please explain. --[[User:Babelfisch|Babelfisch]] ([[User talk:Babelfisch|talk]]) 12:57, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

: Back to previous version. --[[User:Babelfisch|Babelfisch]] ([[User talk:Babelfisch|talk]]) 16:48, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm in contact with a number of users from Mainland China, and I've read extensively on this subject. All the majority of users want to do is access Wikipedia. Privacy is a very distant second priority. The authorities have shown very little interest in prosecuting readers to date, rather they have concentrated on those who produce or disseminate subversive writing. Nevertheless, no Chinese person should doubt that the Government will be able to find out who is editing Wikipedia, if they really want to, '''whether or not the user is using Tor'''. Tor is flawed and must be used very carefully if you wish to maintain privacy against the Chinese authorities. And of course, it's not like you can hide the fact that you're using the software.

::{{Ping|Babelfisch}} For some reason I don't recall getting a notification for your message. I made the change to reflect what our policy page mentions. I figure that if "we" are offering advice to users, we should advise them as to what our current practices are. (As I linked to in the edit.) It would be preferable to revert it back to the previous version, as a policy page is more accurate than the essay page you linked above. <span style="font-family: Palatino;"> [[User:Mike V|<b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b>]] • [[User_talk:Mike V|<b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b>]]</span> 17:55, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

::: ''Your'' “current practice” is not undisputed (see [[:meta:User_talk:Ajraddatz#IPBE|here]]), and the policy is under discussion right now ([[Wikipedia talk: IP block exemption]]). --[[User:Babelfisch|Babelfisch]] ([[User talk:Babelfisch|talk]]) 19:03, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

To suggest that using open proxies is better for privacy than HTTPS is just bizarre. I've dealt with a number of attempted DoS attacks from behind open proxy networks, and I've never had any trouble tracking down the originating IP. The advantage of HTTPS over open proxies comes from the technical nature of the Great Firewall: all unencrypted traffic is sampled at the firewall, and proxies which are used to download prohibited material are systematically blocked. HTTPS resists this sampling.

::::Meta's practice for handing out IPBE is different from the way that en.wiki handles IPBE. It's no different to how each project has it's own policies regarding admin/'crat/OS/CU roles, deletion discussions, article notability, project maintenance, etc. Respectfully, I'm not too bothered by Reguyla's opinion of me. He doesn't seem to have a favorable opinion of any administrator, nor is he particularly kinds towards us when we have to block his sock accounts. <span style="font-family: Palatino;"> [[User:Mike V|<b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b>]] • [[User_talk:Mike V|<b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b>]]</span> 21:36, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

== Academic paper about Wikipedia and Tor ==

I can only assume by the way SJMurdoch is going on about HTTPS images that he believes I am advocating that Tor users should disable proxying for SSL and then navigate the web at large believing they are completely safe. Rather, I am saying that Tor users who only installed Tor in the first place so that they could read Wikipedia can go ahead and switch it off now because there's another option. Anyone who believes they are completely safe from persecution because they have Tor installed is deluded.

The paper is

-- [[User:Tim Starling|Tim Starling]] 15:15, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

*{{Cite conference| publisher = College of Computing and Informatics, Drexel University Philadelphia, PA, USA| conference = CSCW '17| pages = 12| last1 = Forte| first1 = Andrea| last2 = Andalibi| first2 = Nazanin| last3 = Greenstadt| first3 = Rachel| title = Privacy, anonymity, and perceived risk in open collaboration: a study of Tor users and Wikipedians| booktitle = Proceedings of Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW). Portland, OR| date = 2017-03-25| url = http://andreaforte.net/ForteCSCW17-Anonymity.pdf}}

It was covered in ''[[WP:Signpost|The Signpost]]'' at [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2016-12-22/Recent_research]].

:I've actually found only one good thing from my studies of how tor and other proxying systems are working and that is that instead of showing up as an http packet with a blatant header leading direct to Wikimedia servers you end up with a packet that will pass a casual scan for http traffic (assuming the proxy is not using port 80) and takes a little more work to work out where it's going so at least and possibly at most it's good for that. <small><font color="#CC1100">[[User:Thygard|Thygard]]</font> - <font color="#FF6600">[[User talk:Thygard|Talk]]</font> - <font color="#006400">[[Special:Contributions/Thygard|Contribs]]</font> - <font color="#3333FF">[[Special:Emailuser/Thygard|Email]]</font></small> ---- 07:00, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

[[User:Bluerasberry|<span style="background:#cedff2;color:#11e">''' Blue Rasberry '''</span>]][[User talk:Bluerasberry|<span style="background:#cedff2;color:#11e">(talk)</span>]] 02:22, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

==Possible privacy improvement==

Could the SSL frontends be configured to hold edits for random amounts of time? --[[User:64.232.164.63|64.232.164.63]] 00:01, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

== Rename... ==

Mainland China controlled by PRC =/= China. -- '''[[User talk:Miborovsky|<font color="#FF0000">Миборовский</font>]]''' 23:30, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

:'''Good point''' Naming this article "XXX in China" is pov, as there are two [[China]]s. -[[User:Koavf|Justin (koavf)]]·[[User talk:Koavf|T]]·[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]·[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]] 02:32, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

::Renamed to [[Wikipedia:Advice to users using Tor to bypass the Great Firewall]]. Might be a mouthful, but it's a more accurate name. -- '''[[User talk:Miborovsky|Миборо]][[User:Miborovsky/B|<font color="#FF0000">в</font>]][[User talk:Miborovsky|ский]]''' 06:30, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

== What the hell?!? ==

If I read this correctly, this page is instructing people in China on how to break the law. Regardless of the validities of these laws, this page should be deleted. It is not the job of a neutral encyclopedia to explicitly tell a group of people how they can circumvent laws. There can be a page stating how to edit this site with Tor, but not one directed at such users in a certain country for the sole purpose of allowing a circumvention of laws. This page should be deleted. [[User:Bsd987|Bsd987]] 23:12, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

:It is relating methods used to access the website hosting the advice. Seems reasonable to me, although maybe it should be in wikipedia namespace? [[User:86.140.170.23|86.140.170.23]] 12:09, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

:Besides, if the Chinese government is going to treat the law arbitrarily, which they do in a way that Americans can hardly imagine, why shouldn't citizens and expats? Circumventing the Golden Shild might not even be formally illegal in China...the gov never bothers to write a lot of laws because it's easier just to accuse someone of being a traitor and lock them up.

::There are a couple of issues with your reasoning Bsd987, first is that there technically is no law permitting them to do this so it's less a codified issue and more of an issue of the PRC enforcing existing laws in a way that allows them to do this in the name of national security and protecting morality (sic), also since Wikipedia is based in the Florida in the United States even if it were a law Wikipedia would be under no legal or moral obligation to help the PRC oppress it's people and I doubt the board would choose to do so given the chance though of course I cannot speak for them, unlike Yahoo I would hope that we would be more open to the spread of free information. <small><font color="#CC1100">[[User:Thygard|Thygard]]</font> - <font color="#FF6600">[[User talk:Thygard|Talk]]</font> - <font color="#006400">[[Special:Contributions/Thygard|Contribs]]</font> - <font color="#3333FF">[[Special:Emailuser/Thygard|Email]]</font></small> ---- 06:57, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

:I have asked, and there is no law against accessing Wikipedia. In fact, the official stance is that the Golden Shield does '''not''' block any content (of course we know better). It's illegal to write "subversive" or immoral content, but not to read it. --[[User:LaloMartins|LaloMartins]] 06:57, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

== Not very helpfull ==

Why can't IP's be softblocked by default? I have created an account so you can track my actions despite the fact I am using Tor.

Yet 8 out of 10 IP's I use are hardblocked. Why should I have to request an softblock for each and every IP I use? The internet is not static. [[User:NegativeNed|NegativeNed]] 23:14, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

== Chinese translation? ==

Is there a Chinese translation of this page on the [[:zh:|Chinese Wikipedia]]? If not, someone should put up a translation there. --[[User:Ixfd64|Ixfd64]] 00:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

== Secure servers blocked too ==

<blockquote>

One possible solution is to use Wikimedia's HTTPS gateway, which is still accessible at the time of writing.

</blockquote>

That's incorrect. After using secure.wikimedia for about an year during the previous block, I found that after the Nov-2006 reblocking the secure servers were blocked too. :-( I'd like other people to verify that before editing, though; I don't know if the whole section should be removed, or rephrased to "accessible from some ISPs", or what. Right now I'm relying on tor and softblocking.--[[User:LaloMartins|LaloMartins]] 07:02, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

== Wikipedia is banning users from China ==

The policy against open proxies effectively bans users from China. Since I've upgraded to Firefox 2.0, Switchproxy doesn't work and I can't use Tor any more. Tor doesn't work any more, the SSL-based URLs don't work any more - for me the only way to view and to contribute to Wikipedia articles and discussions is to use open proxies, so I'm violating a Wikipedia policy. Will I be blocked for that? This situation is ridiculous and Wikipedia policies have to change. —[[User:Babelfisch|Babelfisch]] 09:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

== Using a computer as a tor router ==

I want to support the [[Tor]] project by donating my bandwidth, but I do not want to be blacklisted from WP when I do. Is there some way I can do this? [[User:Firefoxman|<font color="#8C8C8C">'''ffm'''</font>]] ^{[[User talk:Firefoxman|<font color="#8C8C8C">'''yes?'''</font>]]} 19:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

== help for the Arabs ==

Could we add such a helpful site for other groups such as the Arabian speaking population? They have similar problems (even in the Gulf states with quite a lot of internet access) and resort to proxies. [[User:Wandalstouring|Wandalstouring]] 17:00, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

:as of a few days ago, I reinstalled Tor+Privoxy without the Vivillda controller. But prior to that, there where two exit nodes displaying in the middle east; one straddeling the Iraq-Saudi Arabia border (couldn't tell which side; which side do you think it's more likely to get bombed on?) and one in the UAE; so I agree with your notion {2007 03 02 06:16 UTC}

Perhaps we could rename and rescope this entry to deal with bypassing all internet censorship? <font style="color:#22AA00;">'''[[User:Tewfik|Tewfik]]'''</font><font style="color:#888888;">^{[[User Talk:Tewfik|Talk]]}</font> 23:45, 6 March 2007 (UTC)