How Egypt Shutdown the Internet Drew Steptoe April 18th, 2011 CSCE 390 Professor Valtorta References: - JAMES GLANZ. “Egypt Leaders Found ‘Off’ Switch for Internet”. New York Times. February 15, The New York Times Company. - ALEX PASTERNACK. “Egypt, Net Neutrality, and the Ethics of Internet Suicide”. Motherboard.tv. January 30, Motherboard-IPTV LLC.

Article Summary On 02/14/11, Former Egyptian President Mubarak nearly shutdown the internet throughout all of Egypt. The shutdown was done in a matter of minutes and lasted approximately 5 days. The move was seen as shocking to many technological experts. The internet is well known for its robustness and accessibility. Egypt managed to accomplish this by withdrawing over 3,500 BGP routes. This heavily affected nearly every ISP (and every ISP customer) in Egypt. Most of the routes are connected to a very limited number of international portals that are tightly controlled by the Government. These portals are connected to servers hosted by companies such as Google and Yahoo. In turn, this caused many domestic network problems since these servers were hosted in a different country.

8-Step Decision Making Process 1) The ethical issue lies with the government having the power to restrict internet access to not only its own people, but to outside people as well. 2) The two primary stakeholders are the (former) Egyptian government and the Egyptian people. The Egyptian government's desired outcome was to suppress communication between citizens who desired to overthrow the Egyptian government. The Egyptian people's desired outcome was to be able to communicate freely and embrace their right to access the Internet. 3) The 1 st extreme solution would be to cut off all access to the internet (which is what was nearly accomplished). The 2 nd extreme solution is to allow free, unrestricted access to the internet. A “compromise” solution would be to allow access to most sites, but to restrict others. The best-case outcome for either party would be their respective extreme solution, and the worst-case outcome would be the opposite extreme solution. I would be perfectly fine with the worst- case outcome for the Egyptian Government, and I would refuse to tolerate the worst-case outcome for the Egyptian People.

8-Step Decision Making Process 4) Not only would I permit everyone to use the solution I chose, I would encourage everyone to chose it. I believe it is the right of the individual to access the Internet if they so chose and use it as a means of communication between other individuals. This is regardless of any intent. 5) I believe this solution is natural, as most people naturally desire freedom. This solution may be viewed as a little excessive (hate speech, dangerous information, etc.), but ultimately it is the policy adapted by most countries in the world. 6) This solution would likely illicit a majority agreement that it is the most efficient means to an end. I believe sharing knowledge easily and quickly will produce the greatest good for the greatest number of people. 7) I am definitely committed to this solution within my own conscience. I was raised on the belief of embracing your own personal freedom as a citizen of the United States, and this is a decision I embraced without outside influence. 8) Idealism seemed to play the greatest role in my solution. While I am mostly a realist at heart, I believe the sharing of information should be uninhibited by outside influences such as a government entity.

ACM Code The action of cutting off the internet to the majority of the Egyptian people harmed human well-being as it prevented the people from acting against oppression. It also failed to respect the opinion of the people and instead only acted in the interest of the government. The government did not take any precaution to not discriminate against its own people and did not treat them fairly. Legally, this did not violate many laws as the action was performed by the governing entity itself. Due to the totalitarian nature of the government, they had no “contract” to honor with the people. However, this obviously violated section 2.7 of the code as this action did the exact opposite of sharing technical knowledge. Nearly the entire 3 rd section of the ACM Code was violated in the government's action. They failed to serve public interest, degraded the quality of life in for its citizens, enforced unestablished rules of organizational computer resources, and failed to support policies that protected the dignity of the users. While the Egyptian government has no relation to ACM, they would have likely had any relationship with the organization terminated after their actions. This is especially true since the government no longer exists and was overthrown by the people they failed to serve.