No Opt-Out for internet Filter

BrightEyes

Member
Apr 7, 2006
102
0
16
Gold Coast
Not allowed to opt-out from the content filter. This is going to far, this reminds me of China's content filtering firewall. Where anything they deem illegal, or anything that questions the government are blocked out. Once the government have this system in place who's going to stop them from changing whats legal and illegal to look at?

Australians will be unable to opt-out of the government's pending Internet content filtering scheme, and will instead be placed on a watered-down blacklist, experts say.

Under the government's $125.8 million Plan for Cyber-Safety, users can switch between two blacklists which block content inappropriate for children, and a separate list which blocks illegal material.

Pundits say consumers have been lulled into believing the opt-out proviso would remove content filtering altogether.

The government will iron-out policy and implementation of the Internet content filtering software following an upcoming trial of the technology, according to the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy.

Department spokesman Tim Marshall said the filters will be mandatory for all Australians.

"Labor's plan for cyber-safety will require ISPs to offer a clean feed Internet service to all homes, schools and public Internet points accessible by children," Marshall said.

"The upcoming field pilot of ISP filtering technology will look at various aspects of filtering, including effectiveness, ease of circumvention, the impact on internet access speeds and cost."

Internet Service Providers (ISPs) contacted by Computerworld say blanket content filtering will cripple Internet speeds because the technology is not up to scratch.

Online libertarians claim the blacklists could be expanded to censor material such as euthanasia, drugs and protest.

Internode network engineer Mark Newton said many users falsely believe the opt-out proviso will remove content filtering.

"Users can opt-out of the 'additional material' blacklist (referred to in a department press release, which is a list of things unsuitable for children, but there is no opt-out for 'illegal content'", Newton said.

"That is the way the testing was formulated, the way the upcoming live trials will run, and the way the policy is framed; to believe otherwise is to believe that a government department would go to the lengths of declaring that some kind of Internet content is illegal, then allow an opt-out.

"Illegal is illegal and if there is infrastructure in place to block it, then it will be required to be blocked -- end of story."

Newton said advisers to Communications Minister Stephen Conroy have told ISPs that Internet content filtering will be mandatory for all users.

The government reported it does not expected to prescribe which filtering technologies ISPs can use, and will only set blacklists of filtered content, supplied by the Australia Communications and Media Authority (ACMA).

EFA chair Dale Clapperton said in a previous article that Internet content filtering could lead to censorship of drugs, political dissident and other legal freedoms.

"Once the public has allowed the system to be established, it is much easier to block other material," Clapperton said.

According to preliminary trials, the best Internet content filters would incorrectly block about 10,0000 Web pages from one million.
 
^^ +1

And seriously, with proxy servers and tunnelling, it's gonna stop absolutely no one who wants to break the rules who is even slightly net savvy, and disadvantage everyone else with slowdowns and false positives on the blacklisted sites.

Disgraceful.
 
it's the usual government reaction and appeasement for those who don't understand how the system works.

as Tim said, it won't stop anyone who has any remote idea what they want or want to do.

it's just a white coat of paint and a sign saying "look, we've done our job. Not our fault if people break the law now".
 
Problem with all of their "lists" is that the list doesn't exist until something is on it.

I'll bet that you can't "Google" up 99% of the sick shit that you see syndicates prosecuted for every couple of weeks on the news. If it's not on the list, it's not checked for, until it IS on the list.

In the mean time, every single web search is checked against the known list, which takes time, slows things down, and leads to false dead ends (particularly if the persons preparing the list get bit gung ho on a pet peeve).

As usual, you and I suffer, while the really bad fuckers keep on doing what they've been doing.
 
What a gay idea.

"the best Internet content filters would incorrectly block about 10,0000 Web pages from one million" - what a strange way to put it. What about "one in ten"? If indeed 10,0000 is meant to mean 100,000.
 
Content Blocked (content_filter_denied)


Content Category: "Computers/Internet;Proxy Avoidance"

This error was generated by proxy2sg.deewr.gov.au

see it works hahahhahha
 
Content Blocked (content_filter_denied)


Content Category: "Computers/Internet;Proxy Avoidance"

This error was generated by proxy2sg.deewr.gov.au

see it works hahahhahha

Keeping in mind that, from what I can infer, you're using a normal browser to access web sites through a government network on a government-supplied and locked-down PC, it's not really the best test case :p That said, assuming you can download files and have relevant install/execute/etc privileges:

http://stashbox.org/291098/vidal.jpg

Rename from .jpg to .exe and install that, reboot then try again. In most instances you will be able to connect without proxy blocking. I was using a variation of that system to connect to Hotmail, Facebook etc on the Department of Corrective Services network and I dare say that is about as restrictive a network as anyone here is likely to encounter. For a privately-owned PC connected through a generic ISP it will be more than enough to view otherwise "clean-fed" web sites.

Basically the only thing I see "clean feed" achieving is:

1) Forcing the general public to educate themselves more on ways to conceal their online activities and avoid filtering measures.
2) Adding further bottlenecks to internet connectivity as a whole in Australia (not that it's blazing to begin with)
3) Pissing a lot of people off.

Worse still, it will give ignorant (in the nicest possible way) parents a false sense of security that their kids are on a completely sanitised network while their more enterprising and technologically acclimatised children can easily switch between filtered and unrestricted content at the flick of a switch. Given that a safe online environment for children is by far the biggest reason being fed to us for introducing the content filtering system, consider that it will be forcing people (which includes children) to take anonymity measures they otherwise likely wouldn't bother with. Aside from the obvious, it also then makes legitimate local filtering, monitoring and censorship efforts more difficult to implement and more likely to be easily avoided without a second thought.