PAKISTAN`S internet has once again found itself under the digital microscope. In recent months, users have experienced sluggish speeds, difficulty downloading media on WhatsApp, and intermittent connectivity issues.

Instead of addressing the root cause behind widespread outcry and economic concerns, the government`s obfuscation on rumours about a `firewall` continues the latest excuse for persistent crawling speeds being too much VPN use or `faulty submarine cables`.

While there is no transparency from the government or the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) about the scale and scope of the country`s internet infrastructureplans, there is ample precedent that suggests what might be at play and why theauthorities must come clean.

Existing capabilities to filter content Amidst a smokescreen of explanations, the government has acknowledged updating a web management system (WMS) for `increased cyber security`. According to the PTA, deployment of the WMS has been underway since December 2023. Meanwhile, industry sources said the government plans to complete the testing and installation of the system by the end of this month.So, what is the WMS? Acquired in 2018 from the controversial company Sandvine, which is known for its Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) technology that can identify traffic coming from VPNs and then block or hinder VPN traffic using techniques like packet dropping, rate limiting, or redirection and surveillance capabilities, the system would allow the telecom watchdog to monitor all internet traffic going in and out of Pakistan.

As per the Sandvine contract, which expired in 2023, the system allowed URL filtering, IP blocking, including complete blocking of websites, and VPN whitelisting.

Industry sources told Dawn that the new system was more advanced and could throttle and limit content on an application basis. `Previously you would be able to block YouTube as a whole but now they can throttle specific apps and block individual pieces of content,` they claimed.

Disruptions to specific apps, sites Governments employ different types of content filtering techniques with the potential to not only disrupt specific targeted services but also negatively impact overall internet performance. In practice, `national firewalls` andsimilar internet censorship technologies are just one tool in the box of mass surveillance systems. These range from URL and IP filtering to application-based filtering and traffic shaping/throttling.

For instance, traffic throttling controls the bandwidth available to specific types of traffic, websites or applications. This can slow down or limit access to these services without blocking them. `We wit-nessed this issue in Pakistan late last year (2023) when many users complained about throttling of Twitter services, said Aftab Siddiqui of Internet Society.

`It is common knowledge that PTA has been doing URL, IP, DNS level filtering for many years, he added.

Companies like Sandvine have provided internet-blocking capabilities to regimes such asAzerbaijan, Jordan, Turkiye and Egypt. In particular, DPI technology has allowed authoritarian governments like Russia to throttle X (erstwhile Twitter) and restrict access to VPNs.

According to US-based internet observatory Censored Planet`s analysis, in Russia, DPI technology targeted X traffic, filtering messages to and from its domains and throttling speeds below 150kbps, rendering it unusable. In 2022, Rest of World also documented how governments were increasingly throttling services instead of completely blocking platforms to disguise censorship as a technical error or localised outage.

Many technologies or one `firewall`? Content filtering at the national gateway level typically involves a combination of technologies rather than relying on a single `firewall` system, Internet Society explained.

National-level content or application filtering usually employs a multi-layered approach. This can include firewalls doing DPI, DNS filtering, URL filtering and IP filtering, among other techniques.

Each layer serves a specific purpose, such as blocking specific URLs, preventing DNS resolution of certain domains, or inspecting the content of data packets to identify and filter out undesired content. `It is not known what Pakistan isimplementing but most likely a combination of all as mentioned above,` said Mr Siddiqui.

Hajira Maryam, an Amnesty Tech spokesperson, told Dawn that these systems take different forms, but typically involve telecom operators in a country installing internet and telephone monitoring technology, as requested by communication regulators or security agencies.

Some governments, she continued, use national firewalls and censorship technology to block certain websites and online content to control what people can see and say on the internet. For example, countries like Algeria, China, Iran, Russia and Vietnam have blocked websites of human rights organisations including Amnesty International, to limit access to information about rights violations.

As highlighted by Amnesty Tech, the use of such national firewalls and censorship technology can stop people from freely sharing their opinions, accessing accurate information, and participating in open discussions.

`Unless these restrictions are fair, legal, and necessary, they can violate fundamental human rights like freedom of expression and access to information, said Ms Maryam.

Hitting Pakistan`s internet infrastructure Unlike other countries,Pakistan`s international connectivity lacks path diversity as it is highly concentrated at both the physical and logical layers.

According to French researcher Nowmay Opalinski, who has published a study titled The Quest for a Resilient Internet Access in a Constrained Geopolitical Environment, the shape of the internet in Pakistan is helping authorities to have some control over it.

`Since the structure of Pakistan`s network is concentrated, it is easier to apply firewall tools as you don`t need to apply tech to a large number of routes. Yet such a concentrated structure brings resilience vulnerabilities, he said.

`Because only a few ISPs, mainly two (PTCL and Transworld), concentrate the bulk of Pakistan`s Internet traffic which constantly goes out of the country`s border because of the lack of local hosting (which stands at 11 per cent according to ISOC), whenever a fault on the infrastructure of these two providers happen, the quality of the connection in the whole country gets downgraded.

On the other hand, Doug Madory, dubbed `the man who can see the Internet` by the Washington Post, said, `Pakistan is a country that has, over the years, struggled with Internet connectivity for a variety of reasons.

`The country has onlytwo international gateways (PTCL and Transworld) and is dependent on a handful of submarine cables. These cables occasionally suffer faults, and when they do, Pakistan has always seemed to be impacted especially hard.

Adding a new national censorship system is likely to compound the connectivity problems faced by Pakistanis,` he said.

Mr Madory further noted that Pakistan appeared to still be dealing with the impacts of the SMW4 cut on June 17, whenPTCL completelylost three international transit providers which reduced the company`s international bandwidth and potentially increased latency to certain services.

With international connectivity concentrated along a few physical and logical routes, implementing content filtering at the gateway while considered an easy task for authorities could exacerbate the risk of single points of failure, emphasises the Internet Society.

`Any disruption, whether due to filtering misconfigurations, equipment failure, or targeted attacks, could lead to widespread internet outages, affecting large portions of the country,` said Mr Siddiqui.

Another issue is the lack of locally hosted popular content. Globally, a large portion of content is delivered through local cachesand Content Delivery Network (CDN) nodes within the country.

However, the Pulse Country Report highlighted that only 13pc of the popular content accessed by users in Pakistan comes from these local sources. For the remaining content, every request must leave the country, passing through these content filters or national gateways.

Additionally, the lack of local peering means that even local traffic often must be routed through external networks, which further exacerbates these issues, shared Mr Siddiqui.

Industry sources confirmed to Dawn that recently most peering with international servers was either depicting high utilisation or choking in some instances. They hinted that gateway-level deployment at the two largest CDN providers would be enough to control and monitor internet traffic in Pakistan but also significantly increase costs and latency.

`Certain countries such as Iran and China have managed to balance both control and resilience through a more complex network architecture, but this needs a high level of planification and major investments, which currently is not in sight in anyways in Pakistan,` warned Mr Opalinski.

A detailed version of this article can be accessed on Dawn.com