Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Fifth Cable Cut To Middle East

CmdrTaco posted more than 6 years ago | from the now-wait-a-minute dept.

Security 676

You may have noticed a number of stories recently about undersea cables getting cut around the world. Apparently the total is now up to 5, but the scariest part of this is that Iran is now offline. You can also read Schneier's comments on this coincidence. Update: 02/06 17:42 GMT by Z : As a commenter notes, though the country of Iran is obviously experiencing some networking difficulties, it is not offline.

cancel ×

676 comments

Goldfinger meets Pogo (5, Insightful)

JesseL (107722) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321034)

"Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action."
-Auric Goldfinger

But who is the enemy?

Re:Goldfinger meets Pogo (5, Funny)

SailorSpork (1080153) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321080)

Why can I picture George Dubbya Bush in a scuba suit, holding a giant pair of sheers and screaming "I'll cut off the terrorist's interweb tubes!"

Re:Goldfinger meets Pogo (5, Insightful)

Pharmboy (216950) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321318)

I doubt it. If anything, we would want Iran to have 100% free and uncensored access for all citizens.

Re:Goldfinger meets Pogo (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321430)

Our government doesn't want that for us so why would they want it for others?

Re:Goldfinger meets Pogo (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321456)

Our government doesn't want that for us so why would they want it for others?
Yep, you get to go around shouting to everyone about how you're "censored".

You are an idiot.

Re:Goldfinger meets Pogo (5, Insightful)

Bruiser80 (1179083) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321500)

Because an informed populace promotes change, especially when grave injustices are being done and the local government is shielding its populace from it. Elected US officials don't want an informed populace because they would be putting their own political lives on the line. That and infrastructure is expensive.

Re:Goldfinger meets Pogo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321462)

Close... but I think to say "we want Iran to have 100% free and uncensored access for all citizens to out propaganga" would be more accurate.

Re:Goldfinger meets Pogo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321504)

Yeah, 'cause the internet is one big U.S. Gov't shill.

Re:Goldfinger meets Pogo (3, Insightful)

jamstar7 (694492) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321520)

But we'd also wanna cut off Iran's leaders, especially its military, from cheap, easy, and fast sources of information. If we were planning on attacking them, it's best to keep them confused as long as possible.

Interesting how this is happening during the primary election cycle in the US, now, isn't it? And no, Iran isn't totally cut off. But if more cables get cut, what would that tell the astute observer?

Re:Goldfinger meets Pogo (5, Insightful)

necro81 (917438) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321454)

I'd like to believe the US isn't behind it for any number of reasons. One of those many reasons that occurs to me is the precedent it sets: if we declare that cutting cables is a valid way of pursuing foreign policy, what implications does that have for the US, who has more cables than anyone, relies on their cables more than anyone, and has the most $$$ invested in those cables? Put simply, if cables become fair game, the US has more to lose than anyone else. The powers-that-be couldn't be that stupid, could they? Sure, they're stupid enough to start a senseless war that's quagmired our foreign policy and military, but to do something stupid enough to threaten our livelihood (and pr0n)? (this is a half-sarcastic, half-pleading comment. I know that they really could be that stupid.)

Keep in mind, too, that these cables aren't, for the most part, state owned assets like radar stations or bridges - they are the private assets of companies and conglomerates, who have invested many billions in their installation. Those conglomerates are able to pursue the US for damages much more effectively than, say, Iran.

Re:Goldfinger meets Pogo (1)

thyrf (1059934) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321120)

I think it's about time someone told the captains of these ships to bring up their anchors. Either that or they tell us what's really going on.

Re:Goldfinger meets Pogo (1)

internetcommie (945194) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321352)

No, it is when they pull up the anchors they cut the cables.
They should all cut their anchor chains and get out of there, or else we'll all be having internet withdrawals within a couple of weeks!

Re:Goldfinger meets Pogo (5, Interesting)

gnick (1211984) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321396)

Not necessarily related, but IMHO interesting:
The US Navy has had to deal with fishing boats intentionally dragging their lines across cables many times. Around their Japanese bases, the US had a couple of data lines strewn along the ocean floor. If the lines were cut, the Navy would have to fix them. To do that, they had to keep fishing boats out of the area when they were working, so they would compensate the fishermen.

Obvious Japanese fisherman's solution:
1) Drag anchor across US data line.
2) Skip work and receive generous compensation.
3) $ Profit $

Except that Iran has NOT gone "offline" (5, Insightful)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321186)

Oops. [slashdot.org]

So when the basic, sole premise and of the story is wrong, and by extension the clear implication, where do we go from there?

Re:Except that Iran has NOT gone "offline" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321422)

The Firehose, of course!

Re:Goldfinger meets Pogo (3, Interesting)

manotick (1234358) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321476)

Connecting The Many Undersea Cut Cable Dots - 9 Or More? http://www.rense.com/general80/cable.htm [rense.com] This is quite an interesting comment. It claims there may be as many a nine cables down now.

Re:Goldfinger meets Pogo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321584)

NESSIE? The infamous Lock Ness....unleashed is anger overseas....

Re:Goldfinger meets Pogo (5, Funny)

William-Ely (875237) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321590)

The plot is much more sinister than we think. Step 1: Cut cables Step 2: Post story on Slashdot Step 3: Have everyone ping Iranian servers to death to prove story wrong Step 4: ??? Step 5: PROFIT!

What they are thinking. (5, Funny)

suso (153703) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321038)

Hmmm, let me see. Is this one it? No that's Syria. Is this it? No that's Saudi Arabia. Ah, here we go, Iran.

Re:What they are thinking. (3, Insightful)

s!lat (975103) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321068)

The scary part is I think this may be right. It's just too damn "convenient" to be a "coincidence"

fp (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321042)

first post on the fifth cable

Re:fp (4, Funny)

halivar (535827) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321424)

first post on the fifth cable
No wonder it took so long to get here.

Iran? All 3 users? (-1, Troll)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321044)

All 3 Iranians who are downloading government-approved news ?

Why Mossad is worried about Iranian Internet access is a mystery.

Coordinated attack? (-1, Offtopic)

192939495969798999 (58312) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321056)

So is there any evidence that this is some kind of coordinated attack, perhaps by laser beam-equipped sharks or something?

Re:Coordinated attack? (4, Funny)

wonkavader (605434) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321294)

I'm tired of this myth. For the LAST TIME: There are NO laser-equipped sharks. All the shark operatives are issued simple wire cutters. Tests with sharks equipped with nuclear landmines were abandoned after it was found that the chickens [wikipedia.org] drown too quickly for the sharks to be maximally effective.

Drastic traffic shaping (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321062)

That's one way to do traffic shaping :-D

Iran has NOT "offline" (5, Insightful)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321066)

...and has NOT lost net connectivity.

One router in Iran -- the one that happens to be used by Internet Traffic Report [internettr...report.com] -- is unreachable. As are dozens of single points on the internet in many states in the region.

A quick perusal of, e.g., newspaper web sites in Iran [onlinenewspapers.com] finds every one I have tried working fine, including all state-run media. As is the web site of the Government of Iran [www.iran.ir] and numerous other government and press web sites physically located in Iran. See for yourself. [google.com] (And yes, I am aware that simply ending in .ir does not mean the site is necessarily physically in Iran, but you can easily verify [arin.net] that nearly all of them are.)

I know all of you are just itching to believe it's a US information operation (I love some of the articles..."a secret Pentagon strategy called 'information warfare'" -- uh, guys, I hate to break this to you, but it's not a secret) to cut Iran off from the internet in advance of the secret Iran invasion that Bush -- er, Cheney -- is oh-so-obviously planning.

No one ever said that one ship damaged all the cables. What was said was that a single ship probably cut two cables in a particular area off Egypt. But that has been called into doubt in that location. Unfortunately, it isn't clear exactly where some of the cables have been damaged, so simply because one area didn't have a ship doesn't mean it wasn't possible for it to be damaged elsewhere.

Even if someone is cutting the cables, as telecom and undersea cable experts believe is unlikely, it would be better to actually consider the facts of the situation, instead of feeing the conspiracy mill with garbage like "Iran is offline" when it clearly isn't? How about waiting until the cables are raised to see what kind of damage has been caused?

But if you want to believe one guy's blog post that "Iran is offline", which ends with:

this author actually dug a bit deeper and found a trail that leads from the owners of most of these internet cables all the way back to some very, very large companies in the U.S. and in the U.K. Which companies you ask? Who is behind this?

Well, that's the topic for my next post. You'll have to subscribe to my RSS feed and stay tuned for my findings. Don't worry, the wait will be short.
...then be my guest. How convenient! If we want to learn "which" big evil companies are behind what is obviously a US operation to cut Iran off from the internet, all we have to do is subscribe to his ad-laden blog!

Or, we could perhaps consider that "[m]ost telecommunications experts and cable operators say that sabotage seems unlikely." [iht.com]

Or, we could perhaps believe the facts, which is that Iran is not "offline", as I have illustrated above.

It seems that the premise to this story -- namely, that Iran is "offline" -- is patently incorrect. So, since that is untrue, what are the motivations of people who want to believe this is a prelude to war?

That lying about it somehow serves a greater purpose?

Oh, and by the way, for all you pushers of the Information Warfare theory, keep in mind that it runs both ways. I wouldn't be surprised before Iran picks up on the conspiracy stories and starts promoting that itself. What a great way to detract attention from its continuing defiance of the world community -- no, not just the US -- on its nuclear processing.

Re:Iran has NOT "offline" (-1, Redundant)

eln (21727) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321178)

Your analysis of the true state of the Internet in Iran is not only accurate, but also dooms my own shorter analysis down the page to a -1, Redundant, so thanks for that.

Anyway, I agree with you that saying this is a government conspiracy is silly. I think we all know what's really going on here: the dolphins are chewing through the cables in order to take down our communications in advance of their planned invasion to take back the land. We'll all be living in the ocean within the week.

Re:Iran has NOT "offline" (0, Flamebait)

provigilman (1044114) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321240)

Wait a minute... You mean someone on /. jumped the gun and immediately blamed everything on a Bush/Cheney conspiracy plan with almost no effort to actually determine the accurracy of the story?

I've never heard of such a thing........

Re:Iran has NOT "offline" (4, Funny)

ahsile (187881) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321244)

Omg... Get your tinfoil hat hating ass out of here. This is slashdot! Everything is a conspiracy! Iran is being slowly disconnected from the internet so that the US can bomb them and nobody will know! Because reporters couldn't ever tell us about it without the interwab!

Sheesh.

Re:Iran has NOT "offline" (-1, Troll)

konohitowa (220547) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321266)

Wow. I'm amazed you got away with a +3 interesting on that [so far]. Any kind of coherent discussion that doesn't toe the party line around here usually dooms one to -1 Troll/Flamebait/Off Topic or similar. Nice job!

Re:Iran has NOT "offline" (5, Funny)

unbug (1188963) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321278)

A quick perusal of, e.g., newspaper web sites in Iran finds every one I have tried working fine, including all state-run media. As is the web site of the Government of Iran and numerous other government and press web sites physically located in Iran. See for yourself.
Jeez, if this goes on Iran will be offline - it will be slashdotted. But maybe that was the plan all along...

Re:Iran has NOT "offline" (2, Insightful)

pla (258480) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321298)

No one ever said that one ship damaged all the cables.

True - Why limit it to one ship, when we have the whole US fleet to choose from?

Look, I don't normally believe in conspiracy theories (they take too much work to implement, and usually you can explain the same outcome by a lot of people all acting out of simple greedy self-interest). But we've gone how many decades with undersea cables only rarely taking damage, and now we have five, which just happen to affect a region of the world in which we have a strategic interest, all cut within two weeks???

Take the blinders off, friend. Even if the US didn't do it, someone (cough cough Israel cough) did, and deliberately at that.

Ever.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321544)

read a Sherlock Homes novel, or about the scientific method? Nevermind....

Re:Iran has NOT "offline" (1)

je ne sais quoi (987177) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321580)

Don't be too quick to blame the U.S. or Israel -- there's more than enough governments in the middle east that could possibly view the internet as "the bringer of the corrupting influence of the west." They might have cut the cables to limit access by their populations. Of course, in the past when these governments have performed acts of sabotage, they shout that they have done it so I don't know. I'm just glad my internets are still making it through the tubes okay, might actually get some work done otherwise.

Re:Iran has NOT "offline" (1)

Odin_Tiger (585113) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321308)

I had read about this yesterday on Reddit, but even taking that into account - all these incidents combined in this short a timespan makes for one hell of an interesting coincidence. Even a sci-fi / fantasy fan like me has to feel their suspension of disbelief getting stretched. I have to say, I'm beginning to wonder the same thing as Bruce:

What the hell is going on out there?

Re:Iran has NOT "offline" (1)

peragrin (659227) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321324)

shhhhh!!! Realspeak isn't allowed in slashdot.

Re:Iran has NOT "offline" (2, Insightful)

TheOldSchooler (850678) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321392)

You beter be careful my friend. They are watching you now.

Depending on your point of view... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321428)

Some people in the USA might think that Iran is declaring some sort of economic war on the USA by daring to set an oil bourse that allows oil to be bought and sold in a currency that is not the US dollar:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7998 [globalresearch.ca]

Re:Depending on your point of view... (1)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321572)

Yes, that may be true. (Some basic info for those who may not be familiar. [wikipedia.org] )

But here's the problem: the implication here -- namely, the "US is trying to stop the Iranian Oil Bourse to protect the fragile dollar" theory vs the "US is secretly planning to invade Iran" theory -- falls apart of the expected action doesn't occur.

If the Iranian Oil Bourse opens this week or next as planned, then the theory that this was designed to "stop" that is incorrect, isn't it? Iran doesn't need undersea cable connectivity to conduct this business, and further, any and all damage to these undersea cables will be examined and repaired. In other words, the theory that believes that this is somehow related to the bourse is going to break down at some point, because Iran cannot be surgically removed from all communications, and even if it could be via undersea cables, it can still have ample connectivity to conduct the operations of the bourse. In fact, some might say Iran would be sufficiently emboldened to do just that.

So that's where these arguments kind of break down. If there isn't any large, defined benefit, and indeed, if Iran isn't even disconnected from the net as these theories assert, then are these theories even correct? They might be interesting, but I'm sure the conspiracy theories will now take on a life of their own. Even after the cables are raised and the damage examined and repaired, some will still believe that any type of evidence that might indicate sabotage will be concealed by the cable operators, who are somehow complicit with the US government. Unfortunately, this detracts from any actual meaningful discussion and public policy debate, as it concentrates a very vocal group of people on conspiracy theories.

Re:Iran has NOT "offline" (5, Funny)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321460)

...and has NOT lost net connectivity.

Meanwhile, at the NWO headquarters:

Underling: "President Bush, Iran still isn't offline!"
Bush: "Dammit, Osama, what the fuck am I paying you for?"
Bin Laden: "Sorry Sir, I'll get right on it"
Elvis: "And get it right this time!"

Statistically, tinfoil hat *IS* required (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321496)

The big problem with your debunking of tinfoil-hat theories is that it doesn't account for 5 cables (FIVE!!! --- let that incredible number soak into your skull for a bit) being cut within the space of a few days.

It is statistically unlikely for a single cable to go down. No surprise there, as these cables cost dozens of millions apiece so they're engineered for permanence. Two in the same week is unheard of, unless there's an underwater earthquake. It doesn't take a PhD in statistics to understand that 5 cables do not get cut by normal processes in the same week or two, EVER. Under any circumstance at all.

So, while you're being partly rational in your response, you're also not addressing the issue. It can't be dismissed.

Re:Iran has NOT "offline" (1)

LSD-OBS (183415) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321560)

Very good point.

Just thought I'd point out, however, that Iran still has some communications backbone that runs over satellite, so being able to reach major Iranian servers from outside doesn't *neccessarily* mean they have any functioning cables, although I'd be impressed if this were the case, because that means there's been some pretty impossibly quick re-routing going on, depending on their topology anyway.

If it turns out they are going through satellite, and that suddenly falls out of the sky, then I'm going to don the nearest metal headware.

Coincidence? (2)

vertaxis (250038) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321070)

2 cut cables are a coincidence

3 or more has to be deliberate. The question is, who is cutting the cables and what is their agenda?

question on everyone's mind: (-1, Redundant)

carambola5 (456983) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321078)

wtf, mate?

Obivously (5, Funny)

Joe U (443617) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321192)

Obivously, it's to stop them from downloading Truecrypt 5.

Traffic Intercept (5, Interesting)

RichMan (8097) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321082)

Cut all the alternate paths until the traffic you desire to capture comes through your surveillance hub.

not-so-thick-tinfoil

Re:Traffic Intercept (1)

electronerdz (838825) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321490)

Exactly my thought... the US (or whomever) will "conveniently" provide an Internet connection to Iran in their "time of crisis". Then monitor every data packet which travels over it.

hmm (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321098)

The system is down. The system is down. The system is down. Down. Down, down, down, down.</strongbad>

Suspicious... (1)

ilovegeorgebush (923173) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321106)

Is anyone else beginning to think there's something fishy going on? (OK, sorry, excuse the pun).

If I'm honest, I was suspicious from the start, but I'm a tad too paranoid I guess.

wtf (1, Redundant)

prelelat (201821) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321118)

Okay something is going on, I'm not usually one for conspiracy theories but shit. How do 5 connections get cut? Someone in one of the other articles said it could have been under sea volcanic activity but does account for all 5? I would have to say something weird is going on if you ask me. If anything I'm not buying a lottery ticket today, the planets have aligned and its not in our favor.

Re:wtf (1)

wilsonng (900790) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321206)

If undersea cables are not laid down properly and are easy to find and sabotage, then our whole internet infra is built on a foundation of loose sand...

Is it really offline this time? (5, Informative)

eln (21727) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321122)

I remember last time a cable cut was reported they said Iran was offline that time as well. I'm not so sure Iran is really offline now either. I have been clicking into the websites of various Iranian universities [wikipedia.org] and all of the ones I've checked so far are up, although some are kind of slow. While I guess it's possible some of them are hosting their main websites offshore, I doubt all of them are. Unfortunately, the routers here block outgoing traceroute for some dumb reason, so I can't verify for sure, but it seems like Iran is not as offline as we might think.

Re:Is it really offline this time? (1)

Altari (1230296) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321550)

I'm not so sure Iran is really offline now either.
Last report I heard Iran was running at 27% capacity. And that was when only 4 cables were cut. Now we have five.

This is great Sesame Street fodder. 5 cables cut, hahaha.

Plate tectonics (1, Interesting)

Nonillion (266505) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321124)

Is it possible this is the result of plate tectonics? How much elasticity do these cables have? Is it possible that the shifting continents are causing these cable breaks, or is there something more sinister afoot.

Re:Plate tectonics (1)

jizziknight (976750) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321330)

I was wondering the same thing. It seems plausible that if the plates shifted enough in the right directions, that the cables would break due to the stress. Though, I would hope that there would have been enough slack in the cables to account for the shifting. Can anyone shed some light on this?

Re:Plate tectonics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321386)

Anything's possible. But that's extremely unlikely. The cable installers would have to be absolute morons not to include at least a couple feet* of slack, and you don't hire that sort of monkey to do this sort of job.

*This is how slowly the tectonic plates move, and why I didn't type "a couple hundred miles" above:

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/ZhenHuang.shtml [hypertextbook.com]

Iran has been down for a few days... (1)

Avitor (640676) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321148)

According to Internet Traffic Report [internettr...report.com] the Tehran node has been down for few days.

Argh! (-1, Flamebait)

RenHoek (101570) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321158)

Damn it America, if you're going to start another war I want nothing to do with you anymore!

Afghanistan is now the #1 producer of cocaine and cannabis.
Iraq has over 1 million civilian death by now and is close to complete anarchy.

And now Iran?

Re:Argh! (2, Interesting)

SpacePunk (17960) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321314)

Who says that it's America? The most likely suspect would be an Islamic nutbag, or group of nutbags that want to cut primarily Islamic states from western influence.

"Afghanistan is now the #1 producer of cocaine and cannabis."

You forgot heroine(sp).

"Iraq has over 1 million civilian death by now and is close to complete anarchy."

I'd have to see the stats on the deaths. Does it include people that die of natural causes also?

As for anarchy, there will never be any. Local sheiks will always have control of their regions. Well, as much control as Islamic militants will allow.

Re:Argh! (1)

Yetihehe (971185) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321518)

Does it include people that die of natural causes also?
Hmm, depends how you define natural causes. Shot in the head naturally causes death...

Re:Argh! (1)

Jeng (926980) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321366)

Don't you mean heroin?

C'mon get your drugs straight.

Besides Afghanistan producing large amounts of heroin is part of the plan since most of it goes to China, former soviet block countries, and Iran.

Re:Argh! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321412)

Yes, that is a logical conclusion to come to. That this is prelude to Iranian invasion.

It's just an attempt to get traffic (4, Insightful)

emj (15659) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321164)

He says he knows it all he will just wait until his next post to tell you all, so this is where "journalism" is heading. It's all about the money of course, but it's actually the first time it's been so clear.

I don't think s/he has anything.

How many? (5, Funny)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321172)

Didn't they say Iran was completely offline when the third cable was cut? Then I hear a fourth cable was and they were "now they're offline"! Now there's a fifth cable cut and the news is saying "Now they're REALLY REALLY offline!". And yet it still appears that they are still not offline.

So, how many fscking cables do they have and can they please tell us exactly how many have to go down before I can't ping a single thing in Iran? I don't wanna go through this on the next 12 cables . . .

Re:How many? (5, Funny)

gingerTabs (532664) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321344)

So, how many fscking cables do they have and can they please tell us exactly how many have to go down before I can't ping a single thing in Iran? I don't wanna go through this on the next 12 cables . . .
Surely your military advisers would give you a better answer than /. George...

Re:How many? (1)

Yetihehe (971185) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321586)

And yet it still appears that they are still not offline.
Iranian minister of (dis)information: We are not offline, I repeat, we are not offline.
It looks like he is more effective that Iraqi minissssster of information.

Is this really confirmed? (4, Informative)

Drakin020 (980931) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321174)

Iran has shown a connection of 0 for the past week or so. That doesn't mean a cable was cut does it? Just means that you cannot ping that one router. Last time I checked Iran had more than 1 router.

Also look at this.
http://www.internettrafficreport.com/namerica.htm [internettr...report.com]

Does that mean Florida is offline? No it just means you cannot communicate with one of their routers.

riiight. (5, Insightful)

apodyopsis (1048476) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321190)

from TFA "However, this author actually dug a bit deeper and found a trail that leads from the owners of most of these internet cables all the way back to some very, very large companies in the U.S. and in the U.K. Which companies you ask? Who is behind this?"

what. the. fuck?

the author clearly has his tinfoil underpants and armadillo hat on. I mean come on, whilst I realize that almost everything can be turned into a conspiracy theory this is too much. Accidents happen all the time and I remember reading that some of this outage is due to routing maintenance. Occams Razor, to me the facts as reported seem simpler then some ulterior motive and cable cutting gear.

Occam's Razor cut the cables ! (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321388)

I finally get it, thanks for the post. Occam's Razor is responsible for cutting the cables !

Re:riiight. (1)

Otter (3800) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321564)

the author clearly has his tinfoil underpants and armadillo hat on.

I think you have that backwards...

If you're gonna let out your seamen (1)

coresnake (1215632) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321200)

You gotta watch those loose anchors!

Conduit (1)

djasbestos (1035410) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321256)

Do you has it!?!?!

Seriously, you'd think they'd armor them a little better in areas where a collision with an anchor is likely.

I already predicted that (0, Flamebait)

G-News.ch (793321) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321202)

When the first story about cables getting cut was posted on slashdot, I already said it might have been "intelligent" coincidence, ie an US secret services operation targetting Iran. Of course, when I said that, people probably considered it a joke. But it's not funny.

Top Secret (4, Funny)

fredz1 (1196229) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321208)

It's "Operation Notwork" AKA "InterNot" it was Big Dick's idea, but I liked it... submarine, big pair of scissors, there you go. - W

RIAA (2)

daninspokane (1198749) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321232)

My suspicion: RIAA. They can't sue them, so they cut their cables!

Conspiracy theorists read this... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321236)

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7998 [globalresearch.ca] ...it's all because the USA wants prevent people from buying oil using any currency except the US dollar.

5 cables,so am I still flaming or on to something? (-1, Flamebait)

flyneye (84093) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321262)

5 cables cut segregating muslim countries from the internet.
It is no flame that I suspect "Muslim Fundamentalists" of protecting Allahs own from the "great satans forum",the internet.Probably in exchange for some reward in the afterlife.
Got a problem w/my opinion? Tough. I haven't seen anything worthy of changing it to protect your sillyass P.C. feelings.
On the lighter side of life I still can't get that song mod outa my head.
"we all live in a Muslim submarine"

Re:5 cables,so am I still flaming or on to somethi (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321482)

To the song of Give me hope Joana.

make me gay Muhammad
make me gay Muhammad
make me gay Muhammad
till the big man cums
make me gay Muhammad
make me gay Muhammad
make me gay until the big man cums

Now there's a big man stood behind me
with his cock shoved up my arse
I'm not really homosexual
but I think it could be a laugh

so

make me gay Muhammad
make me gay Muhammad
make me gay Muhammad
till the big man cums
make me gay Muhammad
make me gay Muhammad
make me gay until the big man cums

Terrorists... (-1, Troll)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321320)

Two fucking arabs in a row boat are fishing cables looking for the US and Euro connections...

Backhoe (1)

zebb2000 (1234350) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321328)

How did 5 backhoes drive into the ocean in such a small period of time?

Re:Backhoe (1)

shadowcabbit (466253) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321588)

SCUBAckhoes!

Conspiracy (1)

zero.kalvin (1231372) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321332)

It's the Conspiracy theory heavenly event... 5 cables in such a short period ? with Iran being probably the most affected by this. ps I live in Lebanon, I'm not affected by this ( so far! )

Wild ass speculations... (-1)

flajann (658201) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321350)

My unsupported wild-ass speculations about the cable cuts is that:
  • The US is behind at least some of the cable cuts.
  • The cable cuts may be the first step to a covert operation where the US wants to restrict news flowing out from the region.
  • The US wishes to "punish" Iran for not cooperating with the US on nuclear issues.
  • Something else is about to go down. Perhaps the US is looking to invade Iran afterall.

Well, let us hope that my wild-ass speculations are nothing more than that!

Re:Wild ass speculations... (1)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321522)

I'd either finger Israel or some fundamentalist Islamic group that doesn't want western views on the internet corrupting their women and bringing some of the countries out of the middle ages.

The internet is good for western propaganda so I doubt the the US has anything to do with it.

Re:Wild ass speculations... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321538)

The greatest threat to an oppressive religious regime is the free exchange of information and exposure to different cultures. The only thing cutting off communications would do is strengthen the power of the few people who already run the country. If you're going to make crazy conspiracy theories, at least get it right and say that Iran is doing the cutting.

Re:Wild ass speculations... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321594)


My unsupported wild-ass speculations about the cable cuts is that:

        * The US is behind at least some of the cable cuts.
        * The cable cuts may be the first step to a covert operation where the US wants to restrict news flowing out from the region.
        * The US wishes to "punish" Iran for not cooperating with the US on nuclear issues.
        * Something else is about to go down. Perhaps the US is looking to invade Iran afterall.

Well, let us hope that my wild-ass speculations are nothing more than that!


All of the above are legitimate wild-ass speculations. However, you seem to be stuck in a groove. There is no reason to assume that the US isn't behind this, but there is no reason to assume that it is.

Try this wild-ass speculation on for size:

The leaders in Iran are prepping for the mother of all crackdowns where they expect to kill civilians by the hundreds (thousands?). They are systematically shutting down communication out of the country so that they can do what they they want without the world watching.

I believe that the US is capable and stupid enough to be doing this. What I do NOT assume that we are the ONLY ones who are capable and stupid enough to be doing this.

The Real Economic Stimulus (2, Interesting)

INeededALogin (771371) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321356)

I am putting on my tinfoil hat for this post but...

What if this is actually a US government plan. Make Hi-Tech industries from low-cost countries unstable and unusable. All of a sudden, companies panic and start to re-think the outsource planning that has been losing US jobs. What if the US is making a coordinated effort to rescue its economy by sabotaging others?

Re:The Real Economic Stimulus (1)

Shados (741919) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321432)

I don't think its that. However, that being said, it is quite likely that some less stable CEOs will rethink their outsourcing plans anyway. There are already a lot of places that are "on edge" of switching back to in house, because outsourcing often doesn't deliver (for certain project types its gold though). So this could be just the straw to push them on the edge: even if it wasn't true at all. It would make them think. CEOs are often overly emotional people, so it doesn't take much.

Cables get cut all the time, news at 11 (4, Insightful)

hcdejong (561314) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321372)

According to an acquaintance who works for an ISP, the weird thing isn't that these cables are broken, it's that all of a sudden it's news. There are always issues with submarine systems. That is why we have so many repair ships in the global fleet:

list of [iscpc.org] ships [iscpc.org]

The rise of the dolphins? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321440)

Obviously this is the beginning of the rise of the dolphins to re-take over the world.

1. Cut internet communication with the rest of the world
2. ???
3. Profit

This is obviously the work of.... (1, Flamebait)

rodney dill (631059) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321464)

...Al Gore taking back the internet since he wasn't getting any credit for it anyway.

C'mon /. (3, Informative)

rock217 (802738) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321480)

I thought we were better than this...one router goes down and suddenly "OMG IRAN HAS NO INTARWEBS!"

Ok, so if Iran has _no_ intarwebs, I shouldn't be able to hit a server in Tehran right?

http://www.iust.ac.ir/ [iust.ac.ir]

I know who did it! (1)

holiggan (522846) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321506)

It was the Cloverfield monster!!!

Those Poor Iranians! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321514)

Without the Internet the people of Iran will be denied objective information and access to the outside world! They won't enjoy free speech and free press! The open exchange of ideas and knowledge will be stiffled!

Oh, nevermind . . .

Where's the Jimmy? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22321546)

Does anybody know where the USS Jimmy Carter is operating at present?

Sharks (1)

Detritus (11846) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321554)

What about sharks? I saw a documentary that said that sharks are attracted by the stray electrical fields emitted by submarine cables.

A communications disruption? (0, Offtopic)

daveewart (66895) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321568)

A communications disruption can mean only one thing: Invasion.

Flag Telecom (4, Informative)

Ritorix (668826) | more than 6 years ago | (#22321596)

Whether the cables are being cut by ship anchors, Navy Seals or lasersharks, there are slower alternate routes. In a pinch most Gulf-region ISPs can route the other way, through Asia, under the Pacific Ocean to America. Obviously that degrades connection quality. Backup routes were contracted after the tsunami damaged so many of the undersea cables at once.

The BBC has a decent article on the issue, at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7228315.stm [bbc.co.uk]
The cables (at least two of them) are owned by http://www.flagtelecom.com/ [flagtelecom.com] , they have updates on repairs on their news page and a nice map of the cables. Their Gulf-region cables are described as a "Self healing Gulf loop, providing maximum design capacity of 1.28 Tbps. Initial launch capacity 50 Gbps.
Four fibre pair route linking the Gulf to Egypt and India. Design capacity of 2.56 Tbps, with initial launch at 90 Gbps.
Approx. length 10,300 km."

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...