Photo of a puppet

Mapping How Autocrats Retain Control Over Internet Infrastructure

Picture of Eda Keremoglu
Guest Author | Political Scientist, University of Konstanz
Categories:
Twitter logo
LinkedIn logo
Facebook logo
June 18, 2024

Control of the Internet is commonplace in autocratic countries and is usually associated with shutting it down, surveilling digital data, or censoring online information.

Governments can enact most state interference methods by collaborating with Internet Service Providers (ISPs). Still, interference is more effective when incumbents can directly influence networks through the underlying infrastructure.

My colleagues and I from the University of Konstanz, Northeastern University, Northwestern University, Georgia Institute of Technology, and the University of California San Diego recently studied the network topology in democratic and autocratic countries. We found that authoritarian governments exert considerable control over infrastructure at home and abroad through governmentally-owned ISPs.

Autocratic Governments Leverage Transit Providers

While most Internet users know about access providers (ISPs) that connect them to the Internet, our study also maps state influence over transit service provision.

Transit providers serve as the backbone of the infrastructure and function as central nodes that can connect several customer networks to the global Internet. They can be large and invisible to ordinary users, making them an efficient means of control.

During our study, we mapped their influence by using Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) data, which provides information on network routes that traffic can take, and assessed the presence of state and nonstate providers. We then linked information on the influence of governmental and private companies to information on the political system in a given country, differentiating between democratic and authoritarian regimes.

State engagement in transit service provision is more pronounced in autocratic than democratic countries. This means that a substantial share of traffic crosses governmental networks in autocracies, and political incumbents retain a more central role in relaying data flows from the country to the global Internet.

In Figure 1, we plot the country-level transit influence of individual providers operating domestically in democracies (right) and autocracies (left).

Scatter plot with average lines showing Country-level transit influence (CTI) of individual state (yellow) vs. nonstate (green) providers operating domestically for non-democratic (low values of the electoral democracy index (V-Dem), left) and democratic countries (right). Higher CTI values denote higher influence.
Figure 1 — Country-level transit influence (CTI) of individual state (yellow) vs. nonstate (green) providers operating domestically for non-democratic (low values of the electoral democracy index (V-Dem), left) and democratic countries (right). Higher CTI values denote higher influence. See paper.

The plot shows that more authoritarian countries’ state providers (yellow) are more influential, as indicated by the higher transit influence score. For instance, state ISPs in Cameroon and Uzbekistan are highly influential in providing transit service to a substantial share of users in their countries. As states can operate more than one provider, the relative prevalence of all governmental networks on Internet routes reaching higher fractions of IP addresses is substantial.

In democracies, conversely, customer networks rely on transit services by both private and state companies.

While access providers can monitor and manipulate digital data, autocratic and democratic governments do not significantly differ in providing access services to their respective citizens.

Overall, non-democratic governments’ engagement in the Internet business as transit providers gives them considerable leverage over digital data flows while reducing accountability and the risk of political backlash.

Box and whiskers graph showing the predicted country-level transit influence (CTIn) of all domestic state (yellow) vs. nonstate (green) providers in autocratic countries.
Figure 2 — Predicted country-level transit influence (CTIn) of all domestic state (yellow) vs. nonstate (green) providers in autocratic countries. See paper.

Cooperation Among Autocratic States

Many ISPs also offer their services abroad. While transit service by autocratic governments is marginal outside of domestic borders, state companies operate internationally as access providers. They mainly engage in Internet business in politically similar countries, providing substantial access services to customer households in foreign autocracies.

Our study does not find this pattern for democratically-owned ISPs. This underlines the political logic of international cooperation between autocratic states, which provides domestic and foreign governments with means of control over the Internet.

Scatter plot showing address space serviced by individual governmental access providers according to the level of democracy of the providing country (x-axis) and the country that receives the service (y-axis), with higher levels indicating more democratic states (0 = autocratic, 1 = democratic). The size of the yellow dots represents the share of address space serviced by individual providers.
Figure 3 — Address space serviced by individual governmental access providers according to the level of democracy of the providing country (x-axis) and the country that receives the service (y-axis), with higher levels indicating more democratic states (0 = autocratic, 1 = democratic). The size of the yellow dots represents the share of address space serviced by individual providers. See paper.

Controlling Infrastructure Is Only One Means To Control the Internet

Overall, the network infrastructure in autocracies is organized to offer domestic and foreign non-democratic governments capabilities to monitor and manipulate data flows on the Internet. While the infrastructure provides direct and efficient means of control, it is only one part of the overall repertoire autocratic governments rely on.

Autocratic governments often pressure private companies that do business under their jurisdiction to comply with government regulations, which also secures their influence over nonstate providers’ customers. These measures are widely criticized for their fragmentation qualities and impact on Internet freedom and access to information.

Contributors: Nils B. Weidmann, Alexander Gamero-Garrido, Esteban Carisimo, Alberto Dainotti, Alex C. Snoeren

Eda Keremoglu is a political scientist at the University of Konstanz. Her research focus is on autocracies and the political role of the Internet.

The views expressed by the authors of this blog are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Internet Society.