Filtering, as a tool for controlling and restricting access to information, has always been a controversial issue in the realm of cybersecurity and human rights violations. This policy, often justified by concepts such as national security, territorial integrity, public order, and the system’s interests, can, in practice, lead to serious violations of freedom of expression, the right to free access to information, and other fundamental rights of citizens. Such restrictions become particularly problematic when they are used as instruments to suppress political, social, and civil freedoms. In many cases, governments use filtering as a means of combating harmful content or security threats. However, this approach sometimes exceeds its stated objectives, resulting in the suppression of dissenting views, the restriction of free information flow, and the curtailment of legitimate civil activities.

From a legal perspective, internet filtering policies are in direct conflict with the fundamental principles of human rights, including freedom of expression and the right to free access to information. These principles, enshrined in international documents such as Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, serve as benchmarks for achieving social justice and respecting citizens’ rights. These legal rights and freedoms are also emphasized in Articles 23 and 24 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Violating these rights not only negatively impacts individual freedoms but can also have widespread political, social, and economic consequences. In reality, these policies undermine principles such as universal access to information, freedom of information, and internet freedom, hindering the realization of social justice and the development of cyberspace.

From a cybersecurity perspective, filtering policies create widespread and complex consequences. To bypass restrictions, users are forced to resort to circumvention tools such as VPNs, which are often designed and distributed by online profiteers or even state actors. Due to the lack of adequate security protocols, these tools expose users to significant cybersecurity risks. Such risks include the theft of personal information, malware infiltration, and even the misuse of financial data. Additionally, VPNs provided by government or government-affiliated entities can act as covert surveillance tools designed to collect sensitive user data and violate privacy.

In Iran, filtering policies, in addition to their extensive negative impacts on cybersecurity and human rights, have complex economic and political dimensions. While the Iranian government imposes severe restrictions on internet access and communication platforms, reports indicate that individuals or entities affiliated with the regime exploit this situation for economic gain. On one hand, extensive internet filtering blocks legal pathways to information access. On the other hand, the market for insecure VPNs and alternative internet service structures—often controlled by regime-associated individuals—flourishes. These tools not only fail to meet necessary security standards but can also serve as tools for monitoring and controlling user activity. This duality clearly reflects a conflict of interest and an overt violation of human rights, as it both limits digital freedoms and monetizes the imposed conditions. Iranian users, lacking legal and secure avenues for internet access, are forced to rely on VPNs, many of which are supplied by the same entities responsible for filtering the internet. This vicious cycle not only violates users’ privacy but also creates an insecure online environment, leaving citizens vulnerable to serious threats, including data theft and unauthorized surveillance.

This approach to managing cyberspace is a clear example of systematic human rights violations and economic exploitation of imposed restrictions. In this duality, where restrictions and the provision of superficial solutions to bypass them are intertwined, not only are human rights doubly violated, but a structure of economic rent-seeking and corruption is also reinforced. To put an end to this destructive cycle, filtering policies must be replaced with a transparent, human-centered approach aligned with human rights principles. Eliminating filtering, ending the economic rent-seeking associated with selling unauthorized tools, and guaranteeing citizens’ free and secure access to the internet are essential steps toward rebuilding public trust and strengthening cybersecurity. Only through transparent policymaking and accountability by responsible institutions can this cycle of human rights violations and economic exploitation be halted, creating a healthy infrastructure for safeguarding citizens’ digital rights and freedoms.