Tell us if your ISP is blocking any proxy websites or VPNs. We promise to seek remedy. #SaveTheInternet #SaveOurPrivacy

Folks! Do report any blocking of proxy or VPNs by your ISP. This is a net neutrality violation and undermines your privacy.

10 January, 2019
1 min read

In Aria Thaker’s article for Quartz on the 8th of January, she reports on activity on India’s subreddit, where users had started a thread reporting that Reliance Jio was blocking proxy websites. This includes websites like, VPNbook, Hidester etc. - all of which are websites that allow the user to mask their location to access information on the internet when the same is blocked in their area.

The principle of Net Neutrality (which now has regulatory backing in India through amendments to the licenses of telecom companies) holds that telecom companies which provide internet access and Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are required to treat all data equally, not interfering with the access choices of the end user. Any provider selectively blocking VPNs and proxy service websites is extremely concerning as it contravenes this principle and violates Indian law.

Further, with the lack of a codified privacy law in India, blocking VPN sites completely leaves users devoid of any sort of privacy online, which means that any such action on a service provider's part takes away a technical protection for one of our most essential fundamental rights.

To this end, we are putting out a Google Form to the public. The intention behind this form is to collect data on which websites are being blocked and by which ISPs, after which we will look through it and see how best to remedy the situation, by complaints, approaching the TRAI, the Department of Telecom, and other bodies as needed.

Suffering a block? Click here and send us a report.

Subscribe to our newsletter, and don't miss out on our latest updates.

Similar Posts

Delhi High Court directs government to submit affidavit confirming lack of written records in Aarogya Setu’s development

Updates on Saurav Das’ writ petition before the Delhi High Court, where he is contesting the Central Information Commission’s decision to withhold information related to Aarogya Setu.

4 min read

Supreme Court refers challenge to constitutionality of sedition law to a larger Bench of at least 5 judges

Noting that the past cases under Section 124-A will not be affected on account of introduction of new Bills, a 3-judges bench of the Supreme Court led by the CJI has referred the petition challenging the constitutionality of Section 124-A to a larger Bench of at least 5 judges

5 min read

Shooting down bad ideas: Our response to TRAI’s consultation paper on OTT Regulation and Selective Banning

TRAI released a consultation paper on OTT regulation and selective banning. In our response, we expressed our view against the licensing and registration as well as selective banning of OTT communication services. See the post to read our detailed comments.

5 min read

Donate to IFF

Help IFF scale up by making a donation for digital rights. Really, when it comes to free speech online, digital privacy, net neutrality and innovation — we got your back!