If clients probe the top 1,000 Alexa-ranked sites to discover a deflecting router, a censor would have to block more than 95% of those 1,000 sites to prevent any client from joining Cirripede. Clients aware of failed probes can continue cycling through additional popular sites, further raising the blocking cost.

In an emulation testbed with 200 ms effective client-server RTT, Cirripede added no more than a few seconds to time-to-first-byte, attributable primarily to two extra TLS round-trips and the SOCKS request-response. For large file downloads, Cirripede's TCP connection splitting (two lower-RTT hops instead of one high-RTT hop) produced faster total transfer times than the non-Cirripede baseline, confirmed with a control non-Cirripede SOCKS proxy.

§6.2, Figure 3 evaluation

Replaying 94 million TCP SYN packets from 6.4 million unique client IPs at ~41,000 packets/second, the Cirripede registration server (quad-core Xeon E5530, 12 GB RAM) achieved a 97% detection rate — 1,038,689 out of 1,069,318 embedded registrations — with average CPU utilization of 56% (max 73%) and average memory of 1.1 GB (max 1.6 GB). The 3% miss rate was caused entirely by network-layer packet reordering, not server capacity.

§6.1 evaluation

Using two CAIDA traces from March 2011, the byte volume of TCP SYN packets across all ports was only 4–7% that of port-443 traffic. Cirripede's registration design inspects only SYN packet headers rather than full HTTPS payloads, reducing the traffic an ISP must process by 14–25× compared to Telex/Decoy routing architectures that must reconstruct all port-443 TCP sessions.

§7.2 evaluation

Simulations on the CAIDA AS-level topology (January 2011 snapshot) show that deploying Cirripede deflecting routers at just 1 tier-1 AS enables 97% of Internet clients to use the system, and 2 participating tier-1 ASes achieve 100% client reachability. When clients probe only the Alexa top-30 most popular sites as overt destinations, 2 tier-1 ISPs still yield 100% reachability.

§6.3, Figure 5b deployment

The June 2025 Iran shutdown—carried out during the Iran-Israel war beginning ~June 19—did not use BGP route withdrawals as in 2019. Instead, authorities applied service-level restrictions at the national border: DNS poisoning of foreign destinations, protocol whitelisting permitting only pre-approved domestic services, and DPI to block circumvention-tool traffic. Iran's international traffic fell roughly 90% while the country's BGP routes remained advertised, making the shutdown invisible to BGP-based monitoring systems. OONI measurement volume, which totalled 121,333 in June 2025, collapsed to under 200 submissions on June 19-20.

2025-iran-shutdown-measurement Executive Summary / §2 dpidns-poisoningport-blockingip-blocking

China Telecom Group reportedly issued directives to Guangdong Telecom in April 2026 requiring comprehensive rectification of cross-border leased-line (IEPL/专线) businesses used for circumvention, with Guangzhou leading enforcement and other Guangdong cities expected to follow sequentially. The targeting is infrastructure-class-specific (IEPL lines as a category) rather than generalized protocol blocking.

2026-ermao-april-airport-outage §广东方向专项整治传闻的影响 ip-blockingport-blocking

IP and port blocking dropped from 30% of countries historically to only 9% during the study period (six countries), with the decline attributed to difficulty maintaining ephemeral blocklists, CDN collateral damage, and IPv6 expansion. Iran is a significant exception: it has implemented port allowlisting — permitting only ports 80, 443, and 53 — on multiple occasions, blocking all other ports entirely.

2023-master-worldwide §4.3, Table 2 ip-blockingport-blocking

Camoufler's blocking-resistance relies on collateral-damage economics: IM platforms had ~2.5 billion active users as of January 2019 (projected >3 billion by 2022) and are embedded in essential business and commercial operations (airline e-tickets, professional collaboration tools). Blocking all IM to disrupt Camoufler would require the censor to harm its own economy; the threat model requires only that the censor permits at least one IM platform, in which case Camoufler remains operational.

2021-sharma-camoufler §3.1, §7 ip-blockingport-blocking

Protozoa uses the economic and social indispensability of popular WebRTC conferencing services as a censorship deterrent: blocking all WebRTC traffic imposes prohibitive collateral damage on legitimate commerce and communication. This 'parasitism' strategy means the circumvention tool inherits the blocking immunity of the carrier without requiring any protocol mimicry at the network level. Protozoa requires only one reachable WebRTC service to function, and Table 3 confirms at least five services remained unblocked in China during testing.

2020-barradas-poking §3, §7.2 ip-blockingport-blocking

Of 229 Thai Internet users surveyed, 63% (n=144) had attempted to circumvent censorship, and of those, roughly 90% (n=132) reported success using VPNs (32.64%), proxies (32.64%), or Tor (23.61%). Failures were isolated to proxies (n=2), VPNs (n=2), and alternative searches (n=3), indicating that existing circumvention tools were technically adequate but that availability and comprehensibility—not raw capability—were the binding constraints on user success.

2017-gebhart-internet §5.2.1, Table 2 ip-blockingport-blocking