Internet Censorship coming to Australia

Kookaburra

Gold Meritorious Patron
This is very relevant to anyone living in Australia (or Canada or the USA if it goes through here. We are the testing ground for government interventions and infringement of civil rights legislations). I think this is one of the most dangerous pieces of legislation I have seen in decades. It threatens free access to information, and allows the government to control what we see and read, with no safeguards whatsoever.

Hi,

Please take 5 minutes to read this message as it's extremely important for your continued access to an uncensored and functional internet, and to help protect children on the internet.

------- BACKGROUND -------

The Rudd Government is currently planning to introduce a mandatory Internet filtering law from some time in 2010. Your ISP (the company you get your internet access from) will be asked to censor between 1000 and 10,000 websites deemed to be "Refused Classification" (aka "RC", many; if not most of these sites are NOT illegal).
They are marketing this as "protecting the children" by reducing access to Child Pornography, something which I am all for doing, but unfortunately, this is a very ineffective means of doing so, with far more drawbacks than benefits.
It is important to remember that this is the same government that’s REDUCING the budget of the Federal Police unit whose job it is to catch the paedophiles this filter will effectively help to protect.
I respect that you may think this a good idea. I for one completely support any measure which will yield any improvement to child safety. However, this proposal is being done in a way similar to many "political" things — it is being sold by the politicians as far more effective than the experts believe it will be, and has the added possibility that in a few years, it will censor far more than just websites of "refused classification".

------- WHAT IS THE FINANCIAL COST? -------

As it currently stands, this filter will cost the Australian public around $43 million. This amount however is only the tip of the iceberg. It does not include the costs to your ISP — costs that they will almost certainly have to pass on to you. Similarly, it does not include the ongoing, and potentially massive, task of maintaining the filter list, which is absolutely vital if there is to be even the slightest chance of the filter actually doing anything productive. These costs, both to the government and passed on to you by your ISP are quite likely to be greater than that of far more effective PC based systems which can be easily purchased and installed and be tailored to your individual family's needs.
However cost is far from the only argument against the proposed filter.

------- WILL IT ACTUALLY PROTECT CHILDREN? -------

There is the illusion of increased safety of children, and their protection from on-line threats and predators, and the issue of uncensored access to the internet.
The main message here is that if this filter ever becomes a reality, do not presume that it will make children safer and DO NOT use it as an excuse to reduce supervision of children whilst they use the Internet. If you believe children are going to be safer because of the filter, then read on and I will explain why that is an illusion.
Here are 10 things you should ask yourself (and the Government) about the filter so that you are more informed:

------- 1) People don't just "stumble" across child porn online or search Google for it. -------

Child porn is already filtered out of search results by all search engines.
So how do people access it?
- Peer-2-Peer networks (High speed sharing of large files like videos)
- Usenet (Direct File sharing)
- Sharing the web page addresses directly
- Encrypted websites (Where their privacy is secured, like your online banking, paypal, etc.)

------- 2) How do paedophiles find children online to perform these disgusting acts on/with? -------

- Social networking sites like Facebook and Myspace
- Chat Rooms
- Instant messaging programs like MSN and Yahoo
- Email

------- 3) What does the ISP filter block? -------

A specific, secret list of website addresses only.
This list includes a number of perfectly legal sites deemed politically "unsavoury", such as euthanasia and anti-abortion websites as well as perfectly harmless websites that were hacked a long time ago, and have been fixed.
This list includes any and all content which the regulatory body deems as "Refused Classification", including any perfectly legal site which does not meet the strict definitions for classification under one of the existing (G, PG, M, MA, R, X, etc) ratings.
If a site hasn't been reported for classification (so as it can be refused that classification), it will not be blocked.
Nobody of good concience is ever likely to find the paedophiles (already secret) websites, so who exactly does the government believe will be reporting these sites? If nobody who knows about them will report them, they will never be blocked.

------- 4) What doesn't the ISP filter block? -------

- "R" Rated pornographic and adult material
- "X" Rated pornographic and adult material
- (As above) Any website containing any content which has not been specifically reported to the authorities and then subsequently refused classification
- Instant messaging
- Facebook and Myspace
- Email
- Peer-2-Peer
- Usenet
- Chat Rooms
- Encrypted Websites

------- 5) Can the filter be worked around to still access child porn? -------

YES, undoubtedly, and easily. You can bet the same people who share their filthy habit of child porn and website addresses will also share the very simple methods for bypassing the filter, which not only makes the filter pointless, but also makes it harder for Police to catch them. ie the Government filter will NOT make your child safer.

------- 6) How easy is the filter to evade? -------

It is extremely easy for any person with the inclination to do so, and access to Google.
a) Both an independent trial by Telstra and the official Government trial report that every single option tested was easy to bypass.
b) The best success rate (at preventing a filter being bypassed) allowed 10% of known bypassing methods to work. It also caused the greatest slow-down (Greater than a 40% reduction in speed).
c) Children already know how to bypass similar filters installed at their schools (http://www.theinquirer.net/i nquirer/news/1567015/school-net-security-failing-grade)

------- 7) Does the Government plan to make evading the filter harder? -------

Under the current proposal, no.
a) There will be no penalties for evading the filter and no plans are in place to make it harder to evade.
b) Proxies, VPNs (Virtual Private Networks), Encryption, and Tunneling programs (all simple ways of evading the filter) will not be blocked by the filter.

------- 8) Are there any technical drawbacks to the filter? -------

Yes, it is likely to cause slowdowns on the internet for everybody.
a) If you're on dialup, you probably will not notice any difference.
b) If you have fast internet, (EG. ADSL, up to 8Mbps) your internet is likely to be slowed up to 10%
c) If you have VERY fast internet (EG. ADSL2+ or Cable, 8-24 and 30, and 100 Mbps are all currently available in Australia) your internet is likely to be slowed significantly more, but no one knows for sure as The Government has failed to test the filters at these speeds.
d) This type of filtering does not "scale" well. As more people use faster internet, so too the effect on the speed of that internet will be worse. The proposed National Broadband Network (NBN) will be 100Mbps and is designed to give almost everyone access to these speeds. The government has done no testing of any kind on any network with even one tenth of that speed, or even one percent of the likely number of connections.
e) There will also likely be some increases to ping times. This will increase online gaming lag (for games such as World of Warcraft and others) as well as make VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol, aka Internet Telephones) less effective, decreasing the quality of the cals)

------- 9) What if I can't access a perfectly safe website? -------

Unfortunately, even the best filter could accidentally block upwards of 3 million websites in its attempts to block less than 1000 child porn websites that's 300,000% of what they are meant to be blocking.

------- 10) What if my website gets blocked? How would I know, and how do I fix that? -------

The government board, ACMA decides what is blocked based on complaints and maintains a secret blacklist (which has already been leaked online once already). Unfortunately there is no process for informing people that their website is blocked, or how to appeal that decision. There is also no evidence that anyone is, or will be held responsible for any loss of business you may encounter if your website is wrongly blocked by the system.
If you, like me, find that any of this is unacceptable, please visit http://www.nocleanfeed.com and make your voice heard by contacting your local and federal members of parliament and putting your vote on the line, and please consider throwing an Australia day party ( http://www.EFA.org.au ), blacking out your twitter/FB profile pic or website ( http://www.internetblackout.com.au/ ) or attend the nationwide protest in your capital city on the 30th of Jan ( http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=200213317223&ref=mf )

------- WHAT CAN I DO TO PROTECT MY CHILDREN NOW? -------

If you are concerned about protecting your children online, there are many easy ways to do this from home, where you can control what level of protection you offer. First and foremost, supervise your children whilst online and teach them about the internet and its dangers just like you would teach them how to cross a road. Nothing can or should replace good supervision and education. Websites like Facebook have 13+ age requirements for a reason. Please feel free to visit this website for more information: http://www.microsoft.com/prot ect/parents/childsafety/age.aspx

Just like crossing the road, the internet can be a safe place, if young children are supervised and assisted, and older children have been taught the safe way to proceed.
I hate chain mail as much as the next person, but this is kind of different. It's not regarding an issue that's no longer relevant, I'm not asking you to sign anything, and I'm not saying your true love's name will be revealed only if you send this on to 20 people, so please forward this email on to anyone in your contact list you think would read this (or even if you think they won't).

The government is determined to hide the truth about their filter with misleading press releases, and using the ETS and NBN as media cover.
For a summary of key trial reports and media stories on the ISP filter, see here http://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/?tag=cleanfeed

Most importantly, please TALK about this issue with your friends and family. Those who are technically minded and the non-technical alike need to make this a matter of public knowledge. Without doing that, messages like this can be forwarded all we like and nothing will change.

Thank you for taking the time to read this message.
 

GoNuclear

Gold Meritorious Patron
It's political

Child porn and legal internet porn will not be affected nor do any of the so-called "free world" governments really care about porn. The X, R, and A sites will be classified and keep on going, whereas the sites that will be continually hit with restrictions will be sites like http://www.infowars.com
http://www.infowars.net http://www.prisonplanet.tv http://www.prisonplanet.com http://www.originalintent.org
http://www.famguardian.org http://www.thinkfree.ca and, of course,
http://www.projectcamelot.org

In otherwords, any site that deals with controversial political issues and doesn't tow the official party line is going to have a hard time of it, especially websites that don't go along with the official 9-11 fairy tale, such as
http://www.wtc7.net and/or contradict the global warming nonsense. These are the sites that government wants to shut down. Screaming about kiddie porn is a ruse to get the public to go along.

Pete
 

xseaorguk

Patron Meritorious
internet

I agree with you Gonuclear, that is the real reason for starting to filter information.
Thats why in the UK there seems to be a much higher percentage of Child abuse than anywhere in Europe (if you go by the media).
I lived in Germnay for many years and never heard so much about Paedophilia there as I do here in the UK.
Its true it IS a terrible thing.
But it is in the newspapers and TV daily, and I believe this is part of the brainashing that goes out to scare us into believing that our governement only wants the 'best' for our safety and families.
Wow, how considerate of them again!:bigcry:

I dont believe that the percentage in the UK is any higher than anywhere else.....
Or am I mistaken?
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
But it is in the newspapers and TV daily, and I believe this is part of the brainashing that goes out to scare us into believing that our governement only wants the 'best' for our safety and families.

It's a button. If they pretend that such-and-such a new law (that reduces general liberties) is intended to stop pedophiles fewer people are likely to stand up and complain about it as it would appear to make them in favour of pedophilia.

Paul
 

Spirited

Patron with Honors
Free speech must not be censored

this censorship thing is scary!!
Apparently the filter is modeled on china's filter and the UK have already implemented one as well. maybe Paul or someone over there would know more about it but it does censor other sites not just the porn issues. the purpose is much broader than is said. apparently it filters websites like prisonplanet.com and infowars.com which are expose sites including government exposes. following is a youtube vid of what alex jones from infowars sees as the bigger picture of censorship inhibiting free speech. He is a bit "full on" in his delivery but talks about england and whats happening there etc.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFhbSolKWP0&NR=1
 

lurkanon

Patron with Honors
UK passes uprecedented Internet censorship bill

The source is a bit dodgy, but the information is true:

http://www.theflucase.com/index.php...s-in-uk&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=64&lang=en

An extract:
"A draconian Internet censorship bill that has been long looming on the horizon finally passed the house of commons in the UK yesterday, legislating for government powers to restrict and filter any website that is deemed to be undesirable for public consumption.
The “Digital Economy Bill” was rushed through parliament in a late night session last night after a third reading.
In the wake of the announcement of a general election on May 6, the government has taken advantage of what is known as the “wash-up process”, allowing the legislative process to be speeded up between an election being called and Parliament being dissolved.
Only a pitiful handful of MPs (pictured below) were present to debate the bill, which was fully supported by the “opposition” Conservative party, and passed by 189 votes to 47 keeping the majority of its original clauses intact."

Looks like this is a global trend.
 

Div6

Crusader
The source is a bit dodgy, but the information is true:

http://www.theflucase.com/index.php...s-in-uk&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=64&lang=en

An extract:
"A draconian Internet censorship bill that has been long looming on the horizon finally passed the house of commons in the UK yesterday, legislating for government powers to restrict and filter any website that is deemed to be undesirable for public consumption.
The “Digital Economy Bill” was rushed through parliament in a late night session last night after a third reading.
In the wake of the announcement of a general election on May 6, the government has taken advantage of what is known as the “wash-up process”, allowing the legislative process to be speeded up between an election being called and Parliament being dissolved.
Only a pitiful handful of MPs (pictured below) were present to debate the bill, which was fully supported by the “opposition” Conservative party, and passed by 189 votes to 47 keeping the majority of its original clauses intact."

Looks like this is a global trend.

Yes....in particular they don't like wikileaks.org exposing them as the murderous b*****ds that they are.
 
Top