RAPID: World Wide Access to COVID-19 Information

应对全球危机，例如当前的COVID-19大流行，需要涉及不同群体（政府、科学家、医疗服务提供者、普通民众）的广泛沟通。互联网确实提供了一种有效的沟通手段，但谣言、未经证实的理论或赤裸裸的宣传也会通过互联网传播给广大受众，并有可能造成重大伤害。人们很容易得出这样的结论：在危机时期，为了限制不满情绪的传播，有必要对互联网进行强有力的控制。另一方面，更自由的信息流动也是有益的。它可以在发生危机时迅速而细致地部署资源，以满足关键需求。 因此，在大流行的情况下，公开的还是严格的信息控制政策更有效，这是一个悬而未决的问题。在这个项目中，研究人员研究了几个国家的互联网审查政策--从非常严格的控制（如中国、俄罗斯）到适度的控制（如韩国、印度）再到非常开放的控制（如美国、德国、日本）--并描述了他们在疫情期间如何控制信息的获取，特别是与COVID-19相关的信息。这项研究将有助于确定互联网通信的最佳做法，从而有助于保护国民健康。本研究从多个国家的Vantage位置收集有关互联网上COVID-19相关信息的读写访问的数据。被选中的国家与互联网连接良好，地理位置多样，对互联网审查的方法也各不相同：有些是严格的审查，有些是半自由的，有些是以言论自由而闻名的（如自由之家的互联网自由研究报告所述）。此外，由于访问控制在一个国家内可能会有所不同，因此使用多个Vantage位置-理想情况下，在该国每个主要AS的“客户锥”中有一个。从这些Vantage位置，每月两次检查四项措施：（1）用户是否可以访问约翰霍普金斯大学系统科学与工程中心冠状病毒仪表板、疾病控制和预防中心、世界卫生组织以及同行评审期刊（如Science、Nature、NEJM等）认为权威的来源。（2）用户是否可以访问非权威来源，例如被确定为传播错误信息的网站（由跟踪社交网络的研究人员确定）。(3)用户可以访问哪些社交媒体网站，以及这些网站是否已知受到审查（例如，A国的用户是否可以访问Twitter、Facebook等，还是只有qq这样的本地网站？这些网站是否被严格过滤？）(4)如果用户发送一个带有手动构造的触发短语的HTTP查询（例如，“冠状病毒生物武器”），查询会被阻止吗？该研究收集的数据与流行病影响的可信指标（到达峰值时间和死亡率）相关联，有助于确定与成功遏制COVID-19流行病并从其恢复相关的互联网控制策略。该奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的知识价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

Response to a worldwide crisis, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic, requires extensive communication involving different groups (governments, scientists, healthcare providers, common people). The Internet does provide an effective means of communication – but rumor, non-validated theories or outright propaganda also propagate to wide audiences over the Internet, and have the potential to cause significant harm. It is tempting to conclude that strong Internet controls are necessary in times of crisis to limit the spread of malcontent. On the other hand, more free flow of information is also beneficial. It can enable rapid yet nuanced deployment of resources to critical needs in times of such a crisis. It is therefore an open question whether open or strict information control policies work better in a pandemic situation. In this project, researchers study Internet censorship policies in several countries – ranging from those employ very strict controls (e.g. China, Russia) through moderate (e.g. South Korea, India) to very open (e.g. USA, Germany, Japan) – and characterize how they control access to information, specifically related to COVID-19, during the course of the pandemic. This study would help decide best practice in Internet communications and thereby help to protect national health. This study collects data regarding read and write access to COVID-19 related information on the Internet, from vantage points in a range of countries. Chosen countries are well-connected to the Internet, geographically diverse, and different in their approaches to Internet censorship: some strict censors, some semi-free, and some known for free speech (as reported in the Internet Freedom Study, by Freedom House). Further, as access controls may vary within a country, multiple vantage points are used – ideally, one in the "customer cone" of each major AS in the country. From these vantage points, four measures are checked twice a month: (1) Whether users can access sources considered authoritative by the Johns Hopkins University's Center for Systems Science and Engineering Coronavirus Dashboard, Center for Disease Control and Prevention, World Health Organization, and peer-reviewed journals such as Science, Nature, NEJM etc. (2) Whether users can access non-authoritative sources, such as websites identified as spreading misinformation (identified by researchers following social networks). (3) What social media sites users can access, and whether these are known to be censored (e.g. can users in country A reach Twitter, Facebook etc., or only local sites like qq? Are these sites strictly filtered?) (4) If a user sends an HTTP query with a manually-constructed trigger phrase (say, "coronavirus bioweapon"), is the query blocked? The data collected in this study is correlated against trusted measures of pandemic impact (time-to-peak and mortality), and can help identify the Internet control strategies associated with success in containing and recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.