Assemblage's diffusion-model steganography (Pulsar) encodes 300–618 bytes per image vector (mean ± SD by model). Generating one local state takes ~9.5 sec on an Apple M4 Pro; encoding takes ~4.4 sec; decoding takes ~4.2 sec. Sending a compressed 300-word message requires only K+h = 4+2 images using the church-256 model, with total send time ~90 sec and receive time ~30 sec. Perceptual-hash candidate detection runs in ~0.33 ms per image, making scanning all ~150 daily posts on /r/AIArt take under 1 second.

Assemblage's anti-censorship collateral damage argument rests on the economic and social value of AI-generated image communities. Blocking DeviantArt (65M MAU), Reddit (1.21B MAU), X/Twitter (611M MAU), or Telegram (1B MAU) to suppress steganographic circumvention would cause massive collateral damage to legitimate users—and to Chinese companies' revenue in the case of platforms popular in CN. The paper observes that even in authoritarian regimes, everyday users actively post AI-generated content, making blanket platform blocking politically and economically costly.

§3.3 (Rendezvous), §5 (Feasibility) defense

Lossy image compression is the primary practical barrier to deploying Assemblage on major platforms. Of 8 tested platforms, WeChat and Rednote (combined 2.6 billion MAU) failed because they serve only lossy-compressed downloads, destroying embedded steganographic content. Platforms that preserve lossless originals (Reddit, X/Twitter, DeviantArt, Discord, Imgur, Telegram) succeeded end-to-end. Discord serves ~30 KB compressed thumbnails by default but provides lossless originals via its native "Download" option.

Table 1, §4.1 evaluation

Assemblage inherits the bootstrapping limitation of all generative steganographic schemes: sender and receiver must share a symmetric key before communication begins. Public-key steganography exists in theory but does not currently support common image/text channels efficiently. The paper identifies three viable deployment scenarios: (1) travelers who carry a pre-shared secret before entering a censored region; (2) users in countries with episodic censorship who establish the key during uncensored periods; (3) a hybrid where a one-time signaling channel establishes the secret, after which Assemblage carries subsequent traffic.

§5 (Bootstrapping) deployment

During the June 2025 Iran shutdown, circumvention tool performance diverged sharply by transport design. Psiphon's multi-protocol architecture sustained 1.5 million concurrent users—roughly one-third of its normal Iranian base. Lantern's "proxyless" protocol (domain-fronting via CDN, ~40% of Lantern's Iranian traffic) showed moderate success. Tor usage collapsed during the blackout but bridge connections surged and rebounded quickly after lifting. BeePass (serving 500k+ daily users at shutdown onset) used live A/B testing of port/obfuscation-prefix combinations to probe the censors' blocking parameters in real time. The Ceno Browser's P2P network grew from 600 active peers on June 13 to ~8,000 by July 11, indicating that decentralized fallback paths stayed up even during peak blocking.

2025-iran-shutdown-measurement §Tool Performance dpithrottling

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

During the June 2025 shutdown, Iranian authorities blocked international One-Time Password (OTP) SMS delivery, preventing new sign-ins to foreign secure-messaging platforms and VPN services. This forced users toward government-approved domestic platforms that lack security and privacy protections. The blockade of OTPs effectively weaponized account-recovery flows as a secondary shutdown layer, disproportionately affecting users who needed to activate new circumvention tools during the crisis.

2025-iran-shutdown-measurement §Human Rights Implications port-blockingdpikeyword-filtering

Input blocking in Chinese LLM services (DeepSeek, Qwen, Kimi, Doubao) is overwhelmingly consistent: all four services persistently block the exact same queries across all 5 measurement samples in both Simplified and Traditional Chinese. Output blocking is far less consistent, with only 29 out of 349 output-blocked queries blocked across all 5 samples. Baidu-Chat is exceptional: it performs almost no input blocking but instead relies heavily on post-search and output blocking (78.6% of blocks are output-phase).

2026-ablove-characterizing §VI-B keyword-filteringdpi

A three-stage detection pipeline exploiting the "dual-role" behavioral fingerprint of single-IP circumvention relays achieved 23.2% recall (96/414 ground-truth relays) with a 0.18% false-positive rate against 97,651 benign TLS servers, for an overall accuracy of 99.5%. The ground-truth set covered OpenVPN, WireGuard, and SOCKS relays identified in a 17 TB single-day backbone trace (WIDE Project, April 9, 2025).

2026-almutairi-server §3.4, Table 1 traffic-shapedpiflow-correlation

The paper identifies a fundamental architectural vulnerability in single-IP circumvention designs: a relay must generate new observable flows (via DNS or TLS SNI) to reach end services after receiving client connections, creating a detectable server-and-client behavioral contrast. A relay accessing user-facing domains (news, social media) scores high on a Relay Suspicion Score (w=0.9) versus infrastructure domains (w=0.1). The paper argues this host-level signal is censorship-invariant and cannot be concealed by link obfuscation.

2026-almutairi-server §2.4, §4 traffic-shapedpisni-blocking