Jump to content

Ultrasurf: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
SJSiam (talk | contribs)
8 edits
m Removed unofficial download link
Tags: references removed Visual edit
Arielweil (talk | contribs)
71 edits
Update funding and security information and add sources
 
Line 17: Line 17:
}}
}}


'''UltraSurf''' is a freeware [[Internet censorship circumvention]] product<ref name="Beiser" /> created by UltraReach Internet Corporation. The software bypasses [[Internet censorship]] and [[Firewall (computing)|firewalls]] using an HTTP [[proxy server]], and employs [[encryption]] [[Protocol (computing)|protocols]] for privacy.
'''UltraSurf''' is a closed-source freeware [[Internet censorship circumvention]] product<ref name="Beiser" /> created by UltraReach Internet Corporation. The software bypasses [[Internet censorship]] and [[Firewall (computing)|firewalls]] using an HTTP [[proxy server]], and employs [[encryption]] [[Protocol (computing)|protocols]] for privacy.


The software was developed by two different groups of [[Falun Gong]] practitioners at the same time, one starting in the US in 2002 by expatriate Chinese.<ref name=Beiser/> The software was designed as a means of allowing internet users to bypass the [[Golden Shield Project|Great Firewall of China]]. In 2011, UltraReach claimed to have as many as 11 million users worldwide. The tool has been described as "one of the most important [[Freedom of speech|free-speech]] tools on the Internet" by ''[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]]'', and as the "best performing" circumvention tool by Harvard University in a 2007 study;<ref name=Berkman/> a 2011 study by [[Freedom House]] ranked it fifth.<ref name="FreedomHouse">[http://www.freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/inline_images/Censorship.pdf “Leaping Over the Firewall: A Review of Censorship Circumvention Tools”], Cormac Callanan, Hein Dries-Ziekenheiner, Alberto Escudero-Pascual, and Robert Guerra, Freedom House, 2011.</ref> Critics in the [[open-source software|open-source]] community, George Turner Says, have expressed concern about the software's [[closed-source]] nature and alleged [[security through obscurity]] design; UltraReach says their security considerations mean they prefer third party expert review to open source review.<ref name=reply>UltraSurf, [http://ultrasurf.us/Ultrasurf-response-to-Tor-definitive-review.pdf "Tor's critique of UltraSurf: A reply from the UltraSurf developers"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160118162858/http://ultrasurf.us/Ultrasurf-response-to-Tor-definitive-review.pdf |date=18 January 2016 }}, 16 April 2012. Retrieved 28 April 2012.</ref>
The software was developed by two different groups of [[Falun Gong]] practitioners at the same time, one starting in the US in 2002 by expatriate Chinese.<ref name=Beiser/> The software was designed as a means of allowing internet users to bypass the [[Golden Shield Project|Great Firewall of China]]. In 2011, UltraReach claimed to have as many as 11 million users worldwide.

UltraSurf is [[proprietary software]]; critics in the [[open-source software|open-source]] community have expressed concern about the software's [[closed-source]] nature and alleged [[security through obscurity]] design.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Ultrasurf Is Malware |url=https://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/ultrasurf-is-malware.237184/ |access-date=2024-06-05 |website=Wilders Security Forums |language=en-US}}</ref><ref name="Appelbaum" />


==Overview==
==Overview==
In 2001, UltraReach was founded by Chinese dissidents in [[Silicon Valley]]. Shortly after, UltraSurf was created to allow internet users in [[China]] to evade government censorship and monitoring.<ref name="Beiser">{{Cite magazine |last=Beiser |first=Vince |date=1 November 2010 |title=Digital Weapons Help Dissidents Punch Holes in China's Great Firewall |language=en-US |volume=18 |magazine=Wired |issue=11 |url=https://www.wired.com/2010/11/ff-firewallfighters/ |url-status=live |access-date=2022-06-15 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110329093936/http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/11/ff_firewallfighters/ |archive-date=29 Mar 2011 |issn=1059-1028}}</ref> As of 2011 UltraSurf reported over eleven million users worldwide.<ref name=Applebaum/> During the [[Arab Spring]], UltraReach recorded a 700 percent spike in traffic from [[Tunisia]].<ref name=Applebaum/> Similar traffic spikes occur frequently during times of unrest in other regions, such as [[Tibet]] and [[Myanmar|Burma]] during the [[Saffron Revolution]].<ref name="Beiser"/> [[Wired (magazine)|''Wired'' magazine]] in 2010 called UltraSurf "one of the most important free-speech tools on the Internet" for enabling citizens to access and share information from oppressed countries during times of humanitarian or human rights crises.<ref name=Beiser/>
In 2001, UltraReach was founded by members of [[Falun Gong]]. UltraSurf was created to allow internet users in [[China]] to evade government censorship and monitoring.<ref name="Beiser">{{Cite magazine |last=Beiser |first=Vince |date=1 November 2010 |title=Digital Weapons Help Dissidents Punch Holes in China's Great Firewall |language=en-US |volume=18 |magazine=Wired |issue=11 |url=https://www.wired.com/2010/11/ff-firewallfighters/ |url-status=live |access-date=2022-06-15 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110329093936/http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/11/ff_firewallfighters/ |archive-date=29 Mar 2011 |issn=1059-1028}}</ref> In 2011 UltraSurf reported over eleven million users worldwide.<ref name=Applebaum/> During the [[Arab Spring]], UltraReach recorded a 700 percent spike in traffic from [[Tunisia]].<ref name=Applebaum/> Similar traffic spikes occurred during times of unrest in other regions, such as [[Tibet]] and [[Myanmar|Burma]] during the [[Saffron Revolution]].<ref name="Beiser"/> However, a study by the [[United States Department of State]] found a very low level of usage of the software as of 2021, partially due to the software only being available on Windows.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last=Folkenflik |first=David |date=April 14, 2021 |title=Falun Gong, Steve Bannon And The Trump-Era Battle Over Internet Freedom |url=https://www.npr.org/2021/04/14/986982387/falun-gong-steve-bannon-and-the-trump-era-battle-over-internet-freedom}}</ref>


==Government Funding==
UltraReach was one of a dozen circumvention tools evaluated by a [[Freedom House]]-funded report based on user experience from China in 2010, which include [[Hotspot Shield]], [[Tor (network)|Tor]], and [[Freegate]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Leaping Over the Firewall: A Review of Censorship Circumvention Tools |url=https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/2020-02/Archived_Special_Report_FH_Censorship_Circumvention_tools.pdf |website=freedomhouse.org|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231228031624/https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/2020-02/Archived_Special_Report_FH_Censorship_Circumvention_tools.pdf |archive-date=28 December 2023 }}</ref>
⚫
UltraSurf has received significant funding from the U.S. government. Originally, funding was provided through the [[United States Department of State|U.S. State Department]] as well as the [[Broadcasting Board of Governors]], which administered [[Voice of America]] and [[Radio Free Asia]].<ref name="Applebaum">Anne Applebaum, [https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-has-the-state-department-run-into-a-firewall-on-internet-freedom/2011/04/03/AFYnn9eC_story.html “Why has the State Department run into a firewall on Internet freedom?”], ''Washington Post'', 4 April 2011.</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Lau |first=Thomas |date=February 10, 2006 |title=Internet Development and Information Control in the People's Republic of China - Updated February 10, 2006 |url=https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RL/RL33167 |access-date=December 29, 2023 |website=[[Congressional Research Service]] Report for the [[United States Congress]], February 10, 2006, table 1. {{pipe}} International Broadcasting Bureau Funding for Counter-Censorship Technology}}</ref> However, this funding was revoked due to UltraSurf's refusal to comply with independent security audits.


In 2020, when [[Michael Pack]] was appointed as the head of the [[U.S. Agency for Global Media]] by [[Donald Trump]], Pack and several conservative allies pushed for additional funding for UltraSurf through the [[Open Technology Fund]], despite use of closed-source code and low number of users. UltraSurf was awarded $1.8 million in funding under Pack, despite the objections of several high-ranking officials who were subsequently fired. Pack's actions were later referred to the [[Inspector General of the Department of State]] as part of a criminal conspiracy.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Allen-Ebrahimian |first=Bethany |date=June 23, 2020 |title=In media agency shakeup, conservative groups push for Falun Gong-backed internet tools |url=https://www.axios.com/2020/06/23/falun-gong-us-agency-global-media |website=Axios}}</ref><ref name=":0" />
⚫
UltraSurf is funded, in part, through contracts with the U.S. government's [[Broadcasting Board of Governors]], which administers [[Voice of America]] and [[Radio Free Asia]].<ref name=Applebaum>Anne Applebaum, [https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-has-the-state-department-run-into-a-firewall-on-internet-freedom/2011/04/03/AFYnn9eC_story.html “Why has the State Department run into a firewall on Internet freedom?”], ''Washington Post'', 4 April 2011.</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Lau |first=Thomas |date=February 10, 2006 |title=Internet Development and Information Control in the People's Republic of China - Updated February 10, 2006 |url=https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RL/RL33167 |access-date=December 29, 2023 |website=[[Congressional Research Service]] Report for the [[United States Congress]], February 10, 2006, table 1. {{pipe}} International Broadcasting Bureau Funding for Counter-Censorship Technology}}</ref> As of 2012, UltraReach has had difficulty serving its growing user base due to insufficient funding.<ref>[https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/tools-to-skirt-web-censors-swamped-by-demand-8220125.html "Tools to skirt web censors swamped by demand], [[James Ball (journalist)|James Ball]], ''The Washington Post'' via ''The Independent'', 22 October 2012. Retrieved 24 July 2013.</ref>


==Operation==
==Operation==
=== Client software ===
=== Client software ===
UltraSurf is free to download and requires no installation. UltraSurf does not install any files on the user's computer and leaves no registry edits after it exits.<ref name=Berkman/> In other words, it leaves no trace of its use. To fully remove the software from the computer, a user needs only to delete the exe file named u.exe. It is only available on a Windows platform, runs through Internet Explorer by default, and has an optional plug-in for Firefox and Chrome.<ref>UltraSurf, [http://ultrasurf.us/security.html “Your Security”].</ref>
UltraSurf is free to download and requires no installation. UltraSurf does not install any files on the user's computer and leaves no registry edits after it exits.<ref name="Berkman">Hal Roberts, Ethan Zuckerman, John Palfrey, [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/publications/2009/2007_Circumvention_Landscape_Report '2007 Circumvention Landscape Report'], Berkman Center of Law and Society, Harvard University. 5 March 2009.</ref> In other words, it leaves no trace of its use. To fully remove the software from the computer, a user needs only to delete the exe file named u.exe. It is only available on a Windows platform, runs through Internet Explorer by default, and has an optional plug-in for Firefox and Chrome.<ref>UltraSurf, [http://ultrasurf.us/security.html “Your Security”].</ref>


The UltraReach website notes that "Some anti-virus software companies misclassify UltraSurf as a malware or Trojan because UltraSurf encrypts the communications and circumvents internet censorship."<ref>UltraSurf, [http://ultrasurf.us/user-center.html “User Center”] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170718054058/https://ultrasurf.us/user-center.html |date=18 July 2017 }}.</ref> Some security companies have agreed to [[whitelist]] UltraSurf.<ref>[http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/082809-chinese-anticensorship.html "Developer denies software to beat Chinese censors is malicious: UltraSurf programmer says the software acts suspiciously, but it's just trying to put one over on the Great Firewall of China"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090830190613/http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/082809-chinese-anticensorship.html |date=30 August 2009 }}, Tim Greene, ''Network World'', 28 August 2009.</ref> According to Appelbaum, the UltraSurf client uses [[anti-debugging]] techniques and also employs [[executable compression]].<ref name=Appelbaum/> The client acts as a local proxy which communicates with the UltraReach network through what appears to be an [[obfuscation|obfuscated]] form of [[Transport Layer Security|TLS]]/SSL.<ref name=Appelbaum/>
The UltraReach website notes that "Some anti-virus software companies misclassify UltraSurf as a malware or Trojan because UltraSurf encrypts the communications and circumvents internet censorship."<ref>UltraSurf, [http://ultrasurf.us/user-center.html “User Center”] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170718054058/https://ultrasurf.us/user-center.html |date=18 July 2017 }}.</ref> Some security companies have agreed to [[whitelist]] UltraSurf.<ref>[http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/082809-chinese-anticensorship.html "Developer denies software to beat Chinese censors is malicious: UltraSurf programmer says the software acts suspiciously, but it's just trying to put one over on the Great Firewall of China"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090830190613/http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/082809-chinese-anticensorship.html |date=30 August 2009 }}, Tim Greene, ''Network World'', 28 August 2009.</ref> According to Appelbaum, the UltraSurf client uses [[anti-debugging]] techniques and also employs [[executable compression]].<ref name=Appelbaum/> The client acts as a local proxy which communicates with the UltraReach network through what appears to be an [[obfuscation|obfuscated]] form of [[Transport Layer Security|TLS]]/SSL.<ref name=Appelbaum/>
Line 37: Line 40:
The software works by creating an encrypted HTTP tunnel between the user's computer and a central pool of [[Open proxy|proxy servers]], enabling users to bypass firewalls and censorship.<ref name=Berkman/> UltraReach hosts all of its own servers.<ref name=Berkman/> The software makes use of sophisticated, proprietary anti-blocking technology to overcome filtering and censorship online.<ref name=Berkman/> According to Wired magazine, UltraSurf changes the "IP addresses of their proxy servers up to 10,000 times an hour."<ref name=Beiser/> On the server-side, a 2011 analysis found that the UltraReach network employed [[Squid (software)|squid]] and [[ziproxy]] software, as well as [[BIND|ISC BIND]] servers bootstrapping for a wider network of open recursive DNS servers, the latter not under UltraReach control.<ref name=Appelbaum/>
The software works by creating an encrypted HTTP tunnel between the user's computer and a central pool of [[Open proxy|proxy servers]], enabling users to bypass firewalls and censorship.<ref name=Berkman/> UltraReach hosts all of its own servers.<ref name=Berkman/> The software makes use of sophisticated, proprietary anti-blocking technology to overcome filtering and censorship online.<ref name=Berkman/> According to Wired magazine, UltraSurf changes the "IP addresses of their proxy servers up to 10,000 times an hour."<ref name=Beiser/> On the server-side, a 2011 analysis found that the UltraReach network employed [[Squid (software)|squid]] and [[ziproxy]] software, as well as [[BIND|ISC BIND]] servers bootstrapping for a wider network of open recursive DNS servers, the latter not under UltraReach control.<ref name=Appelbaum/>


UltraSurf is designed primarily as an anti-censorship tool but also offers privacy protections in the form of industry standard encryption, with an added layer of obfuscation built in.<ref name=reply/> UltraReach uses an internal content filter which blocks some sites, such as those deemed pornographic or otherwise offensive.<ref name=Berkman/> According to Wired magazine: "That's partly because their network lacks the bandwidth to accommodate so much data-heavy traffic, but also because Falun Gong frowns on erotica."<ref name=Beiser/> Additionally, the Falun Gong criticism website facts.org.cn, alleged to be operated by the Chinese government, is also unreachable through UltraSurf.<ref name=Appelbaum/>
UltraSurf is designed primarily as an anti-censorship tool but also offers privacy protections in the form of industry standard encryption, with an added layer of obfuscation built in.<ref name="reply">UltraSurf, [http://ultrasurf.us/Ultrasurf-response-to-Tor-definitive-review.pdf "Tor's critique of UltraSurf: A reply from the UltraSurf developers"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160118162858/http://ultrasurf.us/Ultrasurf-response-to-Tor-definitive-review.pdf|date=18 January 2016}}, 16 April 2012. Retrieved 28 April 2012.</ref> UltraReach uses an internal content filter which blocks some sites, such as those deemed pornographic or otherwise offensive.<ref name=Berkman/> According to Wired magazine: "That's partly because their network lacks the bandwidth to accommodate so much data-heavy traffic, but also because Falun Gong frowns on erotica."<ref name=Beiser/> Additionally, the Falun Gong criticism website facts.org.cn, alleged to be operated by the Chinese government, is also unreachable through UltraSurf.<ref name=Appelbaum/>


==Evaluation==
==Evaluation==
{{Update|section|date=June 2020}}
In a 2007 study, Harvard University's [[Berkman Center for Internet & Society]] found UltraSurf to be the "best performing" of all tested circumvention tools during in-country tests, and recommended it for widespread use. In particular, the report found that UltraSurf effectively bypassed various forms of censorship and blocking, include IP block, DNS block, and keyword filtering. It was also the fastest tool during in-country tests, and was noted for being easy to use and install with a simple user interface.<ref name=Berkman/> The report noted, however, that UltraReach is designed primarily as a circumvention product, rather than as an anonymity tool, and suggested that users concerned about anonymity should disable browser support for active content when using UltraSurf.<ref name=Berkman>Hal Roberts, Ethan Zuckerman, John Palfrey, [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/publications/2009/2007_Circumvention_Landscape_Report '2007 Circumvention Landscape Report'], Berkman Center of Law and Society, Harvard University. 5 March 2009.</ref>

A 2011 report by the U.S.-based human rights group [[Freedom House]] ranked UltraSurf fourth overall among censorship circumvention and privacy tools, as measured by a combination of performance, usability, support and security. In particular, the tool was recommended for users interested in downloading or viewing information, who required a relatively high degree of privacy, and who favored a fast connection speed.<ref name="FreedomHouse" />

Some technologists have expressed reservations about the UltraReach model, however. In particular, its developers have been criticized by proponents of open-source software for not allowing peer review of the tool's design, except at the discretion of its creators. Moreover, because UltraReach operates all its own servers, their developers have access to user logs. This architecture means that users are required to trust UltraReach not to reveal user data.<ref name=Beiser/><ref name=Berkman/> UltraReach maintains that it keeps logs for a short period of time, and uses them only for the purpose of analyzing traffic for signs of interference or to monitor overall performance and efficacy; the company says it does not disclose user logs to third parties.<ref name=reply/><ref name=Beiser/> According to [[Jacob Appelbaum]] with the [[Tor Project]], this essentially amounts to an example of "privacy by policy".<ref name=Appelbaum>Jacob Appelbaum, [https://media.torproject.org/misc/2012-04-16-ultrasurf-analysis.pdf “Technical analysis of the UltraSurf proxying software”], Tor Project, 16 April 2012. [https://blog.torproject.org/blog/ultrasurf-definitive-review Blog announcement] with updates.</ref>
Some technologists have expressed reservations about the UltraReach model, however. In particular, its developers have been criticized by proponents of open-source software for not allowing peer review of the tool's design, except at the discretion of its creators. Moreover, because UltraReach operates all its own servers, their developers have access to user logs. This architecture means that users are required to trust UltraReach not to reveal user data.<ref name=Beiser/><ref name=Berkman/> UltraReach maintains that it keeps logs for a short period of time, and uses them only for the purpose of analyzing traffic for signs of interference or to monitor overall performance and efficacy; the company says it does not disclose user logs to third parties.<ref name=reply/><ref name=Beiser/> According to [[Jacob Appelbaum]] with the [[Tor Project]], this essentially amounts to an example of "privacy by policy".<ref name=Appelbaum>Jacob Appelbaum, [https://media.torproject.org/misc/2012-04-16-ultrasurf-analysis.pdf “Technical analysis of the UltraSurf proxying software”], Tor Project, 16 April 2012. [https://blog.torproject.org/blog/ultrasurf-definitive-review Blog announcement] with updates.</ref>


In an April 2012 report, Appelbaum further criticized UltraSurf for its use of internal content filtering (including blocking pornographic websites), and for its willingness to comply with subpoenas from U.S. law enforcement officials.<ref name=Appelbaum/> Appelbaum's report also noted that UltraSurf pages employed [[Google Analytics]], which had the potential to leak user data, and that its systems were not all up to date with the latest security patches and did not make use of [[Perfect forward secrecy|forward security mechanisms]].<ref name=Appelbaum/> Furthermore, Appelbaum claims that "The UltraSurf client uses Open and Free Software including [[PuTTY|Putty]] and [[zlib]]. The use of both Putty and zlib is not disclosed. This use and lack of disclosure is a violation of the licenses."<ref name=Appelbaum/> In a response posted the same day, UltraReach wrote that it had already resolved these issues. They asserted that Appelbaum's report had misrepresented or misunderstood other aspects of its software. UltraReach also argued that the differences between the software approaches to Internet censorship represented by Tor and UltraSurf were at base philosophical and simply different approaches to censorship circumvention.<ref name=reply/> A top-secret [[NSA]] presentation revealed as part of the [[2013 global surveillance disclosures]] dismisses this response by UltraSurf as "all talk and no show".<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/oct/04/tor-high-secure-internet-anonymity |title=Tor: 'The king of high-secure, low-latency anonymity' |work = [[The Guardian]]|date = 4 October 2013}}</ref>
In an April 2012 report, Appelbaum further criticized UltraSurf for its use of internal content filtering (including blocking pornographic websites), and for its willingness to comply with subpoenas from U.S. law enforcement officials.<ref name=Appelbaum/> Appelbaum's report also noted that UltraSurf pages employed [[Google Analytics]], which had the potential to leak user data, and that its systems were not all up to date with the latest security patches and did not make use of [[Perfect forward secrecy|forward security mechanisms]].<ref name=Appelbaum/> Furthermore, Appelbaum claims that "The UltraSurf client uses Open and Free Software including [[PuTTY|Putty]] and [[zlib]]. The use of both Putty and zlib is not disclosed. This use and lack of disclosure is a violation of the licenses."<ref name=Appelbaum/> In a response posted the same day, UltraReach wrote that it had already resolved these issues. They asserted that Appelbaum's report had misrepresented or misunderstood other aspects of its software. UltraReach also argued that the differences between the software approaches to Internet censorship represented by Tor and UltraSurf were at base philosophical and simply different approaches to censorship circumvention.<ref name=reply/> A top-secret [[NSA]] presentation revealed as part of the [[2013 global surveillance disclosures]] dismisses this response by UltraSurf as "all talk and no show".<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/oct/04/tor-high-secure-internet-anonymity |title=Tor: 'The king of high-secure, low-latency anonymity' |work = [[The Guardian]]|date = 4 October 2013}}</ref>

A 2021 review of UltraSurf by [[TechRadar]] described UltraSurf as "capable yet slow", and cautioned that the software "cannot increase your online privacy, and should not be considered or used as an online security tool".<ref>{{Cite web |last=updated |first=Sead Fadilpašić last |date=2020-09-29 |title=Ultrasurf review |url=https://www.techradar.com/reviews/ultrasurf |access-date=2024-06-05 |website=TechRadar |language=en}}</ref>

A 2021 audit by the [[United States Department of State]] found that UltraSurf relies on outdated technologies from 2013, which would be "trivial for a moderate-budget adversary" to defeat.<ref name=":0" />


==See also==
==See also==

Latest revision as of 17:10, 5 June 2024

UltraSurf
Developer(s)UltraReach[1]
Initial release2002
Stable release
21.32
Operating systemAndroid, Microsoft Windows
Available inChinese, English
TypeInternet censorship circumvention
LicenseFreeware
Websiteultrasurf.us

UltraSurf is a closed-source freeware Internet censorship circumvention product[2] created by UltraReach Internet Corporation. The software bypasses Internet censorship and firewalls using an HTTP proxy server, and employs encryption protocols for privacy.

The software was developed by two different groups of Falun Gong practitioners at the same time, one starting in the US in 2002 by expatriate Chinese.[2] The software was designed as a means of allowing internet users to bypass the Great Firewall of China. In 2011, UltraReach claimed to have as many as 11 million users worldwide.

UltraSurf is proprietary software; critics in the open-source community have expressed concern about the software's closed-source nature and alleged security through obscurity design.[3][4]

Overview

[edit]

In 2001, UltraReach was founded by members of Falun Gong. UltraSurf was created to allow internet users in China to evade government censorship and monitoring.[2] In 2011 UltraSurf reported over eleven million users worldwide.[5] During the Arab Spring, UltraReach recorded a 700 percent spike in traffic from Tunisia.[5] Similar traffic spikes occurred during times of unrest in other regions, such as Tibet and Burma during the Saffron Revolution.[2] However, a study by the United States Department of State found a very low level of usage of the software as of 2021, partially due to the software only being available on Windows.[6]

Government Funding

[edit]

UltraSurf has received significant funding from the U.S. government. Originally, funding was provided through the U.S. State Department as well as the Broadcasting Board of Governors, which administered Voice of America and Radio Free Asia.[5][7] However, this funding was revoked due to UltraSurf's refusal to comply with independent security audits.

In 2020, when Michael Pack was appointed as the head of the U.S. Agency for Global Media by Donald Trump, Pack and several conservative allies pushed for additional funding for UltraSurf through the Open Technology Fund, despite use of closed-source code and low number of users. UltraSurf was awarded $1.8 million in funding under Pack, despite the objections of several high-ranking officials who were subsequently fired. Pack's actions were later referred to the Inspector General of the Department of State as part of a criminal conspiracy.[8][6]

Operation

[edit]

Client software

[edit]

UltraSurf is free to download and requires no installation. UltraSurf does not install any files on the user's computer and leaves no registry edits after it exits.[9] In other words, it leaves no trace of its use. To fully remove the software from the computer, a user needs only to delete the exe file named u.exe. It is only available on a Windows platform, runs through Internet Explorer by default, and has an optional plug-in for Firefox and Chrome.[10]

The UltraReach website notes that "Some anti-virus software companies misclassify UltraSurf as a malware or Trojan because UltraSurf encrypts the communications and circumvents internet censorship."[11] Some security companies have agreed to whitelist UltraSurf.[12] According to Appelbaum, the UltraSurf client uses anti-debugging techniques and also employs executable compression.[4] The client acts as a local proxy which communicates with the UltraReach network through what appears to be an obfuscated form of TLS/SSL.[4]

UltraSurf servers

[edit]

The software works by creating an encrypted HTTP tunnel between the user's computer and a central pool of proxy servers, enabling users to bypass firewalls and censorship.[9] UltraReach hosts all of its own servers.[9] The software makes use of sophisticated, proprietary anti-blocking technology to overcome filtering and censorship online.[9] According to Wired magazine, UltraSurf changes the "IP addresses of their proxy servers up to 10,000 times an hour."[2] On the server-side, a 2011 analysis found that the UltraReach network employed squid and ziproxy software, as well as ISC BIND servers bootstrapping for a wider network of open recursive DNS servers, the latter not under UltraReach control.[4]

UltraSurf is designed primarily as an anti-censorship tool but also offers privacy protections in the form of industry standard encryption, with an added layer of obfuscation built in.[13] UltraReach uses an internal content filter which blocks some sites, such as those deemed pornographic or otherwise offensive.[9] According to Wired magazine: "That's partly because their network lacks the bandwidth to accommodate so much data-heavy traffic, but also because Falun Gong frowns on erotica."[2] Additionally, the Falun Gong criticism website facts.org.cn, alleged to be operated by the Chinese government, is also unreachable through UltraSurf.[4]

Evaluation

[edit]

Some technologists have expressed reservations about the UltraReach model, however. In particular, its developers have been criticized by proponents of open-source software for not allowing peer review of the tool's design, except at the discretion of its creators. Moreover, because UltraReach operates all its own servers, their developers have access to user logs. This architecture means that users are required to trust UltraReach not to reveal user data.[2][9] UltraReach maintains that it keeps logs for a short period of time, and uses them only for the purpose of analyzing traffic for signs of interference or to monitor overall performance and efficacy; the company says it does not disclose user logs to third parties.[13][2] According to Jacob Appelbaum with the Tor Project, this essentially amounts to an example of "privacy by policy".[4]

In an April 2012 report, Appelbaum further criticized UltraSurf for its use of internal content filtering (including blocking pornographic websites), and for its willingness to comply with subpoenas from U.S. law enforcement officials.[4] Appelbaum's report also noted that UltraSurf pages employed Google Analytics, which had the potential to leak user data, and that its systems were not all up to date with the latest security patches and did not make use of forward security mechanisms.[4] Furthermore, Appelbaum claims that "The UltraSurf client uses Open and Free Software including Putty and zlib. The use of both Putty and zlib is not disclosed. This use and lack of disclosure is a violation of the licenses."[4] In a response posted the same day, UltraReach wrote that it had already resolved these issues. They asserted that Appelbaum's report had misrepresented or misunderstood other aspects of its software. UltraReach also argued that the differences between the software approaches to Internet censorship represented by Tor and UltraSurf were at base philosophical and simply different approaches to censorship circumvention.[13] A top-secret NSA presentation revealed as part of the 2013 global surveillance disclosures dismisses this response by UltraSurf as "all talk and no show".[14]

A 2021 review of UltraSurf by TechRadar described UltraSurf as "capable yet slow", and cautioned that the software "cannot increase your online privacy, and should not be considered or used as an online security tool".[15]

A 2021 audit by the United States Department of State found that UltraSurf relies on outdated technologies from 2013, which would be "trivial for a moderate-budget adversary" to defeat.[6]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ "About Ultrasurf and Ultrareach - Internet Freedom, Privacy, and Security". Ultrasurf.us. Retrieved 2 April 2019.
  2. ^ a b c d e f g h Beiser, Vince (1 November 2010). "Digital Weapons Help Dissidents Punch Holes in China's Great Firewall". Wired. Vol. 18, no. 11. ISSN 1059-1028. Archived from the original on 29 March 2011. Retrieved 15 June 2022.
  3. ^ "Ultrasurf Is Malware". Wilders Security Forums. Retrieved 5 June 2024.
  4. ^ a b c d e f g h i Jacob Appelbaum, “Technical analysis of the UltraSurf proxying software”, Tor Project, 16 April 2012. Blog announcement with updates.
  5. ^ a b c Anne Applebaum, “Why has the State Department run into a firewall on Internet freedom?”, Washington Post, 4 April 2011.
  6. ^ a b c Folkenflik, David (14 April 2021). "Falun Gong, Steve Bannon And The Trump-Era Battle Over Internet Freedom".
  7. ^ Lau, Thomas (10 February 2006). "Internet Development and Information Control in the People's Republic of China - Updated February 10, 2006". Congressional Research Service Report for the United States Congress, February 10, 2006, table 1. | International Broadcasting Bureau Funding for Counter-Censorship Technology. Retrieved 29 December 2023.
  8. ^ Allen-Ebrahimian, Bethany (23 June 2020). "In media agency shakeup, conservative groups push for Falun Gong-backed internet tools". Axios.
  9. ^ a b c d e f Hal Roberts, Ethan Zuckerman, John Palfrey, '2007 Circumvention Landscape Report', Berkman Center of Law and Society, Harvard University. 5 March 2009.
  10. ^ UltraSurf, “Your Security”.
  11. ^ UltraSurf, “User Center” Archived 18 July 2017 at the Wayback Machine.
  12. ^ "Developer denies software to beat Chinese censors is malicious: UltraSurf programmer says the software acts suspiciously, but it's just trying to put one over on the Great Firewall of China" Archived 30 August 2009 at the Wayback Machine, Tim Greene, Network World, 28 August 2009.
  13. ^ a b c UltraSurf, "Tor's critique of UltraSurf: A reply from the UltraSurf developers" Archived 18 January 2016 at the Wayback Machine, 16 April 2012. Retrieved 28 April 2012.
  14. ^ "Tor: 'The king of high-secure, low-latency anonymity'". The Guardian. 4 October 2013.
  15. ^ updated, Sead Fadilpašić last (29 September 2020). "Ultrasurf review". TechRadar. Retrieved 5 June 2024.
[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ultrasurf&oldid=1227425946"