Roskomnadzor and the Prosecutor General's Office exceeded authority when blocking Telegram
On August 6, a court hearing took place (I recommend reading the broadcast, sometimes ridiculous) at the suit of the Live Photography company against Roskomnadzor and the General Prosecutor's Office. Roskomnadzor, in attempts to disrupt the work of Telegram on the territory of Russia, massively blocked millions of addresses of popular hosting sites, causing the Live Photo site to suffer. The basis for blocking is the famous “rubber” resolution of the Prosecutor General’s Office.
The result is a bit predictable - the plaintiff’s claims (to recognize the blocking as illegal, which opened up the possibility to recover lost profits) were not satisfied by the court.
More interesting is that Roskomnadzor is forced to pull out the resolution itself. Which up to this point refused to present to the public, referring to the fact that he is not obliged to do so. True and at the same time the department managed to cheat. Until May 17, the network was blocked by order 27-31-2015 / Id4082-15, and since May 17, the document number in the registry suddenly changed to 27-31-2018 / Id2971-18. The rhetorical question - and what was possible?
As the saying goes, with a black sheep even a tuft of wool ... we meet 27-31-2018 / Id2971-18 . Inside:
These powers are listed in federal law 149-ФЗ “On information, information technologies and information protection” (Article 15.3). Anyone can make sure that not a word about the services that allow to bypass the lock is not there.
Such services are referred to in clause 15.8 . But there is no word about the Prosecutor General’s Office.
In the Prosecutor General’s Office itself they came to the conclusion that the department cannot be a defendant in the lawsuit. That is, they did not give orders to block the Live Photo site. Therefore, the violation allowed Roskomnadzor? Nice touch: a representative of the prosecutor's office complained that information flies through the Internet too quickly, and it’s tiring to write requests every time, so they ask Roskomnadzor to look for what to block.
Firstly, 10+ million addresses do not fit the definition of “mirrors” simply because most of them have no trace of Telegram. It is like bombing Voronezh, because somewhere in the city a terrorist is hiding.
Secondly, it is unclear how the actions of the department relate to the same article 15.3 , which clearly describes the procedures for restricting access. Believe me, there is not a word that a whole network should be blocked (65536 IP addresses) due to only three (!) "Problem" addresses (the source is a reference provided by the Roskomnadzor Tagansky Court).
Thirdly, the terms of the procedure have been violated. There is a ruling with a long and unspeakable title., according to which a notice is first sent to the site owner and hosting provider, and only after 3 days the resource is sent to the ban.
And what about the timing in our case? April 16 comes the "rubber decree" of the Prosecutor General. On April 18, the ILF “calculates” the addresses and on the same day enters the registry. Do not pull for three days, right?
Cherry on the cake: the screenshots from the reference show how an ILV officer trying to catch a Telegram on the Amazon network gets ... into the Digital Ocean.
After that, you understand that in every joke there is some truth. Perhaps Roskomnadzor really planted a couple of employees in the basement with Wireshark, a supply of food and an order not to release until Telegram is blocked?
I express my gratitude to the human rights group "Agora", which provided the documents, as well as to the restless Philand the channel "For Telecom" .
The result is a bit predictable - the plaintiff’s claims (to recognize the blocking as illegal, which opened up the possibility to recover lost profits) were not satisfied by the court.
More interesting is that Roskomnadzor is forced to pull out the resolution itself. Which up to this point refused to present to the public, referring to the fact that he is not obliged to do so. True and at the same time the department managed to cheat. Until May 17, the network was blocked by order 27-31-2015 / Id4082-15, and since May 17, the document number in the registry suddenly changed to 27-31-2018 / Id2971-18. The rhetorical question - and what was possible?
As the saying goes, with a black sheep even a tuft of wool ... we meet 27-31-2018 / Id2971-18 . Inside:
- links to web pages (t.me and web.telegram.org) with materials justifying the activities of ISIL and other Islamist terrorist groups
- Proxy URL and its three IP addresses
- the requirement to restrict access to these accounts, groups, as well as “mirrors” and copies, if any
Prosecutor General's Office has gone beyond its authority
These powers are listed in federal law 149-ФЗ “On information, information technologies and information protection” (Article 15.3). Anyone can make sure that not a word about the services that allow to bypass the lock is not there.
Such services are referred to in clause 15.8 . But there is no word about the Prosecutor General’s Office.
In the Prosecutor General’s Office itself they came to the conclusion that the department cannot be a defendant in the lawsuit. That is, they did not give orders to block the Live Photo site. Therefore, the violation allowed Roskomnadzor? Nice touch: a representative of the prosecutor's office complained that information flies through the Internet too quickly, and it’s tiring to write requests every time, so they ask Roskomnadzor to look for what to block.
Roskomnadzor violated regulations
Firstly, 10+ million addresses do not fit the definition of “mirrors” simply because most of them have no trace of Telegram. It is like bombing Voronezh, because somewhere in the city a terrorist is hiding.
Secondly, it is unclear how the actions of the department relate to the same article 15.3 , which clearly describes the procedures for restricting access. Believe me, there is not a word that a whole network should be blocked (65536 IP addresses) due to only three (!) "Problem" addresses (the source is a reference provided by the Roskomnadzor Tagansky Court).
Thirdly, the terms of the procedure have been violated. There is a ruling with a long and unspeakable title., according to which a notice is first sent to the site owner and hosting provider, and only after 3 days the resource is sent to the ban.
And what about the timing in our case? April 16 comes the "rubber decree" of the Prosecutor General. On April 18, the ILF “calculates” the addresses and on the same day enters the registry. Do not pull for three days, right?
Cherry on the cake: the screenshots from the reference show how an ILV officer trying to catch a Telegram on the Amazon network gets ... into the Digital Ocean.
After that, you understand that in every joke there is some truth. Perhaps Roskomnadzor really planted a couple of employees in the basement with Wireshark, a supply of food and an order not to release until Telegram is blocked?
I express my gratitude to the human rights group "Agora", which provided the documents, as well as to the restless Philand the channel "For Telecom" .
When commenting on this material, please follow the rules. Please refrain from insults and toxic behavior. Postmoderation works in comments.