Google Redirects Traffic To Avoid Kazakh Demands 169
pbahra writes "Google has rejected attempts by the Kazakh government 'to create borders on the web' and has refused a demand to house servers in the country after an official decree that all Internet domains ending with the domain suffix for Kazakhstan be domestically based. Bill Coughran, Google senior vice president said in his blog that from now on, Google will redirect users that visit google.kz to google.com in Kazakh: 'We find ourselves in a difficult situation: creating borders on the web raises important questions for us not only about network efficiency but also about user privacy and free expression. If we were to operate google.kz only via servers located inside Kazakhstan, we would be helping to create a fractured Internet.' Mr. Coughran said that unfortunately, it would mean that Kazakh users would have a poorer experience as results would no longer be customized for the former Soviet republic."
What? (Score:5, Insightful)
unfortunately, it would mean that Kazakh users would have a poorer experience as results would no longer be customized for the former Soviet republic
What is wrong with simply using something along the lines of http://www.google.com/kz/ [google.com] to customize results?
Re: (Score:1)
Or http://www.google.borat/
Re: (Score:2)
Funny thing about the situation is that this is exactly the kind of stupidity that might just happen in a Borat movie.
Re: (Score:2)
Because it wouldn't let them punish Kazakhian internet users for their governments foolish behaviour. As a result it wouldn't allow Google to implicitly threaten any other country (due to lack of economic clout and small internet using population) where a law like this might actually have a non-negligable effect with unhappy constituents as a means of preventing them from excercising their sovereign rights and obliging Google to abide the laws outside the US.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, I could have almost swallowed everything else that Google has said on the subject, but this is just grandstanding. Wikipedia manages to localise its website for tens, if not hundreds, of world languages under a single .org domain (with subdomains), so it's utterly ridiculous to think that Google couldn't do the same.
I agree in principle that a national domain registrar should be able to restrict their domain names to people and organisations with a connection to the country. Simply having a localisa
Re: (Score:2)
Already possible, even tho the country code appears to be kk.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=kk&q=russia [google.com]
You will get a similar search also when you're redirected from .kz to .com and it's not just a translated interface, the results do look country customized.
I think the poorer experience is referred to loger round trip times, impacting especially features like InstantSearch.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What I'm not understanding about the original statement is why Google needs the .kz domain when they can do a Geoip and figure out where in the world you are the minute you hit Google.com. It just seems kind of silly that the domain would be necessary in the first place, for a company that continually hires the best and brightest engineers in the world. You can't tell me that I'm smarter than the entire team at Google. Simply not possible. But if it is, I'll be happy to accept a job there, and show them how
Re: (Score:2)
In fact, Google already does this. They do not need google.kz but they want it only to increase trust among Kazakh users.
Everybody can get .com domain but the rules for getting .kz domain are more restrictive. Apparently Kazakh government requires content on .kz sites to be stored in-country to be able to exert greater control. This can have both bad and good effects; the government can shut down opposition and it also helps to prosecute fraud. In other words, .kz is like a trusted zone on the internet wher
Re: (Score:2)
In fact, Google already does this. They do not need google.kz but they want it only to increase trust among Kazakh users.
And to prevent somebody else from registering google.kz
Re: (Score:2)
I don't entirely trust GeoIPs resolution.
If I did, I would believe that I travel 1800 miles to work every morning in 20 minutes and 1800 miles home every evening in 30 minutes.
Re: (Score:2)
Dumb joke (Score:2)
Search engining of America (Score:2, Funny)
No longer make benefit glorious nation of Kazakhstan?
Re: (Score:2)
Now it take longer to find picture of my sister with boobies!
Re: (Score:2)
Mr. Coughran said that unfortunately [the demand for local servers] would mean that Kazakh users would have a poorer experience as Google has no servers capable of operating on horse urine.
Here are the actual reasons... (Score:4, Insightful)
'We find ourselves in a difficult situation: "..." "If we were to operate google.kz only via servers located inside Kazakhstan, we would be helping to create a fractured Internet.' "...".
The more plausible reason follows, thus: -
"We find ourselves in a difficult situation: If we were to operate google.kz only via servers located inside Kazakhstan, we will be backing ourselves into a corner where we could find ourselves subject to the whims of governments good and bad. Not a good move under any measure at all. We could enable governments confiscate our equipment and be subject to more blackmail.
Further, our yielding to such [outrageous] demands could mark the beginning of a torrent of similar requests from governments around the globe, disrupting our current efficient setup, which we modify/tweak without asking for any government approval.
All in all, Google will not succumb to any action and will oppose any efforts from within or without that seek to undermine the value of our shareholders.
Re: (Score:2)
In quoting, you cut out the part about questions of efficiency, then replaced it with more verbose questions about efficiency. Good job.
Will Google lose its google.kz domain? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
.. will fill the government demands.
Excuse me, have you seen this [wikipedia.org] guy? And this was one of his neighbors. [wikipedia.org]
First one still puts his face on stamps- do you seriously think there will ever be any reasonable way to "fill the government demands?
Isn't redirecting a domain still operating it? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Having a server doing redirects and nothing else would still accomplish the same ends. Google doesn't want to put servers with content there. A redirection server would technically be operating www.google.kz within their borders AND it would avoid the unreasonable demands.
Although I'm not sure changing the DNS entry really qualifies as operating but governments will see it how they want.
Re: (Score:2)
Having a server doing redirects and nothing else would still accomplish the same ends. Google doesn't want to put servers with content there. A redirection server would technically be operating www.google.kz within their borders AND it would avoid the unreasonable demands.
Although I'm not sure changing the DNS entry really qualifies as operating but governments will see it how they want.
I suspect you've got it exactly backwards. It seems to me that Google above all does not want to host any infrastructure (even a redirection server) in the nation of Kazakhstan because of the potential for interference.
The redirects that they speak of would likely be from google.com to google.com (localised in Kazakh -or Russian, or whatever- language) when a GEOIP lookup determines that the query is originating from within Kazakhstan. This does complicate the issue because it means they can't use their nor
Re: (Score:2)
You're right except his question was regarding google.kz. If google.kz disappears then it is no longer being operated and you're right. If google.kz keeps being used then it might get interesting.
Great Success (Score:1)
Please to be ignorink demands of little countries. Much good of you. Maybe we tries the China next, yes?
Re: (Score:2)
You can has chinese cheezburger.
-dZ.
Who are we fooling here? (Score:1)
Google is a business, right now only a little country is asking for it,next it will US, Russia, China, UK, or somebody else. Hell someone (even google) probably already has done it but just hasn't told anyone.
Until a business is willing to put it's employees and profit on the line we all know that businesses are just going to dance. After all, they are only there to make money and bribe elected officials to create a bunch of back doors. Think of it like this... would you rather keep your job or would you
Re: (Score:2)
It seems a reasonable and logical request. The country has a domain as a resource and is seeking to use that resource to benefit it's people. What do they lose if you refuse basically that nothing annual domain name payment.
Now what do they gain if you say yes. A office that provides employment a server farm that uses resources and provides expertise as well as further employment. Is that fair, well google is sucking income out of the country so it seems pretty reasonable.
Personally I think google is b
Re: (Score:2)
I actually agree with you on governments having the right to control their own TLD and leverage that towards employment but lets be honest that this is not why Kazakhstan has made this law. Nazarbayev the (first and only) president, commander of the armed forces, and head of the political party which controls the 'democratic' legislature is a dictator in all but name. The reasoning for this law is to place Google's data where it is physically vulnerable to being seized, blackmail, or some similar tactic.
Re: (Score:2)
Whilst it is true that Kazakhstan has a mock democracy, it is still a stable one. A suck and see approach is most likely appropriate in this case, so it seems rather petty or at the very least cowardly. That is of course if you can tolerate the endemic corruption of government services.
Relevant to .mobi TLD also (Score:5, Funny)
I've been meaning to suggest that all websites with a .mobi TLD should be hosted on mobile devices.
Consistency is key.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Relevant to .mobi TLD also (Score:4, Funny)
This raises interesting questions about the .cat TLD.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't even want to know about goatse.me.
Re: (Score:2)
This raises interesting questions about the .cat TLD.
Not to mention where servers of .xxx domains should be located.
Reason for the request (Score:2)
Glorious nation of Kazakhstan has the best internets.
All other countries have inferior internets.
Re: (Score:2)
And also, potassium.
All the other countries are ruled by little girls.
I can't believe nobody has mentioned it yet... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
None of this makes any sense (Score:2)
If the KZ government wants certain conditions for hosts whose names are in the .kz domain, this isn't somethiing Google can work around with redirects. It's KZ's namespace and if they don't like google.kz redirecting to get around their law's intent, then Google won't have google.kz to redirect from for very long.
OTOH there isn't any reason at all, that Google should give a rat's ass. If they want to market to KZ citizens, they don't need a .kz domain.
Both sides simultaneously win and lose, to no effect.
Re: (Score:2)
OTOH there isn't any reason at all, that Google should give a rat's ass. If they want to market to KZ citizens, they don't need a .kz domain.
I agree. I think it is well within a country's rights to demand that hosts carrying the country's TLD be within that country. In fact, I think it is a good thing to know where the server is. That does nothing to "fragment the net". You don't need a .kz domain name to be reachable from .kz land --
Until the KZ government decides to pull the connections to the outside world. But then, anyone with a .kz domain who ISN'T inside the borders won't be reachable from inside anyway. It won't matter what domain you
Re: (Score:2)
Really, your naivete is charming. This has nothing to do with your espoused idealism, and everything to do with with a dictatorship trying to control information. You have a guy that has been "President" since 1991, and was the party leader for the region in the decades before when it was part of the USSR. KZ has been ranked one of the worlds most corrupt countries.
Think maybe the folks at Google realize that the ploy to have a data center in KZ is just so that KZ can seize said data center.
Re: (Score:2)
The only act that would fragment the net is for KZ to pull the router cables and stop traffic crossing the border. That has nothing to do with who has a .kz domain, it has only to do with who is inside and who is outside the borde
Re: (Score:2)
Why is it that Google isn't happy with one domain name, google.com? why on earth do they have any reason to have a domain name with every single extension available anyway?
Most people, no matter what country they are in, type google.com anyway, they only end up on their local one because google re-directs them there.
Google refuses to host servers in that country stating that it will fracture the internet, but they themselves are already causing that fracture by forcing people all over the world in to their
Re: (Score:2)
No. I don't. They specifically say they want to fight AGAINST dividing the internet up by country, but then they do EXACTLY the same thing with their coutry specific TLDs.
Additionally, in most countries they reroute you to your local TLD even if you specifically type a different one. meaning you don't even have a choice but to be "localized" the way google sees fit. If they don't let you choose, then why do it at different TLDs in the first place? they might as well just localize it all on a single domain n
Really? (Score:1)
Not News (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps you're joking...but the whole article sounds like it's April 1 come early (or late, depending on which way you age). Domain names are assigned by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). If you pay them your money, you get to use the domain name, and there's no laws I know of that say you can't set up your server wherever you want. The mucky muck of Kazakhstan might own Kazakhstan, but he doesn't own the "google.kz" domain name...presumably, Google does. Because, presumably,
Re: (Score:2)
ICANN does not assign domain names but TLDs. The .kz TLD was assigned to some government body in Kazakhstan and Google paid that body (not ICANN) to get their google.kz domain.
Moreover, paying for that google.kz doesn't mean it is owned by Google, only merely assigned. I am quite sure the national registrar retains full rights over the domain itself (just like the government still owns the passport, while you and me are only passport "holders").
Basically the Kazakhstan government can do whatever they want about .kz domains and Google decided not to comply (assuming the consequences, obviously).
Amazing what I learn by posting my mistaken opinions on this forum! I kinda wish the learning process was more dignified...oh well, better than not learning at all.
You're right about how assigning domain names works—"registrars" accredited by ICANN actually assign individual domain names within top-level domains to which they have access. Here [icann.org] is the info from ICANN about registrar accreditation. In my defense, I do believe that, once upon a time, back in the ancient days, ICANN actually assigned all
Many other countries do this (Score:1)
All .us domains have the legal restriction that not only the web servers, but the DNS servers too, have to be in the USA. I'm sure there are tons of countries with that same restriction, why is it bad when Kazakh does it?
Re: (Score:2)
Because it would take more mules than the country has to power a single Google search farm (and no other sources of power are available)? ~
Re: (Score:2)
Because it would take more mules than the country has to power a single Google search farm (and no other sources of power are available)? ~
And all the mules are busy transporting mud from neighboring Elbonia anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
The contract with NeuStar appears to specify such a requirement, when it says "In addition to the current policy set forth in RFC 1480 requiring that usTLD domain name registrations be hosted on computers located within the United States...".
However, unless I missed it, RFC 1480 contains no such requirement. It's not even normative. The closest it comes is "Any computer in the United St
Legal vs Technical Issues (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Personally I really wish there was a way to ensure routing so that my traffic would never enter or be processed by a particular jurisdiction to avoid legal problems and illegal (but commonplace) monitoring.
I would happily accept the potential for greater latency to keep anything that does not have an end destination in the US from passing through that country. The madcap laws and privacy invasions don't even recognize the token acknowledgement of the constitution that citizens get for us foreigners and I'd
Re: (Score:2)
The US does too, or perhaps you might want to test it out by stating one of those things that get the Secret Service to come visit you personally.
High Five! (Score:2)
This Kazakh Technology Minister, Nursultan Tuleiakbay. He is pain in the Google assholes. They get a server with a .kz domain, he must get a server with a .kz domain. They get a redirect, he must get a redirect. They get search engine that works like young wife plow field - he cannot afford! Great success!
Re: (Score:2)
This Kazakh Head Server Technician, Sergei Popklovev. Expansion plans is beautiful received! Will need more generators for stationary bicycles.
Right policy, wrong motive (Score:2)
In former Soviet Russia... (Score:2)
... dead horse flogs YOU!!!!
In unrelated news (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Might be the service provider doing that. And Kazakhstan's ISPs can do the same thing if they want.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
When I'm in spain I can only get to google.es.
Even google.us redirects me to google.es, which is pretty annoying.
Just click the Go to Google English link on front page. The automatic redirection makes sense for most users because they want local language content to come up higher in the search.
Re: (Score:2)
It makes no sense at all. If he'd wanted local language content he'd have typed google.es in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd be surprised how many people don't realize that google.ca, google.fr, google.co.uk, google.de, google.cn, google.jp, etc. exist. They type in google.com because that's what they've been coached to type in.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah not really. It's still thought of as google.com to most people, even though they are using the local variant 99 times out of 100.
For me I just type "google" in the bar. The browser adds 'www.' and '.com'. And then, Google redirects me to the local (Australian) version www.google.com.au
Though there is a link right below the search bar to "go to Google.com" (which takes you to the main site). I rarely use it though unless I'm specifically looking for results ~not~ about my local area (e.g. researching tra
Re: (Score:2)
I think it should be the other way around - go on the site the user actually typed, but put a link to the local site, maybe in whatever language the browser is set and the local language.
But then I bloody well hate it when they second guess me. Hints or suggestions I can live with because I have the option to ignore them.
kz.google.com anybody? (Score:2)
That would be enough to let users in the Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan get Kazakh-tuned Google results without having to comply with the government restrictions on content hosting inside their country.
Re: (Score:2)
There's also a strong hint that they want anyone who has both example.com and example.kz to redirect traffic from example.com to example.kz (which is located intraterritorially). Which is probably what makes Google ga
Re:Isn't the internet (and google) already fractur (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Even worse is the growing trend to assume you want Spanish language pages because your IP address is geolocated in Spain, completely disregarding the Accept-Language HTTP header. Google and Facebook are both abusing their geolocation technology in this way, and probably others as well. Just because you have the technology to do something, doesn't make it a good idea, especially when there is an already existing method of dealing with language preference which is under control of the users. Google fanboys will pop up now and say that the unwashed masses don't know how to configure their browsers, so Google is doing them a favour, but the reality is that browsers on PCs sold to the unwashed masses in Spain will default to Spanish, so the existing standards based method is at least no worse than the geolocation assumption in predicting what language the user might want, and much easier to work around especially if you want to access those services anonymously.
Google provides automatic redirection to the unwashed masses based on geolocation and adds a very simple way to get around it for those who don't want it. Just Google it.
Re:Isn't the internet (and google) already fractur (Score:5, Insightful)
GP's point was that we already have a well-defined way for browsers to specify the desired language - Accept-Language HTTP request header. This is usually easily configured by the user - e.g. in IE it's in Options->Languages. Furthermore, most browsers (at least IE and Chrome here) are automatically using the OS locale to provide a meaningful default. If I'm in Spain, but I'm running Windows with US English locale, then chances are good that I want my searches to be in English, not Spanish.
Re: (Score:3)
Google provides automatic redirection to the unwashed masses based on geolocation and adds a very simple way to get around it for those who don't want it. Just Google it.
I can't, you insensitive clod - it's in SPANISH!
Re: (Score:2)
Déjame ayudarte con eso. Qué te sale? Yo te lo puedo traducir :D.
Re: (Score:2)
Crappy slashdot ate my opening question mark.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's even worse when you live in a country that has two and a bit languages, and none of them is the one you want.
Re: (Score:2)
Rather like fixing a cut on your finger by cutting off your arm.
Re: (Score:2)
How would it solve it? How would I address a packet to someone else's lan?
Re: (Score:2)
You could add another octet at the f- . Oh wait.
Re: (Score:2)
China has already (somewhat)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
And while we
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Look, if you're opposed to free speech just come out and say it. Don't hedge around with stuff about "responsibility" and "consequences". Any petty dictator can say "My people all have free speech. I expect that they will use it responsibly. If they do not, the consequences will be a bullet to the head".
Re: (Score:2)
Look, if you're opposed to free speech just come out and say it. Don't hedge around with stuff about "responsibility" and "consequences". Any petty dictator can say "My people all have free speech. I expect that they will use it responsibly. If they do not, the consequences will be a bullet to the head".
The government cannot restrict your freedom to say whatever you want. If you wish to exercise your right to free speech by calling me an asshole for no reason, I will exercise my right to free speech by making a physical statement with a punch to the face.
("Freedom of speech" does not mean "freedom to speak." It means "Freedom to make statements" and statements aren't necessarily speech.)
Re: (Score:2)
you'll lose quite a few of those rights after you're convicted of assault.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your first paragraph should tell your second paragraph not to undermine his arguments. Or vice versa.
Re: (Score:2)
Haven't you heard of John Gabriel's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory [penny-arcade.com]? Railing against it is futile, I think -- better just to mod the fuckwad to oblivion and move on with your life.
Re: (Score:1)
No, there is not. Borat was a terrible movie. After watching it my only thought was, "There's two hours of my life I'm never going to get back."
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to watch Dungeons & Dragons ...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
"There's two hours of my life I'm never going to get back."
As opposed to the other hours of your life that you can get back... how?
Re: (Score:2)
"There's two hours of my life I'm never going to get back."
As opposed to the other hours of your life that you can get back... how?
If the time is well spent, you don't want it back.
Re: (Score:1)
sage (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is more honest than the US approach to seizing domains. Of course, Google's too big for that to happen to Google - watch what'd happen to you or I if we were to provide some of the sorts of data in a neatly indexed and searchable format that Google does.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that they have no physical presence there and therefore have no reason to respect local law.
Ah, the corporation's favourite excuse and the reason for much of the Western world's problems: "We're not abusing our workers - we're outsourcing our work to a country that abuses its workers. The outsourcing firm has no physical presence here so it doesn't need to respect local laws." You buy a kz, you're doing business with kz and hoping to profit from kz.
Kazakhstan is a de-facto dictatorship, ruled by the same man for almost 30 years. Political opposition is censored and overall it is one of the most corrupt countries in the world.
"Wikipedia said..." The US is a de facto dictatorship, ruled by the same Reganite elite for almost 30 years. Political opposition is censored as long a