Internet traffic in Iran increasing

(radar.cloudflare.com)

62 points | by Cider9986 3 hours ago

7 comments

  • zuzululu 1 hour ago
    Any country watching Iran situation should take a way a few things: For one khamenei was known to be against nuclear weapons and was a sort of a peace keeper between hardliners leaning towards lifting sanctions but seems to have been forced into a lame duck through narratives inside and outside along with internal leaks. Two, its no longer possible to shut down the internet with Starlink.

    Those two were supposed to be backstops against any externally induced regime change. Now any country at odds with United States currently owning nukes is looking at escalating straight to warning shot doctrine. Having enriched uraniums or some land based ICBM is no longer enough. Something tactical and small enough to be used to limit nuclear fallout but make regional allies absolutely against engaging in war at behest of the US seems like it would test US nuclear umbrella.

    ex) Any NATO countries willing to have a low yield tactical nuke detonate near their border but inside a disputed territory/land? Which non-nuclear EU country is willing to erase themselves off the map to shield their European brothers?

    • whatever1 55 minutes ago
      I really thought that Russia would use such a device to end the war in Ukraine. Hopefully they will not.
      • epistasis 38 minutes ago
        If Ukraine had kept its nuclear weapons it would not have been attacked, but there was never any risk of Russia using nuclear weapons.

        This is just one of many many ways that people in the west fundamentally misunderstand Russia, and why so many people made fools of themselves thinking that Putin would not invade. The other really big one is that Russia never admitted that it lost the Cold War and thinks the war is still going on, and that it's the fault of the US and others that Russia is so backwards and poor, not a result of their own mismanagement, the weakness of their people, and the general corruption.

        • rayiner 36 minutes ago
          > and that it's the fault of the US and others that Russia is so backwards and poor

          Why is Russia so backwards and poor? Russia and Iran are two countries that seem to way underperform their fundamentals.

          • whatever1 1 minute ago
            Because their institutions are completely corrupt. There are no rules to the game so the powerful take everything. It is a smaller pie but if I can have it all, why do I care?
          • p-e-w 27 minutes ago
            Brain drain at an unimaginable scale, which is a self-reinforcing mechanism because once it starts, governments will usually impose restrictions to try to stop it, which makes everyone else want to leave too.
    • rayiner 51 minutes ago
      > For one khamenei was known to be against nuclear weapons and was a sort of a peace keeper between hardliners

      I think the Iran war was a dumb idea, but you’re repeating propaganda.[1] Khamenei called the shots in Iran. The country had a nuclear weapons program because he wanted it. Iran isn’t an autocracy in the same way China isn’t an autocracy—the mullahs run the country in the same way as the CCP runs China. But major defense programs don’t happen without the supreme leader’s approval.

      Khamenei was also a hardliner. Over the last two decades, there have been many moderate candidates for Iran’s presidency. But the Guardian Council banned all of them from running. (The Guardian Council has six members appointed by the Ayatollah, and six appointed by the Chief Justice, who is appointed by the Ayatollah.)

      [1] I find it interesting people feel the need to make excuses for the Iranian regime. I guess non-interference with a sovereign country’s internal affairs is not, by itself, a very satisfying principle. So there is a desire to make it seem like Iran’s leadership didn’t deserve to get blown up.

    • aaron695 42 minutes ago
      [dead]
    • taneq 58 minutes ago
      Re. point 2: It is if you own Starlink. :S
      • mgiampapa 50 minutes ago
        The US Government can own and nationalize it in a heartbeat if they want to. Even other Billionaires hate Musk.
  • r721 2 hours ago
  • nostrademons 2 hours ago
    The weird thing is: Iran seems to be acting like the war is ending, and that their peace plan has been accepted, and yet now it's the Trump administration that says it's all fake news. In the past the Trump administration has claimed the war was ending and Iran said (truthfully) it's all fake news.

    It makes me wonder if something has shifted with the internal power dynamics in Iran, and the civilian government at least is worried about being ousted if this continues. The usual reason why you would lie about peace being around the corner is to placate the citizenry and prevent them from revolting.

    Also relatedly, Trump is now doubling down on U.S. demands and threats of more military action. This is what you do if you sense your opponent is weak. Does U.S. intelligence know something we don't?

    • dools 1 hour ago
      > Does U.S. intelligence know something we don't?

      Well, yes probably.

    • NordStreamYacht 59 minutes ago
      > Does U.S. intelligence know something we don't?

      Unlikely. They thought a dose of shock and awe would get people out on the streets for a rapid regime change and it didn't work.

      • hypeatei 42 minutes ago
        I don't think U.S. intelligence thought any part of this war was a good idea or justified. There were two National Intelligence Estimates (a panel of all 18 agencies in the IC) that concluded Iran was not developing nuclear weapons.

        There has also been reporting that a top general in the Joint Chiefs of Staff warned Trump about starting a conflict with Iran[0]. The only party that believes, or wants others to believe that Iran is a huge threat, is Israel.

        0: https://www.axios.com/2026/02/23/iran-strike-trump-gen-dan-c...

    • twothreeone 1 hour ago
      Isn't it also possible that this happened to be one of the explicit pre-conditions for a treaty by the US?
      • nostrademons 1 hour ago
        It could be a trust-building move, open up a little and see if it's reciprocated, although if it's a trust-building move the right response is probably not to threaten to obliterate them, or to launch more military strikes.

        Although this conflict has seen both sides consistently choose the wrong response in basically every situation, which is why it's still going on.

        • twothreeone 1 hour ago
          Yeah, it's not even clear what the true motivation is from the US side.. "get the Uranium out" by itself doesn't make sense, because (a) they can just enrich again (or even be supplied directly by Russia/NK) and (b) even if they build nukes they'll never be able to reach US territory. If they wanted to destabilize the regime, they would have needed to actively push an alternative group or leader. If they wanted to pressure China/EU by stressing global markets, I'd say it was mildly successful - though incredibly short term.. I suppose it may be a mix of all of those (and maybe more). But I'm lost as to what the overall goal and strategy is here, it feels extremely haphazard.
          • the_af 53 minutes ago
            Everyone is lost about what exactly was the US strategy here. Everybody understands Iran wasn't a threat to the US that warranted immediate action. Mostly everyone understands the aftermath of this war looks to be worse than the previous situation.
            • drnick1 16 minutes ago
              > Everyone is lost about what exactly was the US strategy here.

              The strategy is clear: out Iran as a paper tiger (accomplished last year), disarm the mullahs by sinking their boats and destroying the few aircrafts they had left, and humiliate the regime so that an uprising becomes more likely. Same strategy that has already realigned Syria and Venezuela with U.S. interests, and that will soon take Cuba too.

              I don't think that anything should be negotiated at this stage. Return to combat operations, destroy Iran's ability to threaten traffic through the Strait, escort the ships that are currently trapped in the Gulf, and maintain the blockade on Iranian ports.

    • cjbgkagh 1 hour ago
      There are many reasons to lie about peace being around the corner, it is the default norm. It is in part to place the blame of further conflicts on your enemies, i.e. I wanted peace but clearly they did not.

      There is a conflict of narratives and one way to help push your narrative is to act like it is the reality on the ground. Unless the US is going to send in a ground army or nuke Iran then all we have at the moment is a pointless stalemate and the longer this goes on the more people will be upset at Trump and Israel for creating this situation.

    • bluegatty 1 hour ago
      No, the regime has been very publicly saying 'there is no deal', more so than US Admin who keeps hinting 'a deal' or 'imminent' or '95% of the way there'.

      "Trump is now doubling down on U.S. demands and threats of more military action. "

      No - he's been backing down over and over for weeks. There limited strikes today.

      The US Admin is wary of escalation, Tehran knows it (or seems to be acting as though they believe that) and are dragging this along.

    • protocolture 1 hour ago
      >Trump is now doubling down on U.S. demands and threats of more military action.

      He does this every day even if hes not at war. He threatens to nuke canada and destroy the EU. You literally can never take him seriously.

      • Gigachad 1 hour ago
        The prime example of the boy who cried wolf.
    • Forgeties79 1 hour ago
      > Also relatedly, Trump is now doubling down on U.S. demands and threats of more military action. This is what you do if you sense your opponent is weak. Does U.S. intelligence know something we don't?

      Hasn’t he done this every week since it started? He constantly bounces between “we’ve almost got a great deal” and “we are going to ABSOLUTELY OBLITERATE IRAN1!!!1!”

    • jmyeet 1 hour ago
      No, Iran is acting like time is on their side. Because it is. The iceberg the rest of the world is about to hit in the coming month or two is strategic reserves of crude oil as well as refined petroleum products (eg jet fuel, gasoline, diesel) being drained. That's going to be a whole new level of suffering.

      Trump is doubling down on Israel's demands. That's the true stumbling block here. Israel wanted this war. They still do. Israel thinks they can turn Iran into a failed-state like Somalia.

      Trump is also the least reliable indicator of what's going to happen becausee, as we all hopefully know by now, he just rants stream-of-consciousness like. The Joint Chiefs, the intelligence community and allies all knew this was doomed to failure. Closing the Strait of Hormuz has been historically modeled in terms of military exercises and capability for decades. It was unproven prior to this war if the US could reopen the Strait. Well, now we know. Congratulations, everybody, the system works.

      I don't know what increased Internet traffic from Iran means. As was proven last year though, Israel used that access for intelligence and assassination purposes (ie to identify target locations, particularly through the large number of of Afghan refugees that were in the country at the time, allegedly [1]).

      There is no grand strategy. There are no cards left to play by the US short of the use of nuclear weapons. I mean that literally. The uS has lost but unwillingness to break with Israel has stopped the administration from admitting it publicly.

      [1]: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckglp8epg11o

      • bluegatty 1 hour ago
        Time is on their side - except for the embargo. That stops 90% of their revenue and that's a very real thing.

        It's interesting to see how far they think they can get away with this, but they are not in an easy situation.

        Soldiers and civil infrastructure don't last on $0.

        That money stops is the 'most likely thing' that will cause a real revolution.

        Both sides are hoping for 'regime change' by embargo it seems!

        • jmyeet 11 minutes ago
          Sanctions don't work on enemies. We've had what? 4 years of sanctions on Russia now? How's that going? Iran has had over 40 years of almost uninterrupted sanctions. How was that going? North Korea?

          Sanctions force an enemy to build an economy to withstand those sanctions. This is easier when you can grow food, have water and have energy. Also, they've built their entire military to resist the one card you can play: strategic bombardment. Cheap missiles, super-cheap drones, both easy to produce and launch and underground facilities that are largely immune to bombing.

          Strategic oil reserves are getting perilously low [1] and everybody understands that Trump would rather let the world burn than restrain Israel in the slightest.

          [1]: https://archive.ph/lWiwl

      • dnautics 1 hour ago
        > The iceberg the rest of the world is about to hit in the coming month or two is strategic reserves of crude oil as well as refined petroleum products (eg jet fuel, gasoline, diesel) being drained.

        It's not clear to me that the "world" will come down on Iran's side on this one. On the one hand you have a country that is perpetrating a violation of international norms by establishing a toll on the straight of hormuz and is shooting at or is threatening to shoot at the "world"'s ships, on the other hand you have a country that violated international norms by invading another country (ho hum, everyone does this) but isn't shooting at or threatening to shoot at your ships (mostly just iranian or dark ships). When the oil reserves run out, do you side with the bad guys that are making a token effort at helping to get oil to you, or do you side with the bad guys that are preventing oil from getting to you just to middle finger trump?

        • t-3 31 minutes ago
          > ho hum, everyone does this

          No, just US, Israel, and Russia.

        • jmyeet 19 minutes ago
          The world already has come down on Iran's side. It's pretty much the US and Israel (and maybe the UAE) against the world. Trump has bemoaned the lack of international support. Use of bases and airpsace have been spotty. And this is only going to get worse once winter hits in Europe and people start seeing their electricity and heating bills. Asia (minus China and Japan) are the most vulnerable because they're almost entirely dependent on Gulf oil that has stopped. And they blame the US for it. Iran has allowed traffic through the Strait to countries that aren't aiding the war effort. It's now the US that is blocking it.

          Americans as a whole don't understand the history of the region or know about all the sins the US has committed against Iran over a century, including being responsible for the current regime, overthrowing their democratically elected government in 1953 and stole their oil. They also propped up the Iran-Iraq war and destabilized Afghanistan to flood Iran with heroin.

          There was a perfectly good deal with Iran called the JCPOA but Trump tore it out because it had Obama's name on it and Israel hated it. Everything that has happened since is Trump's (and Biden's) fault.

          Iran is defending itself against an unprovoked attack by the biggest bully on the planet. The tolls are e complex issue because the navigable lanes through the Strait of Hormuz go through, in part, Iranian territorial waters. There were no tolls. The us started an unprovoked war, caused countless deaths, blew up a school through of girls and assassinated a bunch of leaders. So the tolls are viewed by many as, well, reparations. Iran never closed the Strait or enforced a toll prior to this war.

          Iran also acted in good faith last year after yet another unprovoked attack (ie the 12 day war) that was ultimately called off because the US and Israel were losing the ability to intercept Iranian missiles. Why? Critically depelted munitions. And what did the US do? turned around and made another unprovoked, surprise attack rather than negotiating. Because Israel told them to.

          So Iran has been forced into the position that they need to make the economic damage of this so high that the US and Israel never think about doing this again. And if you can't see why they might do that, consider what the US did after 9/11.

  • mlmonkey 2 hours ago
    I don't think the current regime has changed their policy out of the goodness of their hearts, or for the concerns of the citizenry. If I were to hazard a guess, I'm guessing it is so their army of digital burglars can wreak havoc on US sites, in retaliation for the bombings by the US. So I guess we can only expect more ransomware and more digital mayhem.
    • platinumrad 2 hours ago
      I'm not a fan of the Iranian government at all but this is pure Iran Derangement Syndrome. If you thought about this for half a second you'd realize that their "army of digital burglars" has had internet access the entire time. No state, and especially not one that specializes in proxy warfare, is going to intentionally cripple its actors with the highest damage to plausible deniability ratio.
      • dakolli 1 hour ago
        Its also simply not true, Iranians have been on the internet this entire time. These people commenting are Israelis, which HN is full of.
        • platinumrad 1 hour ago
          It's the middle of the night in the region, so I don't expect very many human internet users from Israel or Iran right now. This may also explain why so much of the traffic coming out of Iran is flagged as bot traffic.

          I agree that a significant portion of urban middle class Iranians have been online the entire time, but it's a group that is roughly analogous to the people in China who go out of their way to use a VPN.

          • taneq 55 minutes ago
            What kind of crazy person would be on the internet on the middle of the night? None of us normal people would ever do that! cough cough
    • tptacek 2 hours ago
      Iranian-sponsored threat actors have had network access throughout this entire conflict.
      • 866-RON-0-FEZ 2 hours ago
        Thanks for reminding everyone of the obvious. You'd think it wouldn't be necessary.

        The popular theory that all Iranian internet was shut off like Johnny pulling the plug out of the socket in Airplane is simplistic and beyond ludicrous.

        • AznHisoka 2 hours ago
          That fact wasnt obvious to me.
      • lysace 2 hours ago
        [flagged]
        • t-3 49 minutes ago
          If you think propaganda is why people are upset about Gaza, you don't understand the politics and history. Diasporas produce grassroots domestic interest and activism, no propaganda needed. 70 years of forcing people out of their homes makes for a pretty significant diasporic population.
        • platinumrad 1 hour ago
          Insofar as it being regular citizens expression their opinions, yes, even if we might not agree with them. I wouldn't call that "pro-hamas propaganda".
          • lysace 1 hour ago
            What would you call it?
            • platinumrad 1 hour ago
              The same thing you would call people on this site expressing geopolitical opinions that half of the world might disagree with.
    • gpm 2 hours ago
      The internet is a pretty critical economic tool. I'd imagine that a good portion of the reason is simply to let Iranian businesses function.
    • Laurel1234 2 hours ago
      Wouldn't regime glow in the darks have open access already? You'd imagine they'd run a whitelist or something.
    • whyage 2 hours ago
      You might be right; most of the traffic is bot-driven
    • lysace 2 hours ago
      The more important aspect is that the regime now feels certain enough that they have killed enough of the internal opposition so that the security forces can handle rest even with open comms.
    • dakolli 1 hour ago
      I've been able to talk to every dev I know in Iran this whole time and none of them are state affiliated, just regular open source contributers. Don't trust 5 eyes (this includes CF) and what they say about Iran. There have been Iranians on twitter this entire time also that are completely normal citizens.

      Israelis and US news sources will tell you Iran is strangling their people of internet and then upload 300 videos a day from inside Iran allegedly from bystanders filming strikes or whatever.

      Its wild how brainwashed western tech people are. If I were a world leader though, I'd probably cut my citizens off from the Western Internet. The original patch for the ARMY psyops division is literally a ghost holding its hand out from way above with electrical signals pulsating from its hand. Which is really future thinking considering this patch is from the 40s-50s. Look up "Army PSYOPs ghost patch". I always say Starlink should change its logo to that.

      Don't fall for the trap where the US and Israel paints Iran as some authoritarian censor. The US is far more authoritarian, we have the largest prison population in the world and the most corrupt leaders on earth. Also, Iran hasn't been committing a genocide. I would love to see evidence for the thousands of executions they allegedly did, still haven't seen a single bit of video evidence for that other than 400p 10 second clips of random bags on a ground.

      • wunderlotus 1 hour ago
        > Don't trust 5 eyes (this includes CF)

        What are CF & 5 eyes?

        • taneq 51 minutes ago
          Not sure about CF but 5 Eyes is an information sharing agreement to get around laws regarding governments spying on their own citizens. So eg. Australia wants to surveil some guy but legally can’t. Well, they can’t help it if the US spies on that guy, right? And if the US later hands the Australian government an envelope with some information in it, that’s perfectly legal, right? And later the same thing takes place in reverse, quite a coincidence really.
      • bluegatty 1 hour ago
        "Don't fall for the trap where the US and Israel paints Iran as some authoritarian censor. The US is far more authoritarian"

        This is total delusion, honestly, it's why people in these systems will remain trapped for a long time.

        America has many problems but when people in places like Iran start on this bandwagon, it's evidence of inability to just weigh reality in the face of emotional rhetoric.

        Nobody is suggesting that Iran is 'committing genocide' - that's just something you made up, however, they have been killing protesters, this is very real.

        From Amnesty [1] (not exactly a pro US voice) Human Rights Watch [2]

        Amnesty and HRW indicate the state murdered at least thousands of protesters, and HRW has considerably more than that under investigation, there is plenty of evidence.

        There are 2000 drones that hit UAE and you hardly see a video, why? Because UAE officials are brutally oppressive about this. They threaten people with imprisonment and expulsion for any 'leaks' and they've been forcing social media personalities to push propaganda. That's just UAE, Iran is even more assertive.

        Press freedom index [3]

        Iran has a ruthlessly oppressive regime, not even comparable to that of the US.

        [1] https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/middle-east-and-north-af...

        [2] https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2024/country-chapters/iran

        [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Press_Freedom_Index

        • t-3 38 minutes ago
          > Iran has a ruthlessly oppressive regime, not even comparable to that of the US.

          Not comparable in domestic affairs... in foreign affairs the situation is reversed. US is by far the most violent, untrustworthy, and oppressive in the world, while Iran looks pretty peaceful and harmless in comparison.

  • myth_drannon 1 hour ago
    Why is the bot traffic in Iran is so high -75%? I checked Argentina - 16%, Netherlands - 65%.
    • stn8188 1 hour ago
      Oh come to think of it, I had some attempted logins to some home-hosted infrastructure from Iran last week...
      • drnick1 22 minutes ago
        You should really filter third world IP ranges. Removes a lot of of the unwanted log noise.
  • 2OEH8eoCRo0 1 hour ago
    The US just struck them again at Bandar Abbas
  • plazmatic 2 hours ago
    [dead]