Even after reading the technical explanation I don't understand how such a network would be useful or who the couriers are and how they actually deliver the cargo... Or why that's desirable over just caching the messages until the internet is available again. And what about reliability? How long does cargo take to get to its destination? How often does it actually make it there?
They simplified the explanation a bit too much in some places and lost details in the process.
I think this is the kind of connectivity that works in places with no other connection, like a village on top of a mountain, an area with long term power outage, places where internet is censored, etc. Some of these cases come with a risk to the courier. The couriers could be for example the regular buses connecting that place to a hub with internet connection. The equipment on the bus "caches" your requests or replies, takes them to the connection hub where it picks up whatever comes back.
> They simplified the explanation a bit too much in some places and lost details in the process.
Please let me know if there's anything else that we could improve, besides the questions raised to the comment by Vampiero that you're replying to.
> I think this is the kind of connectivity that works in places with no other connection, like a village on top of a mountain, an area with long term power outage, places where internet is censored, etc
Indeed. It could work in those cases, but my priority are regions disconnected to the Internet due to government orders or a foreign adversary.
Hiya! Author of Awala here. We're revamping the website right now so it's great to get this kind of feedback! I'll answer your questions in the meantime.
You raise good questions. I originally tried to keep it simple and wrote the documentation with my (prospective) partners in mind. They already work in this space, so they know the problem very well, and we'd usually have a few high-level conversations before getting into that kind of details, so I didn't want to bore them with things they already knew. However, things are changing now and we're opening things up to the public in the coming days, so these are things I need to document better.
> how such a network would be useful
We're trying to establish connectivity in regions where the national/local government, or an adversary in a conflict zone (e.g. Gaza, Tigray), deliberately cuts off the population from the Internet.
I'm talking about places where satellite Internet services, like Starlink, won't work:
- Conflict zones where the enemy controls the sky, as they could "triangulate" the location of the terminal. This is why Starlink can be used in most of Ukraine, but is too risky to use in other conflict zones.
> who the couriers are and how they actually deliver the cargo
A courier is an individual or a group of people who volunteer to transport the data physically, between the region without access to the Internet and a location with access to the Internet. They can charge people if they want to and people agree, but Awala itself doesn't handle anything to do with that, so it'd be more of a verbal agreement amongst them.
That location with access to the Internet can be a place within the disconnected region that the government is intentionally keeping online (e.g. hospitals, international hotels), or a place/subregion whose ISP is taking too long to take offline. Worse case scenario, it could be:
> Or why that's desirable over just caching the messages until the internet is available again.
Because in many cases you never know when the Internet will be restored. And during that time, you have diaspora communities absolutely horrified after not hearing from close relatives for weeks or even months. Or, in the case of many North Korean escapees, potentially ever.
> And what about reliability? How long does cargo take to get to its destination? How often does it actually make it there?
Every situation will be different. For example:
- In non-conflict zones where the government doesn't have the capability to triangulate unlicensed Starlink devices, it'd take whatever it takes for the courier to drive/cycle/walk to that device. People have smuggled these things even in Iran, where the government does have some capability to detect them: https://iranwire.com/en/technology/133773-iranians-defy-inte...
- In places like India (the world's capital of Internet blackouts), where blackouts are regional, couriers could catch a train to another region as shown in the link above.
Awala is built to withstand delays of up to 6 months.
Haha, that's one of my long-term ~plans~ dreams. :)
NASA and the rest of the space industry have done a fantastic job with the Bundle Protocol (BP) and other related tech[1], but I think they will need something like Awala running on top of BP as we start to send humans further and further into space.
With Awala running on top of the Interplanetary Internet, astronauts could use regular Awala apps, with no need to built custom integrations with things like social networks (once those too are supported on Awala).
Extremely easy. Starlink uses active steering, but there's always some signal leaking into unintended directions. The spectrum used is very obvious as well.
I couldn't post a reply to a message from shubhamkrm because someone flagged it. Honestly, I don't see how the comment would've violated the HN guidelines. They disagreed with me, but did so respectfully. I suspect someone may have perceived it as a violation to the following rule:
> Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. That tramples curiosity.
But I'd argue that deleting their message actually tramples curiosity. It wasn't a political or ideological message. The focus was ethics.
In the hope that this was a mistake, I'll quote most of their message below next to my replies.
---
> A major reason for Internet blackouts here is because in many areas, there’s a deep seated animosity between different communities due to historical and ideological differences. Internet blackouts are done close to any sensitive event, to prevent malicious actors from spreading misinformation/rumours and provoking riots
First of all, I like your summary of the situation in India because I think it's objective and brings its nuance to the front.
> Have you considered the ethical implications of your service in such cases?
I have.
India is the reason why I describe Awala's goal as "providing all human beings with uncensored and timely communication anywhere in the universe – without impairing the fundamental rights of other human beings".[1] That last sentence is mainly because of India.
I agree with the sentiment, or the problem that the government is trying to tackle, but I disagree with their methods. They violate the fundamental human rights of many millions of people -- predominantly in Jammu & Kashmir and Manipur -- whenever they disconnect entire regions, not just from the Internet, but from the outside world. Even the postal service has been suspended.[2]
I don't think it's all India's fault though. At its core, this is a content moderation issue. Those malicious actors that spread misinformation use large WhatsApp groups and the like, and the companies behind those products haven't done enough to address the problem, so local governments in India take the drastic decision to cut off the Internet.
> Are you willing to take the moral responsibility for the damage to life and property that could be caused using your service?
Rather than waiting for something like that to happen, I'm more interested in mitigating it in the first place. That's why:
- Letro[3], the first -- and so far only -- app to be powered by Awala, only supports 1:1 messaging. No groups yet, and when we do, we'll only support a relatively small number of people (TBD; not hundreds or thousands).
- The future functionality to support "broadcasting" information to many users already has built-in mechanisms to handle hate speech and misinformation.[4]
- As I work closely with anyone integrating Awala in their existing services, I intend to ensure that they have adequate plans to address hate speech and misinformation.
Thanks for taking the time to respond to my comment. I didn't mean to be provocative or offensive, just wanted to show the perspective from the other side.
> I agree with the sentiment, or the problem that the government is trying to tackle, but I disagree with their methods. They violate the fundamental human rights of many millions of people -- predominantly in Jammu & Kashmir and Manipur -- whenever they disconnect entire regions, not just from the Internet, but from the outside world. Even the postal service has been suspended.[2]
> I don't think it's all India's fault though. At its core, this is a content moderation issue. Those malicious actors that spread misinformation use large WhatsApp groups and the like, and the companies behind those products haven't done enough to address the problem, so local governments in India take the drastic decision to cut off the Internet.
I appreciate the sentiment. People on HN who live in free Western countries might not appreciate how an under-policed country with deep historical animosities looks like (India had 145 police personnel per 100k population, whereas the US had 428[1]). Unmitigated misinformation can do (and has done) a lot of harm in such societies. I agree with you that at its core, its a moderation issue, and a policing issue. I myself do not agree with the blanket bans, but I do not see any other possible mitigations as long as the communication service providers (such as Meta) do not bring proper moderation and fact-checks.
> Rather than waiting for something like that to happen, I'm more interested in mitigating it in the first place. That's why:
> - Letro[3], the first -- and so far only -- app to be powered by Awala, only supports 1:1 messaging. No groups yet, and when we do, we'll only support a relatively small number of people (TBD; not hundreds or thousands).
> - The future functionality to support "broadcasting" information to many users already has built-in mechanisms to handle hate speech and misinformation.[4]
> - As I work closely with anyone integrating Awala in their existing services, I intend to ensure that they have adequate plans to address hate speech and misinformation.
I do hope the mitigation works, and people are able to communicate with each other without allowing misinformation to spread. I had done some research on opportunistic networks as an undergrad student, with a similar goal of restoring communication in regions without adequate network coverage, so I do understand the need for such services. I wish you all the best, and would be following Awala with interest.
Hi there. I’m from India (the world’s capital of Internet blackouts). A major reason for Internet blackouts here is because in many areas, there’s a deep seated animosity between different communities due to historical and ideological differences. Internet blackouts are done close to any sensitive event, to prevent malicious actors from spreading misinformation/rumours and provoking riots. Have you considered the ethical implications of your service in such cases? Are you willing to take the moral responsibility for the damage to life and property that could be caused using your service?
I think that it's manifestly unreasonable to preemptively knock out communications in a large civilian area during peacetime for essentially any reasons; in that same vein, it's absurd to lay blame at the feet of a communications enabler who provides a means for individuals to escape authoritarian suppression of communications.
The only parties responsible for the violence you are implying would be the individuals actualizing the violence, the individuals originating falsities, and the governments who fail to actively maintain peace. The collective failures of all three to restrain their actions amidst uncertain rumors should not condemn the vast majority of peaceable humans from communicating with each other.
Nobody I know seriously claims that free speech and communication exclusively has upsides, but I'd argue that the benefits vastly outweigh the downsides and risks.
Whether freedom of speech should be externally "dictated", i.e. against the laws passed and enforced by an elected (or often not so much elected) local government, is a much more complicated question, but the ethics of providing a pure communications tool (i.e. a tool that isn't directly leveraged by its creators for foreign propaganda etc.) seem fairly clear to me: I think the desire for communication and information of somebody in such a region is ethical; the desire of others to suppress it isn't.
Cutting the internet is an authoritarian move, that’s used as threat on communities (usually minorities).
There is no moral irresponsibility when it comes to giving the general public access to data. The moral irresponsibility here is India bullying a minority population through their nationalist right wing government.
Also my god I can’t believe the pendulum has swung so far the ass of nationalism that it’s not a moral quandary to restore access to communications to marginalized communities.
Unfortunately at least on iOS, it's always going to be severely limited by what Apple allows and does not allow apps to do in the background and with regards to P2P connecting to other (especially non-Apple) Wi-Fi devices.
I've been dreaming about an optionally P2P messenger for a long time, i.e. something that just communicates over the internet while it's there, but lets messages piggy back onto others' devices if not.
This could address simple cases like one person with and another without a mobile data plan, or something more complicated like a hiker passing through a campsite, collecting everybody's pending outgoing messages and submitting them once they have signal again. (The return path in the latter scenario would be much more complicated, as it would require either a lot of storage and broadcasting, or good heuristics about who's going to pass by where, in order to preemptively download messages.)
Indeed, iOS is going to be a challenge for the reasons you mentioned. The fact that we won't be able to have a standalone app like Awala on Android[1], which serves local apps, means we won't be able to have a single app that people could use to sync data with couriers.
So, we're going to have to pick a poison. Either we don't offer the sneakernet on iOS, or we'll leave it up to the developer of every app to use an SDK to sync with couriers (meaning that the user would have to open each app to sync with couriers, one app at a time). "Fortunately", Android is pretty much the only mobile OS in the regions susceptible to Internet blackouts, so the former option is the most likely one.
I think I've seen an app like the one you describe, but I can't remember the name. There's also Bridgefy, which is more general purpose, but they provide an SDK that you may be able to integrate. I haven't checked Bridgefy in ages, but I hope they sorted out their security; it didn't use any cryptography for ages, and when they added it was all quite vague and opaque.
This is more of an anti-censorship thing. Most useful in areas where somebody turns off the Internet for political reasons.
A really reliable low-bandwidth emergency network would be more useful. Something that forwards short text messages via phone to phone WiFi until they reach some place with more connectivity would be helpful in emergencies.
> This is more of an anti-censorship thing. Most useful in areas where somebody turns off the Internet for political reasons.
Yup, that's exactly the only use case I'm targeting (I'm the author of Awala)
> A really reliable low-bandwidth emergency network would be more useful. Something that forwards short text messages via phone to phone WiFi until they reach some place with more connectivity would be helpful in emergencies.
That's also useful, but I'm not sure about either option being more useful than the other. These are very different problems within the realm of offline comms.
> Something that forwards short text messages via phone to phone WiFi until they reach some place with more connectivity would be helpful in emergencies.
Even in non-emergencies this would be extremely useful! Bluetooth LE has hundreds of meters of device-to-device range on the newer modulation schemes and would be excellent for this; low-frequency things like LoRa would be even better and could probably easily incorporated into phones, given that mobile networks use adjacent frequencies and the power amplifiers are probably already there.
It's a real shame that Apple has been curbing even the one P2P communications tool deployed at scale (Airdrop) supposedly out of censorship concerns, and given that, I unfortunately don't see something like "P2P iMessage" becoming a thing any time soon.
The challenge with out-of-band RF networks in certain situations is that they can be triangualted by a hostile power. In places like Ukraine, that can trigger indiscrimante artillery or rocket fire onto civilians, for example. In China that can get people disapeared. Sometimes sneakernet is safer and more secure.
Right. I'm thinking North Carolina floods in populated areas. Even if nearby cell towers are out, there are probably enough phones around to pass short text messages out to an area with network connectivity.
Hello! Author of Awala here. Not sure about that. We're trying to solve very different problems.
Scuttlebut and SSB-powered apps like Manyverse focus on social media and decentralisation, which is more about "broadcasting" and gossip protocols, where the offline comms is a happy side-effect of their decentralisation goals.
Awala is a platform to make software communicate offline securely. Centralised services like Twitter[1], and decentralised ones like Letro[2], or even hybrids, are all possible.[3]
I'm not on a quest to decentralise the Internet. I'm on a quest to connect people to their loved ones despite repressive regimes and wars.
>Behind the scenes, your Awala app connects to an Internet gateway, which is a server that acts as a bridge between your device and the rest of Awala on the Internet.
Any ETA on F-Droid, Accrescent, and/or APK releases from Github (for Obtainium)?
I know it's a non-trivial ask, and is planned, but seems important that software against censorship be hosted on a less censorship-friendly platform than the Play Store.
That said, thank you so much for doing this important work! I've often thought that I should start or contribute to a project like this, considering the direction of the world seems to be bending towards censorship and autocracy on the internet.
> how would this work in jurastictions that are likely to jail you for transporting information across borders
Great question! This is, by far, my biggest worry. Especially in North Korea if we ever launch there. This is actually going to be the topic of the next episode in the Inside Awala podcast: https://awala.alitu.com/
Long story short, there are measures that we've taken, and measures we will take.
Measures that we've taken include using another layer of E2E encryption for the data transported by couriers and minimising the metadata to such an extent that you couldn't see who's the sender/recipient, even if the authorities took the courier's device to a lab. This way, couriers couldn't be coerced into giving something they don't have.
Measures we will take include concealing the app. For example, it could look and behave as a calculator when you open it (even its icon and name could convey that), and you'd only see the actual app once you enter a particular math expression.
Also, the technology is getting independent security audits periodically. They're currently wrapping up the latest one, and the report should be available in the coming weeks.
As for China, that's a totally different problem: They do have access to the Internet, but it's heavily censored. However, we're tackling that problem too now, as we're adding a resilient VPN function to Awala, whose prototype was already tested in China: https://github.com/relaycorp/fanqiang-poc
The reason for this VPN functionality inside Awala is that, at the end of the day, every single region that's susceptible to Internet blackouts is also subject to Internet censorship when the Internet is available. So people shouldn't have to install multiple apps for the various types of censorship they will be subjected to at different points in time.
However, at the sneakernet level, and at least today, I think the only region where it'd be useful would be North Korea, if this is ever used there. Interestingly enough, I'll be talking about this in the next episode of the Inside Awala podcast, in case you're interested: https://awala.alitu.com
China is very special case of totalitarianism with low entropy, but most other totalitarianism cases have low entropy only in capital City, and extremely corrupted outside capital, especially on borders.
This is don't mean that you could run across border on station wagon filled with prohibited content, but somebody could hide something like microSD in clothes.
Exists paradox - people usually thinking, jails have very strong and serious security system so inside there should be sterile environment without anything prohibited, but in reality usually there exist black market of prohibited things.
These practical problems make the project less feasible:
1. Making end applications implement your protocol (eg Facebook) makes it way harder to scale, simply because the enshittified big tech apps are unlikely to care. Now the apps will have to maintain a separate service and not get paid to do it.
2. Having deliberate physical couriers travel across borders are a massive risk - a hop to hop mesh network where connectivity can be easily established across all users (every user is a courier when they connect to unlimited mobile data or wifi) will make the network a lot more available
> These practical problems make the project less feasible:
I agree! But...
> 1. Making end applications implement your protocol (eg Facebook) makes it way harder to scale, simply because the enshittified big tech apps are unlikely to care. Now the apps will have to maintain a separate service and not get paid to do it.
My bet is that, once we gain sufficient ground, Facebook and other mainstream social networks will be interested in building an alternative clients powered by Awala, just like Twitter built "Twitter Lite" back in the day. It's likely to be a PR stunt.
OTOH, third parties could build such applications, as long as the social networks give them access to their APIs (without extortionate fees!).
Until we gain sufficient ground, we'll carry on with in-house Awala-compatible apps like Letro.[1]
> 2. Having deliberate physical couriers travel across borders are a massive risk
> a hop to hop mesh network where connectivity can be easily established across all users (every user is a courier when they connect to unlimited mobile data or wifi) will make the network a lot more available
I don't think that's a practical solution. Bluetooth-based meshnets are rather cumbersome to use, and WiFi-based ones are not even feasible (on Android, for example, you'd have to root your phone). Also, the regions we're targeting have low-spec devices, where most won't have enough capacity to replicate so much data from their family/neighbours.
It would be more useful to build a bluetooth mesh network (like what airtags already uses) to carry small pieces of information across long distances without internet access instead of having physical couriers that need to deliberately stop and have people connect to them to store data and potentially charge a fee
It should be ubiquitous and something that just works when someone passes by
Bluetooth LE support would be great. That's the one P2P thing that allows Apple and other devices to communicate without an internet connection (or at least a Wi-Fi infrastructure network).
