When Russia blocked Facebook and limited Twitter this month, many Chinese internet users were surprised. Wait a moment, they said: The Russians could use Facebook and Twitter? Both social media platforms have been banned in China since 2009.

By blocking online platforms, shutting down the last vestige of Russia’s independent media and making it a crime to refer to the fighting in Ukraine as a war, the Kremlin has made it nearly impossible for the Russian people to get independent or international news after its invasion. Most Russians are taking in an alternative reality.

That is exactly what China has been doing to its 1.4 billion people for years. Nearly all major Western websites are blocked in the country. A generation of Chinese have grown up in a very different information environment from the rest of the world. Mostly, they are left to believe in what Beijing tells them.

“When people ask me how info environment within the Great Firewall is like,” Yaqiu Wang, a researcher at the Human Rights Watch in New York, wrote on Twitter about China’s censored internet, “I say, ‘Imagine the whole country is one giant QAnon.’”

After years of testing and hesitation, Russia is heading toward harsher internet censorship akin to China’s Great Firewall to better control its people. China’s information dark age could be Russia’s future.

“What is darkness?” asked a user on the Chinese social media platform Weibo. “You can’t speak the truth, and you aren’t allowed to see the truth.”

The two countries have the tendency to learn the worst from each other.

Both the Russians and the Chinese were deeply scarred by disastrous eras under communism, which produced tyrants like Josef Stalin and Mao Zedong, gulags and labor camps, and man-made famines that starved millions to death.

Now, Russia is learning from China how to exert control over its people in the social media age.

The Ukraine crisis has only accelerated a process that started years earlier. In late 2015, China and Russia signed a strategic cooperation agreement on internet governance. A few months later, two of China’s most infamous proponents of censorship travelled to Moscow to preach their ideas of the internet to their Russian counterparts.

“Unlimited freedom can lead to terrorism,” China’s internet czar at the time, Lu Wei, told his Russian audience at a forum. “If borders exist, they exist in cyberspace, too,” said Fang Binxing, known as “father of the Great Firewall.”

China has not always been as tightly controlled as it has become under its top leader, Xi Jinping. In the 1990s and 2000s, investigative journalists broke many stories that led to the downfalls of government officials and to judiciary reforms. The internet and social media made it possible for the public to exchange ideas, debate important topics and pressure the government to respond to their concerns.

There was censorship — at times very strict — and some people went to jail for voicing their political views. But there was a little room for free speech, as there was in Russia for much of Putin’s rule.

Then, under Xi, a new era of control took hold, and it did not stop at news media and social media. It reached everything that touches human minds: books and cartoons, films and television, music and classrooms.

The country regulates what textbooks children use, what type of novels writers can publish, and what kind of mobile games people can play. And it is all possible because the vast majority of Chinese live in the huge information bubble within the Great Firewall.

The effects are clearly demonstrated in the overwhelmingly pro-Russia, pro-war and pro-Putin online sentiment in China after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February. A huge number of Chinese internet users have bought into the disinformation that the Russian and Chinese propaganda machines feed them.

Weibo, China’s Twitter-like social media platform, used to be the place to debate democracy and freedom. Now, the biggest influencers on Weibo are state-owned media outlets like the People’s Daily, the Global Times and China Central Television. Bilibili, a user-generated video site that used to be popular among young gamers and comic and anime fans, is now full of nationalistic young people known as little pinks.

It requires a lot of perseverance for someone with independent thoughts to keep a presence on Weibo. A law scholar I know had set up 343 Weibo accounts from 2009 to 2014, only to see them deleted one by one. Some of them survived only a few minutes. Many people quit social media because they could not stand the abuses by government trolls and little pinks. They also do not want to risk of getting jailed for a post.

The news media has suffered an even greater retreat.

After the huge earthquake struck Sichuan province in May 2008, many Chinese news outlets sent journalists there despite a ban from the Central Propaganda Department. Their powerful, emotional coverage informed the nation of the tragedy and raised questions about the quality of many school buildings.

That kind of reporting is long gone. When news happens, the Chinese public has no choice but to accept the government’s version of the truth.

In January, when the government of the northwestern city of Xi’an imposed a strict lockdown that created chaos and crises not seen since Wuhan two years ago, few news outlets sent journalists to cover it. The only significant reporting the Chinese public got was a first-person blog post written by a former investigative journalist known by her pen name, Jiang Xue.

A few weeks later, when the public was outraged by a video that showed a woman chained in a doorless shack, they had many questions about her, including whether she was a victim of human trafficking. No journalist was able to conduct any independent investigation. Despite the government issuing five statements about her case, many people remain sceptical and are worried that they may never know her real identity.

State censors scrutinize books, videos, films, TV series and just about any creative content much more closely before they reach their audience. The goal is to make sure that everyone, especially the young generation, shares the same values.

A well-known Chinese intellectual has written three books that might never get published. Another famous scholar has written five books with no hope of getting them past the censors.

On Chinese TV, hip-hop singers and soccer players wear long sleeves or use makeup to cover their tattoos, and men’s earrings are blurred so they will not become a “bad influence” to young people.

China still wants to offer some Western entertainment content, but only in sanitized format. In the sitcom “Friends,” Ross never explained to his parents that he had split from his wife because she was a lesbian living with another woman. “Bohemian Rhapsody,” the Queen biopic, had no scenes involving homosexuality. The Chinese censors put a black dress on the heroine’s nude body in “The Shape of Water.”

Creative talents are now signing contracts that include clauses that make them liable for engaging in immoral behaviours or making politically sensitive comments. Celebrities can have their online presence scrubbed for having a nasty divorce, evading taxes, hiring a prostitute, or for no clear reason at all.

The release of a much-anticipated Chinese thriller was delayed last Christmas because one of the main actors in the movie was accused of taking drugs in 2015. It did not matter that the charges against him were dropped. All his shots had to be redone.

I used to doubt that young people would want to watch jingoistic propaganda movies. My generation could not run away from them fast enough, like Russians in the 1980s and 1990s. But I was wrong.

Last year, “The Battle at Lake Changjin,” a government-sponsored movie dramatizing an against-all-odds defeat of the United States during the Korean War, smashed box office records in China.

The most depressing aspect of the information dark age is collective amnesia.

Young censors are so ignorant about China’s forbidden history that they need to be taught before they start work. Otherwise, they will not even know to look for references to the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown on pro-democracy protests, or to the dissident and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Liu Xiaobo.

Some young people believe it is their responsibility to report to the authorities on speeches they deemed not in line with Communist Party values. Some teachers have lost their jobs or have been punished after their students reported on their “politically incorrect” speech.

Last summer, a local state security bureau in the southeastern province of Fujian awarded a college student $1,500 for reporting on an online user spreading “anti-revolutionary information.”

For many Chinese online users, the Great Firewall is seen as necessary to ward off the information and ideological imposition from the West. And after the Kremlin followed suit this month, banning many foreign websites, many in China cheered the decision.

“It’s very necessary to build the Great Firewall,” wrote the Weibo user @icebear_Like_. “Ideology is also a battlefront.”

When Russia blocked Facebook and limited Twitter this month, many Chinese internet users were surprised. Wait a moment, they said: The Russians could use Facebook and Twitter?

When Russia blocked Facebook and limited Twitter this month, many Chinese internet users were surprised. Wait a moment, they said: The Russians could use Facebook and Twitter? Both social media platforms have been banned in China since 2009. By blocking online platforms, shutting down the last vestige of Russia’s independent media and making it a crime to refer to the fighting in Ukraine as a war, the Kremlin has made it nearly impossible for the Russian people to get independent or international news after its invasion. Most Russians are taking in an alternative reality. That is exactly what China has been doing to its 1.4 billion people for years. Nearly all major Western websites are blocked in the country. A generation of Chinese have grown up in a very different information environment from the rest of the world. Mostly, they are left to believe in what Beijing tells them. “When people ask me how info environment within the Great Firewall is like,” Yaqiu Wang, a researcher at the Human Rights Watch in New York, wrote on Twitter about China’s censored internet, “I say, ‘Imagine the whole country is one giant QAnon.’” After years of testing and hesitation, Russia is heading toward harsher internet censorship akin to China’s Great Firewall to better control its people. China’s information dark age could be Russia’s future. “What is darkness?” asked a user on the Chinese social media platform Weibo. “You can’t speak the truth, and you aren’t allowed to see the truth.” The two countries have the tendency to learn the worst from each other. Both the Russians and the Chinese were deeply scarred by disastrous eras under communism, which produced tyrants like Josef Stalin and Mao Zedong, gulags and labor camps, and man-made famines that starved millions to death. Now, Russia is learning from China how to exert control over its people in the social media age. The Ukraine crisis has only accelerated a process that started years earlier. In late 2015, China and Russia signed a strategic cooperation agreement on internet governance. A few months later, two of China’s most infamous proponents of censorship travelled to Moscow to preach their ideas of the internet to their Russian counterparts. “Unlimited freedom can lead to terrorism,” China’s internet czar at the time, Lu Wei, told his Russian audience at a forum. “If borders exist, they exist in cyberspace, too,” said Fang Binxing, known as “father of the Great Firewall.” China has not always been as tightly controlled as it has become under its top leader, Xi Jinping. In the 1990s and 2000s, investigative journalists broke many stories that led to the downfalls of government officials and to judiciary reforms. The internet and social media made it possible for the public to exchange ideas, debate important topics and pressure the government to respond to their concerns. There was censorship — at times very strict — and some people went to jail for voicing their political views. But there was a little room for free speech, as there was in Russia for much of Putin’s rule. Then, under Xi, a new era of control took hold, and it did not stop at news media and social media. It reached everything that touches human minds: books and cartoons, films and television, music and classrooms. The country regulates what textbooks children use, what type of novels writers can publish, and what kind of mobile games people can play. And it is all possible because the vast majority of Chinese live in the huge information bubble within the Great Firewall. The effects are clearly demonstrated in the overwhelmingly pro-Russia, pro-war and pro-Putin online sentiment in China after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February. A huge number of Chinese internet users have bought into the disinformation that the Russian and Chinese propaganda machines feed them. Weibo, China’s Twitter-like social media platform, used to be the place to debate democracy and freedom. Now, the biggest influencers on Weibo are state-owned media outlets like the People’s Daily, the Global Times and China Central Television. Bilibili, a user-generated video site that used to be popular among young gamers and comic and anime fans, is now full of nationalistic young people known as little pinks. It requires a lot of perseverance for someone with independent thoughts to keep a presence on Weibo. A law scholar I know had set up 343 Weibo accounts from 2009 to 2014, only to see them deleted one by one. Some of them survived only a few minutes. Many people quit social media because they could not stand the abuses by government trolls and little pinks. They also do not want to risk of getting jailed for a post. The news media has suffered an even greater retreat. After the huge earthquake struck Sichuan province in May 2008, many Chinese news outlets sent journalists there despite a ban from the Central Propaganda Department. Their powerful, emotional coverage informed the nation of the tragedy and raised questions about the quality of many school buildings. That kind of reporting is long gone. When news happens, the Chinese public has no choice but to accept the government’s version of the truth. In January, when the government of the northwestern city of Xi’an imposed a strict lockdown that created chaos and crises not seen since Wuhan two years ago, few news outlets sent journalists to cover it. The only significant reporting the Chinese public got was a first-person blog post written by a former investigative journalist known by her pen name, Jiang Xue. A few weeks later, when the public was outraged by a video that showed a woman chained in a doorless shack, they had many questions about her, including whether she was a victim of human trafficking. No journalist was able to conduct any independent investigation. Despite the government issuing five statements about her case, many people remain sceptical and are worried that they may never know her real identity. State censors scrutinize books, videos, films, TV series and just about any creative content much more closely before they reach their audience. The goal is to make sure that everyone, especially the young generation, shares the same values. A well-known Chinese intellectual has written three books that might never get published. Another famous scholar has written five books with no hope of getting them past the censors. On Chinese TV, hip-hop singers and soccer players wear long sleeves or use makeup to cover their tattoos, and men’s earrings are blurred so they will not become a “bad influence” to young people. China still wants to offer some Western entertainment content, but only in sanitized format. In the sitcom “Friends,” Ross never explained to his parents that he had split from his wife because she was a lesbian living with another woman. “Bohemian Rhapsody,” the Queen biopic, had no scenes involving homosexuality. The Chinese censors put a black dress on the heroine’s nude body in “The Shape of Water.” Creative talents are now signing contracts that include clauses that make them liable for engaging in immoral behaviours or making politically sensitive comments. Celebrities can have their online presence scrubbed for having a nasty divorce, evading taxes, hiring a prostitute, or for no clear reason at all. The release of a much-anticipated Chinese thriller was delayed last Christmas because one of the main actors in the movie was accused of taking drugs in 2015. It did not matter that the charges against him were dropped. All his shots had to be redone. I used to doubt that young people would want to watch jingoistic propaganda movies. My generation could not run away from them fast enough, like Russians in the 1980s and 1990s. But I was wrong. Last year, “The Battle at Lake Changjin,” a government-sponsored movie dramatizing an against-all-odds defeat of the United States during the Korean War, smashed box office records in China. The most depressing aspect of the information dark age is collective amnesia. Young censors are so ignorant about China’s forbidden history that they need to be taught before they start work. Otherwise, they will not even know to look for references to the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown on pro-democracy protests, or to the dissident and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Liu Xiaobo. Some young people believe it is their responsibility to report to the authorities on speeches they deemed not in line with Communist Party values. Some teachers have lost their jobs or have been punished after their students reported on their “politically incorrect” speech. Last summer, a local state security bureau in the southeastern province of Fujian awarded a college student $1,500 for reporting on an online user spreading “anti-revolutionary information.” For many Chinese online users, the Great Firewall is seen as necessary to ward off the information and ideological imposition from the West. And after the Kremlin followed suit this month, banning many foreign websites, many in China cheered the decision. “It’s very necessary to build the Great Firewall,” wrote the Weibo user @icebear_Like_. “Ideology is also a battlefront.”

China’s information dark age could be Russia’s future

Chinese authorities have reportedly drafted a&nbsp;regulation which would punish people who help internet users bypass its "Great firewall" and provide access to content not passed by regulators.

The proposed rule is still under consultation. It was unveiled over the weekend as China continues its clampdown on internet freedom.

The development comes as US tech giant Microsoft announced last month that it will be closing its career social site LinkedIn over "challenging operating environment".

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/technology/chinese-internet-watchdog-says-33-mobile-apps-broke-data-privacy-rules-382522">Also Read:&nbsp;Chinese internet watchdog says 33 mobile apps broke data privacy rules</a>

Microsoft said it was facing "compliance requirements" in China. The company's career site was launched in 2014.&nbsp;

China's "Great Firewall" has increasingly become the focus of international attention after authorities restricted local internet giants accusing them of monopolistic practices and failing to ensure privacy of users.

Watch:&nbsp;Dissident Chinese artist highlights China's poor record

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/dissident-chinese-artist-badiucaos-exhibition-in-italy-highlights-chinas-poor-record-429519/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

China's social media giant Tencent had taken a hit in revenues after regulatory crackdown. Last month, China's State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) had said large platforms needed to do more to ensure data protection.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/one-year-since-jack-mas-speech-alibaba-has-lost-344-billion-report-423908">Also Read:&nbsp;One year since Jack Ma's speech, Alibaba has lost $344 billion</a>

The SAMR instructed the "super-large platforms" with over 500 million users not to take data from users without their consent as it targeted the big local giants Tencent and Alibaba.

Last year Chinese regulators had launched an anti-trust investigation into Alibaba's founder Jack Ma's business and had suspended his&nbsp;multi-billion dollar IPO of his fintech firm Ant Group. China's e-commerce giant faced a massive $2.75 billion fine as Ma's net worth plunged.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/china-issues-draft-guidelines-for-internet-recommendation-algorithms-408694">Also Read:&nbsp;China issues draft guidelines for internet recommendation algorithms</a>

Authorities took the step after Ma reportedly said in a speech that the country's financial watchdogs were stifling innovation.&nbsp;

(With inputs from Agencies)

Chinese authorities have reportedly drafted a regulation which would punish people who help internet users bypass its "Great firewall" and provide access to content not passed by regulators.

Chinese authorities have reportedly drafted a regulation which would punish people who help internet users bypass its "Great firewall" and provide access to content not passed by regulators. The proposed rule is still under consultation. It was unveiled over the weekend as China continues its clampdown on internet freedom. The development comes as US tech giant Microsoft announced last month that it will be closing its career social site LinkedIn over "challenging operating environment". Also Read: Chinese internet watchdog says 33 mobile apps broke data privacy rules Microsoft said it was facing "compliance requirements" in China. The company's career site was launched in 2014. China's "Great Firewall" has increasingly become the focus of international attention after authorities restricted local internet giants accusing them of monopolistic practices and failing to ensure privacy of users. Watch: Dissident Chinese artist highlights China's poor record China's social media giant Tencent had taken a hit in revenues after regulatory crackdown. Last month, China's State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) had said large platforms needed to do more to ensure data protection. Also Read: One year since Jack Ma's speech, Alibaba has lost $344 billion The SAMR instructed the "super-large platforms" with over 500 million users not to take data from users without their consent as it targeted the big local giants Tencent and Alibaba. Last year Chinese regulators had launched an anti-trust investigation into Alibaba's founder Jack Ma's business and had suspended his multi-billion dollar IPO of his fintech firm Ant Group. China's e-commerce giant faced a massive $2.75 billion fine as Ma's net worth plunged. Also Read: China issues draft guidelines for internet recommendation algorithms Authorities took the step after Ma reportedly said in a speech that the country's financial watchdogs were stifling innovation. (With inputs from Agencies)

Now, China targets individuals who help users bypass 'Great Firewall'

The encrypted messaging app Signal, recommended by Tesla's Elon Musk, appeared to have been blocked in China on Tuesday, closing off one of the last US social media platforms still freely available in the country.

Users of the free app, which has surged in popularity globally after rising privacy concerns, were unable to access it without a virtual private network (VPN).

China has deployed a vast and sophisticated system to scrub the internet of dissent and prevent citizens from accessing international social networking platforms such as Facebook and Twitter, in what is known as the "Great Firewall".

Also read|&nbsp; <a href="https://www.wionews.com/technology/party-over-chinese-users-of-clubhouse-app-say-experiencing-internet-access-disruptions-362362">'Party over': Chinese users of Clubhouse app say experiencing internet access disruptions</a>

Signal's website has been banned since at least March 15, according to the GreatFire.org website which tracks online censorship in China, although the app remains available on China's App Store.

The app was already unavailable on third-party Android stores in China, where Google services are largely blocked.

On several occasions, the app had previously stopped working in China without VPN with no reason given, only for usage to resume.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/elon-musk-asks-people-to-use-signal-app-instead-of-whatsapp-and-facebook-over-privacy-issues-355704">Elon Musk asks people to use Signal app instead of WhatsApp and Facebook over privacy issues</a>

Signal&nbsp;saw a surge in downloads worldwide after January 6 when WhatsApp updated its privacy terms, reserving the right to share user data, including location and phone number, with its parent Facebook Inc and units such as Instagram and Messenger.

Signal&nbsp;had been downloaded close to 510,000 times on iOS in China, and has been downloaded 100 million times worldwide on the App Store and Google Play combined, according to data company Sensor Tower.

The WhatsApp policy update, later delayed,&nbsp;concerned how merchants using WhatsApp to chat with customers can share data with Facebook, which could use the information for targeted ads, according to the social network.

Signal has stopped working without a VPN occasionally before, although service resumed afterwards.

Co-founder of GreatFire.org Martin Johnson said&nbsp;that its data showed that the app was briefly unavailable in the App Store in&nbsp;2019.

Last month China closed down the Clubhouse app in China, an audio platform which boomed briefly in the country for uncensored discussion of taboo topics.

Tencent's all-in-one mobile app WeChat is China's dominant messaging app, with its payment functions and other services, boasts more than a billion users globally.

The encrypted messaging app Signal, recommended by Tesla's Elon Musk, appeared to have been blocked in China on Tuesday, closing off one of the last US social media platforms still freely available in the country.

The encrypted messaging app Signal, recommended by Tesla's Elon Musk, appeared to have been blocked in China on Tuesday, closing off one of the last US social media platforms still freely available in the country. Users of the free app, which has surged in popularity globally after rising privacy concerns, were unable to access it without a virtual private network (VPN). China has deployed a vast and sophisticated system to scrub the internet of dissent and prevent citizens from accessing international social networking platforms such as Facebook and Twitter, in what is known as the "Great Firewall". Also read| 'Party over': Chinese users of Clubhouse app say experiencing internet access disruptions Signal's website has been banned since at least March 15, according to the GreatFire.org website which tracks online censorship in China, although the app remains available on China's App Store. The app was already unavailable on third-party Android stores in China, where Google services are largely blocked. On several occasions, the app had previously stopped working in China without VPN with no reason given, only for usage to resume. Also read: Elon Musk asks people to use Signal app instead of WhatsApp and Facebook over privacy issues Signal saw a surge in downloads worldwide after January 6 when WhatsApp updated its privacy terms, reserving the right to share user data, including location and phone number, with its parent Facebook Inc and units such as Instagram and Messenger. Signal had been downloaded close to 510,000 times on iOS in China, and has been downloaded 100 million times worldwide on the App Store and Google Play combined, according to data company Sensor Tower. The WhatsApp policy update, later delayed, concerned how merchants using WhatsApp to chat with customers can share data with Facebook, which could use the information for targeted ads, according to the social network. Signal has stopped working without a VPN occasionally before, although service resumed afterwards. Co-founder of GreatFire.org Martin Johnson said that its data showed that the app was briefly unavailable in the App Store in 2019. Last month China closed down the Clubhouse app in China, an audio platform which boomed briefly in the country for uncensored discussion of taboo topics. Tencent's all-in-one mobile app WeChat is China's dominant messaging app, with its payment functions and other services, boasts more than a billion users globally.

Encrypted messaging app Signal no longer working in China

An app launched by China's Tuber by a cybersecurity firm Qihoo 360 disappeared after it gave the country’s internet users access to Facebook and Google which are banned in the Communist country.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/technology/quantum-leap-united-states-unveils-blueprint-for-virtually-unhackable-internet-315799">Also Read:&nbsp;'Quantum' leap: United States unveils blueprint for virtually 'unhackable internet'</a>

The App also allowed Chinese citizens to legally access Youtube and Instagram photos without resorting to the illegal virtual private network(VPN). However, it disappeared from &nbsp;Huawei's app store.

China controls all access to the Internet in the country with users allowed to access only government sanctioned sites. Tuber was reportedly dowloaded five million times on Huawei’s App store.

The new app had allowed millions of Chinese to bypass the state-controlled Great Firewall. After it was launched, it required personal information from users namely names and identity card numbers even as some users complained it too slow.

Qihoo 360 is owned by China's tech tycoon Zhou Hongyi who had delisted his company from the New York stock exchange four years ago and aligned itself to China's policies. The US had earlier this year sanctioned Zhou’s two companies over national security concerns.

The US government had earlier clamped down on China's popular video-sharing app TikTok over security concerns. US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said following the Trump administration's line had said that TikTok must become a "US-based company controlled by US investors".

However, China's Xi Jinping regime accused Trump of "bullying" and "abusing national power" in its bid to take over TikTok.

An app launched by China's Tuber by a cybersecurity firm Qihoo 360 disappeared after it gave the country’s internet users access to Facebook and Google which are banned in the Communist country.

An app launched by China's Tuber by a cybersecurity firm Qihoo 360 disappeared after it gave the country’s internet users access to Facebook and Google which are banned in the Communist country. Also Read: 'Quantum' leap: United States unveils blueprint for virtually 'unhackable internet' The App also allowed Chinese citizens to legally access Youtube and Instagram photos without resorting to the illegal virtual private network(VPN). However, it disappeared from Huawei's app store. China controls all access to the Internet in the country with users allowed to access only government sanctioned sites. Tuber was reportedly dowloaded five million times on Huawei’s App store. The new app had allowed millions of Chinese to bypass the state-controlled Great Firewall. After it was launched, it required personal information from users namely names and identity card numbers even as some users complained it too slow. Qihoo 360 is owned by China's tech tycoon Zhou Hongyi who had delisted his company from the New York stock exchange four years ago and aligned itself to China's policies. The US had earlier this year sanctioned Zhou’s two companies over national security concerns. The US government had earlier clamped down on China's popular video-sharing app TikTok over security concerns. US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said following the Trump administration's line had said that TikTok must become a "US-based company controlled by US investors". However, China's Xi Jinping regime accused Trump of "bullying" and "abusing national power" in its bid to take over TikTok.

China's Tuber app bypasses Great Firewall, then disappears

An app launched this week in China allows access to some content on Western social media sites long banned domestically such as YouTube, marking the first product by a major Chinese tech firm that helps internet users bypass the Great Firewall.

Tuber was launched on third-party Android stores in China by a subsidiary of Qihoo 360, the biggest Chinese cybersecurity firm. The app, which has since seen millions of downloads, is not available on the Apple store just yet.

While such proxy apps are not new in China, where a virtual private network (VPN) service is typically needed to allow domestic users passage to sites such as Google or Facebook, the arrival of Tuber suggests a slight lowering of the Great Firewall.

While welcomed by internet users in China, some complained about the app`s slowness. References to sensitive political issues such as the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown and the Hong Kong protests were also censored in part, according to Reuters checks.

Users of the app must also register with personal information such as their identity card numbers and real names, while being warned against flouting state interests and going against the country`s socialist system.

Qihoo 360 could not immediately be reached for comment.

An app launched this week in China allows access to some content on Western social media sites long banned domestically such as YouTube, marking the first product by a major Chinese tech firm that helps internet users bypass the Great Firewall.

An app launched this week in China allows access to some content on Western social media sites long banned domestically such as YouTube, marking the first product by a major Chinese tech firm that helps internet users bypass the Great Firewall. Tuber was launched on third-party Android stores in China by a subsidiary of Qihoo 360, the biggest Chinese cybersecurity firm. The app, which has since seen millions of downloads, is not available on the Apple store just yet. While such proxy apps are not new in China, where a virtual private network (VPN) service is typically needed to allow domestic users passage to sites such as Google or Facebook, the arrival of Tuber suggests a slight lowering of the Great Firewall. While welcomed by internet users in China, some complained about the app`s slowness. References to sensitive political issues such as the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown and the Hong Kong protests were also censored in part, according to Reuters checks. Users of the app must also register with personal information such as their identity card numbers and real names, while being warned against flouting state interests and going against the country`s socialist system. Qihoo 360 could not immediately be reached for comment.

Chinese app allows small glimpse beyond 'Great Firewall'

In today&rsquo;s time, blogs, forums and the likes are the breakthroughs in citizen development. Social media platforms through the access of the Internet has become a way for people to engage in issues they wish to express their opinion on, influence the government and maintain their anonymity as well.

But not all is well with the governments supporting this citizen development. People are facing penalties and getting arrested for sharing and publishing content in the name of cybersecurity or as the critics call it cyber sovereignty. According to a report from freedom house, a pro-democracy think tank, Internet freedom around the world declined in 2016 for the sixth consecutive year. It listed China dead last out of all nations surveyed.

The Great Firewall of China, not a physical barrier but a virtual one, prevents harmful information from entering the country. Apparently, it seems it was not enough as China&rsquo;s cyber administration has recently released a new cybersecurity law to tighten control and strengthen the oversight mechanism over Internet discussion.&nbsp;

These regulations demand that all social media users register accounts only with proper identification; a prior censorship for all Internet comments in the form of first approve then post system; Internet companies to assist public security organisations in protecting national security, and allowing the state to establish undefined systems for cybersecurity monitoring.

In addition to the above mentioned monitoring requirements, the law mandates that personal information and other important data collected in China must be stored on servers physically located within mainland China. The law also requires firms that operate critical information infrastructure to comply with all other obligations created by law or administrative regulation.&nbsp;

Moreover, local and overseas firms are required to submit to security checks and their business licenses can be revoked for serious violations.

The sad part about these restrictions is the lack of definitional detail present in them. There is no precise enumeration of which sectors constitute critical information infrastructure that requires enhanced cybersecurity measures. The guidelines mentioned in the law are written in vague terminology and absent official guidance, increasing the scope of state authority in an ambiguous manner.

The requirement for the companies to verify an individual&rsquo;s real identity before providing Internet services nullifies the blessing of being anonymous to users. The extensive terms and conditions of the law also present huge problems for foreign corporations attempting to comply with it. International law firms are worried that companies could be asked to provide source code, encryption, or other crucial information for review by the authorities, increasing the risk of this information being lost, passed on to local competitors, or used by the authorities themselves.&nbsp;

Moreover, these companies now face at least four separate security audits by different Chinese government agencies with unclear jurisdictions. This new cybersecurity law is not only curbing freedom of expression but can also be used for political purposes to delay or block market access. It can damage global trade in services and disrupt cross-border transfers of information that are routine in the ordinary course of business. The law has also raised concerns among foreign companies over greater data controls as well as increased risks of intellectual property theft.

Government-backed Internet commentators can flood the web in China with pro-regime propaganda. It can also threaten to shut down foreign technology companies out of various sectors considered critical. The Economist has warned that the new law could well constitute &lsquo;a Trojan horse designed to promote China&rsquo;s aggressive policy of indigenous innovation. &nbsp;Also, the substantial investment by Chinese technology firms in recent years to establish domestic data centres is believed to bolster the domestic Chinese data management and telecommunications industry against global competitors.

Moreover, China&rsquo;s refusal to accede to the Budapest Convention on Cyber Crime reflects its developing state-centric approach to international agreements on cyberspace. The Convention is a multilateral agreement that serves as a framework for international cooperation on cybercrime and a guide for the development of national cybercrime legislation

The proponents of this law have called it an information security policy. It is linked with Xi Jinping&rsquo;s dictum that without cyber security there is no national security. It can be used to counter threats of hacking, terrorism and other cyber crimes. Though, the reality for the critics is far from the objective. China hopes to reap the economic benefits of cyber-development while actively shaping and constraining the ideas available to the country&rsquo;s citizens. It is moving its model of Internet sovereignty for the world by making it a legal reality at home.

Internet censorship in this information age is hard to gulp in seeing the overwhelming presence of real-time news and data availability. Cyber powers all around the world need to talk about in practical technological and human terms. If China calls its cybersecurity policy as an information security policy, then international information security and the peace in cyberspace is highly questioned. For the people of China, living in a society where speech and expression can be freely exchanged is becoming a distant reality. 
&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

People are facing penalties and getting arrested for sharing and publishing content in the name of cybersecurity or as the critics call it cyber sovereignty.

In today’s time, blogs, forums and the likes are the breakthroughs in citizen development. Social media platforms through the access of the Internet has become a way for people to engage in issues they wish to express their opinion on, influence the government and maintain their anonymity as well. But not all is well with the governments supporting this citizen development. People are facing penalties and getting arrested for sharing and publishing content in the name of cybersecurity or as the critics call it cyber sovereignty. According to a report from freedom house, a pro-democracy think tank, Internet freedom around the world declined in 2016 for the sixth consecutive year. It listed China dead last out of all nations surveyed. The Great Firewall of China, not a physical barrier but a virtual one, prevents harmful information from entering the country. Apparently, it seems it was not enough as China’s cyber administration has recently released a new cybersecurity law to tighten control and strengthen the oversight mechanism over Internet discussion. These regulations demand that all social media users register accounts only with proper identification; a prior censorship for all Internet comments in the form of first approve then post system; Internet companies to assist public security organisations in protecting national security, and allowing the state to establish undefined systems for cybersecurity monitoring. In addition to the above mentioned monitoring requirements, the law mandates that personal information and other important data collected in China must be stored on servers physically located within mainland China. The law also requires firms that operate critical information infrastructure to comply with all other obligations created by law or administrative regulation. Moreover, local and overseas firms are required to submit to security checks and their business licenses can be revoked for serious violations. The sad part about these restrictions is the lack of definitional detail present in them. There is no precise enumeration of which sectors constitute critical information infrastructure that requires enhanced cybersecurity measures. The guidelines mentioned in the law are written in vague terminology and absent official guidance, increasing the scope of state authority in an ambiguous manner. The requirement for the companies to verify an individual’s real identity before providing Internet services nullifies the blessing of being anonymous to users. The extensive terms and conditions of the law also present huge problems for foreign corporations attempting to comply with it. International law firms are worried that companies could be asked to provide source code, encryption, or other crucial information for review by the authorities, increasing the risk of this information being lost, passed on to local competitors, or used by the authorities themselves. Moreover, these companies now face at least four separate security audits by different Chinese government agencies with unclear jurisdictions. This new cybersecurity law is not only curbing freedom of expression but can also be used for political purposes to delay or block market access. It can damage global trade in services and disrupt cross-border transfers of information that are routine in the ordinary course of business. The law has also raised concerns among foreign companies over greater data controls as well as increased risks of intellectual property theft. Government-backed Internet commentators can flood the web in China with pro-regime propaganda. It can also threaten to shut down foreign technology companies out of various sectors considered critical. The Economist has warned that the new law could well constitute ‘a Trojan horse designed to promote China’s aggressive policy of indigenous innovation. Also, the substantial investment by Chinese technology firms in recent years to establish domestic data centres is believed to bolster the domestic Chinese data management and telecommunications industry against global competitors. Moreover, China’s refusal to accede to the Budapest Convention on Cyber Crime reflects its developing state-centric approach to international agreements on cyberspace. The Convention is a multilateral agreement that serves as a framework for international cooperation on cybercrime and a guide for the development of national cybercrime legislation The proponents of this law have called it an information security policy. It is linked with Xi Jinping’s dictum that without cyber security there is no national security. It can be used to counter threats of hacking, terrorism and other cyber crimes. Though, the reality for the critics is far from the objective. China hopes to reap the economic benefits of cyber-development while actively shaping and constraining the ideas available to the country’s citizens. It is moving its model of Internet sovereignty for the world by making it a legal reality at home. Internet censorship in this information age is hard to gulp in seeing the overwhelming presence of real-time news and data availability. Cyber powers all around the world need to talk about in practical technological and human terms. If China calls its cybersecurity policy as an information security policy, then international information security and the peace in cyberspace is highly questioned. For the people of China, living in a society where speech and expression can be freely exchanged is becoming a distant reality. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: Is China curtailing freedom in the name of cybersecurity?