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.

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.

§6.3, Figure 5c defense

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

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

Chinese users treat full proxy/VPN (Shadowsocks, V2Ray/Clash, commercial VPNs) as the '终极大杀器' (ultimate solution) for bypassing GitHub DNS poisoning, implying that lighter-weight DNS-only fixes fail in some network environments where the censor adds firewall-layer blocking beyond DNS.

2026-anon-6-github-dns §3 使用代理或 VPN dns-poisoningip-blocking

Rule-based proxy tools (Clash, Shadowsocks, V2Ray) are documented as the most reliable solution for accessing GitHub from China, with split-tunneling rules routing only GitHub traffic through the proxy while keeping domestic traffic on the direct path. Git command-line tools require explicit proxy configuration (git config --global http.proxy http://127.0.0.1:7890) to route clone/push operations, as they do not inherit system proxy settings automatically.

2026-anon-github-2026-6-dns §方法二 dns-poisoningip-blocking

The GFW blocks GitHub via DNS poisoning across at least four domains — github.com, assets-cdn.github.com, github.global.ssl.fastly.net, and raw.githubusercontent.com — causing connection timeouts and page-load failures for mainland China users. The block is persistent as of February 2026, affecting both browser access and command-line git operations.

2026-anon-github-2026-6-dns Introduction / §方法一 dns-poisoningip-blocking

Article 19 documents that Iran's National Information Network (NIN / SHOMA) was designed with explicit reference to China's Great Firewall as a model, with institutional mirroring: Iran's Supreme Council of Cyberspace parallels China's Cyberspace Administration of China, and both governments share a "cyber sovereignty" doctrine used to justify domestic content controls and cross-border technology transfer. The report frames Iran's filtering infrastructure as deliberately architected to replicate GFW capabilities, not as an independently developed system.

2026-article19-tightening-the-net §2, §3 dpisni-blockingdns-poisoningip-blockingbgp-hijackthrottling

Article 19 documents that Iran combines technical filtering with formal coercion of major foreign platforms (including Telegram, Instagram, and WhatsApp) to comply with content removal orders under threat of full blocking. The report notes that Iran's 2022 Women Life Freedom protests accelerated platform blocking when foreign operators refused compliance, demonstrating that the censorship system operates in two modes: coerce-and-allow for compliant platforms, block for non-compliant ones. Domain fronting via these platforms is therefore subject to sudden revocation if political conditions change.

2026-article19-tightening-the-net §6 ip-blockingdns-poisoningthrottling