Weapon of Choice: Who controls the Internet?

Past Control

When looking to understand who controls the Internet, it is important to establish the theoretical history behind linking computers.

www.leidenuniv.nl/.../index.php3-c=5.htm

The Advanced Research Projects Agency Network (ARPANET), precursor to the Internet, was created at a time when the US Department of Defense became aware of the positive and strong link that University research could have to homeland security. Writing in Behind the Net – The Untold History of the ARPANET, Michael Hauben (1973-2001) said: “[ARPANET] was formed with an emphasis towards research, and thus was not oriented only to a military product. The formation of this agency was part of the U.S. reaction to the then Soviet Union's launch of Sputnik in 1957.”

By commissioning ARPANET through University funding and research, the early divisions between it’s end use as a military weapon or knowledge machine can be recognised: “This community spirit has a long history beginning with the early ARPANET. The early ARPANET researchers worked as a close-knit community …”
Mark Hauben (1992) Behind the Net - The untold history of the ARPANET Or - The "Open" History of the ARPANET/Internet [Online] Available from: http://www.dei.isep.ipp.pt/~acc/docs/arpa--1.html (Accessed: 22 October 2009)

ARPA, as the name would indicate, looked to research and development. The project was passed to the Defense Communications Agency by the mid-1970s and the divisions were finally recognised when in 1983 the network was split between the Internet and Milnet.

The concept of linking machines to share and spread information without the requirement for one static source was seen as an advantage to the US Military. Paradoxically, the notion of creating something that had no centre caused its own security risks.

Now You Are In Control: Hackers and Hacktivism

http://w3.cultdeadcow.com/cms/index.html

“The wonderful device meant to enrich life has
become a weapon which dehumanizes people.
To the government and large businesses,
people are no more than disk space, and the
government doesn't use computers to arrange
aid for the poor, but to control nuclear death
weapons. (8)”
Metac0m (2003) What Is Hacktivism? 2.0 [Online] Available from: http://www.thehacktivist.com/whatishacktivism.pdf (Accessed: 22 October 2009)

MGM United Artists: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAcEzhQ7oqA&feature=related

The Military and Government may have believed in their ability to control the Internet, but there have been a number of cases when weaknesses have been proven. Mirroring the 1983 movie, WarGames, one man rocked U.S. defences in 2001-2002 by successfully hacking into networks controlled by the Army, Navy, Air Force, DoD and NASA. Gary McKinnon (http://freegary.org.uk/) is still awaiting extradition to the U.S. on the grounds of maliciously causing over $700,000 in damages to security systems.
http://www.londontv.net/freegarymckinnon.html

Even encryption tools utilised today by such agencies were initially met with distrust and risks to military security: “Philip R. Zimmermann is the creator of Pretty Good Privacy, an email encryption software package. Originally designed as a human rights tool, PGP was published for free on the Internet in 1991. This made Zimmermann the target of a three-year criminal investigation, because the government held that US export restrictions for cryptographic software were violated when PGP spread worldwide. Despite the lack of funding, the lack of any paid staff, the lack of a company to stand behind it, and despite government persecution, PGP nonetheless became the most widely used email encryption software in the world.”
Philip Zimmermann [Online] Available from: http://www.philzimmermann.com/EN/background/index.html (Accessed: 22 October 2009)


If the Internet has been identified as a potentially dangerous weapon, could we all be accused of complacency? It could be taken that hackers are the knowledge seekers and they have a duty to show us the loop holes. Do we all rely too much on the idea that the Internet is under our own individual control and therefore are we guilty of not questioning the safety and security of digital technology?

Jonathan Zittrain, Professor of Internet Law at Harvard Law School, asked the question: Can we trust the Internet to regulate itself? He believes that the control should be the shared responsibilty of everyone concluding:

“[We should look at] ways of solving the problems as a community” 5.24
Jonathan Zittrain (2008) Can we trust the Internet to regulate itself? Available from: http://bigthink.com/jonathanzittrain/re-can-we-trust-the-internet-to-regulate-itself# (Accessed 23 October 2009)

Controlling The Future
‘We shall meet in the place where there is no darkness,’ O'Brien had said to him. He knew what it meant, or thought he knew. The place where there is no darkness was the imagined future, which one would never see, but which, by foreknowledge, one could mystically share in.’
George Orwell (1949) Nineteen Eighty-Four

Perhaps the most disconcerting question is: Who will control the Internet in the future?
Vernor Vinge (retired Professor of Mathematics, Computer Scientist and Science Fiction Author) speaking in September 2005 at the Accelerating Change conference at Stanford University when discussing Technical Singularity (self-improving intelligence) said:“as we get embedded processors and as they get more ubiquetous…the environment around us is coming close to waking up” 20.04
“[Is it] possible humans are operating under the illusion that we are self aware?” 34.24
Vernor Vinge (2005) Accelerating Change Conference Available from: http://itc.conversationsnetwork.org/shows/detail711.html
http://cdn.itconversations.com/ITC.AC05-VernorVinge-2005.09.17.mp3 (Accessed 23 October 2009)

Is it possible that in the future, digital technology itself will control the Internet, and what questions does that pose for governments, the military and the people?