Internet filtering to target 'instruction in drug use'

[Al B. Fuct]

I thought that Labor would have come to their senses and quietly dumped this (with some convenient excuse of course).

 

I'm a little worried about where the Mad Monk stands on this:

 

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/technology...91217-kxvh.html

This is taken a little out of context but make no mistake this kind of thing would appeal to Abbott. Most Liberals would oppose this, however. I suspect a lot of people in the Labor party aren't happy with this either.

 

Yeah, agreed- there's simply no political benefit in this for Labor. On the face of it, it would appear to appeal to the Mad Monk(ey). He had no qualms about telling women what to do with their reproductive bits r/ RU486, he'd theoretically have no philosophical problem with mandatory internet filtering. You better believe Labor voters have a problem with this. Go have a look at the comments thread on Sen Kate Lundy's blog site.

 

I'm pretty sure, back at federal election time. Abbott mentioned that the libs had already had a good look at it while they were in power, and it was regarded as a poor model back then.

 

You're quite right. The Howard Junta rejected ISP level filtering, instead offering the 'NetAlert' application for installation on PCs. Almost no-one downloaded it, giving you some idea of the public interest in filtering the internet, even for homes with chilluns.

 

With this latest statement coming from him, may see a possible backflip. Just goes to show, you can't trust any of em as far as you could kick em.

 

That's the worst case scenario. Warm up your VPN, you just might need it.

 

AFAIK there IS NO kiddy porn on the web, it's all done through private netwroks and P2P which the filter wont touch. If TPTB were really concerned about kiddy porn they'd be properly funding the coppas who work in that field and then hanging the guilty purps from the nearest yard arm when caught and found guilty.

 

'Course, that's all quite true- but taking the dough off of Conjob and handing it to the cops means taking power away from a politician... and they all think that getting elected made them gods.

 

The filter can be easily bypassed using a vpn or tor, all this POS will do is slow down the net and stop sites like this and other sites that show that other emperors are just as naked as this one. So maybe THAT'S the type of nakedness they really want to filter, the naked truth.

 

Yeah, it's trivial to bypass the filter. Unfortunately, it's a pain in the ass to have to fuck with it. Tor in particular slows things WAAAY down.

[Al B. Fuct]

Mods, could we please shift off this basicfraud nonsense to the Conspiracy Theories subforum and/or dev/null? It's off topic for this thread.

[Pure]

This sensorship bill is nothing new in my eyes , for over 10 years it's been a "plan" but for over 10 years there have been more than several reasons for it to stop before the panning stage even comes into effect.

 

It is likley an inevitable thing , wether in 2 years or 20 , but it wont help a lick with what their intentions are , those that care to find the information they wish to block will be just as happy in most cases finding a solution that will work around the filter .. meaning the large majority of innocent surfers are left effected by the bottlenecking filtering WILL cause whilst those after the information they want for the most part are not effected

 

VPN and proxy have been mentioned here and yes OSA does have a few plans up our sleeve to keep online dispite filters, However at this point I belive it's pre-mature for us to be having such conversations in the open as it will only drive the motivation to create a more efficient filter. I can assure you though that when/ If the feather drops then we will bring things more into light to avoid disruptions .

 

Remember that it will take a year if not more to actually get everyone agreeing to the implementation and the roll out itself will certainly take time

 

Our biggest supporters in many cases though will remain the ISP's they may have the public face of wanting to be the do-gooders but how many 80 gig plans do you think they would sell each month if everyones internet was filtered

 

and you can't underestimate peoples demands to privacy , The government has this campaign on atm about identity theft and information gathering being a huge concern on the Internet etc etc which has a flip side , now the thought of having a few central access points that if weak could be used to gather info on just about anyone , scares the shit out of your average everyday person ... and so it should

 

It would be one thing is governments had this clean reccord of keeping their word but everyone knows this system can and will be exploited for other means if it goes in place

[flatcat_auz]

Cheers for the informative post Pure.

[Al B. Fuct]

Yep, thanks for that, Pure. While we all would have expected you to have a 'plan B,' it's comforting to see you confirm as much.

 

It's important for OSA users to know that it will never actually be possible for the proposed filter to successfully block any content- you will always be functionally able to get to any site you choose, via a variety of methods. Opposing the filter is really more of a principle issue.

 

If legislation passes which enacts mandatory filtering (which is by no means a sure thing), as Pure notes, the system will be exploited by moralist campaigners and future conservative govts to drive their political agendae. However, it will also be exploitable by anti-censorship activists. ACMA are going to be VERY busy sorting the wheat from the chaff.

 

If a filter is ever actually enacted, I fully expect that easy workarounds will become commonplace, perhaps even as browser plugins.

[luciddreaming]

AFAIK there IS NO kiddy porn on the web, it's all done through private netwroks and P2P which the filter wont touch. If TPTB were really concerned about kiddy porn they'd be properly funding the coppas who work in that field and then hanging the guilty purps from the nearest yard arm when caught and found guilty.

Guess you didn't catch the first black list on wikileaks then?

There was a ton of CP sites. However most would be via P2P and private network etc.

So yeah your point is still valid. It would be SOOOO easy for cops (or ANYONE, I could do it right now, but I'd probably get busted myself) to download CP off limewire and thus share it with anybody else who is downloading it. You then just look at the IP addresses of the people you are sharing with and bingo. It's so easy it's not funny. Which means the Gov clearly have another agenda.

 

Yeah, agreed- there's simply no political benefit in this for Labor. On the face of it, it would appear to appeal to the Mad Monk(ey). He had no qualms about telling women what to do with their reproductive bits r/ RU486, he'd theoretically have no philosophical problem with mandatory internet filtering.

Um.... RU-486 was about GIVING freedom, not taking it away.

 

Anyway, if this does come in to play. I have realised that a DDOS attack would work. Say they implement the filter at ISP level. Someone creates a DDOS attack and basically sends hundreds of thousands of servers to a banned website. It would seize up the filter for who knows how long. Just something to think about.

[Al B. Fuct]

Um.... RU-486 was about GIVING freedom, not taking it away.

 

Abbott wanted to keep approval of RU486 as a ministerial power instead of handing the approval authority to the TGA. Abbott as Health Minister had no intention whatsoever of approving RU486 for use in Australia, thus, da Monk was taking freedoms away from women.

 

Anyway, if this does come in to play. I have realised that a DDOS attack would work. Say they implement the filter at ISP level. Someone creates a DDOS attack and basically sends hundreds of thousands of servers to a banned website. It would seize up the filter for who knows how long. Just something to think about.

 

Well, lots of illegal things would trash the filtering system... but could simultaneously take down internet access for millions of people. Bit of an own goal. Don't think that the gubmint wouldn't use the draconian terra-ism laws to prosecute the attacker/s, either.

 

Gotta be a better way.

Edited December 19, 2009 by Al B. Fuct

[Pure]

Dos attacks , that kind of talk will get you no-where and tbh what you have " figured out " is probably the first line of consideration for any type of system ,

 

Your not dealing with dlink adsl routers , cheap enduser firewalls and crappy network configurations , there are Technologies like NLB and HA which make attacks like this from any-one person a pretty pointless excersise ....

 

There will certainly be ways to exploit the system and it will likely be the target of allot of attacks but the concept of Dosing a government infrastructure at the risk of over 45 years in prision to make no effect at all seems pointless to me .

[boomstix]

after reading the whole thread, i think the most appealing argument against a filter is that it is an enourmous waste of money.

 

pretty much everyone can relate to that, on any side of politics

 

waste of time, waste of money

 

the real problem is that we have people with no understanding of the internet and technology trying to make rules about how it's used. so we need to educate people as much as possible about how easy this is to beat and why it won't work.

 

of course then the censors will just go back to trying to find a way to get into everybody else's business. we could have let them believe they'd won and just put up with using VPNs and whatnot but it will seriously bugger up the internet for the whole country.

[luciddreaming]

Abbott wanted to keep approval of RU486 as a ministerial power instead of handing the approval authority to the TGA. Abbott as Health Minister had no intention whatsoever of approving RU486 for use in Australia, thus, da Monk was taking freedoms away from women.

Ohhh, sorry, I misunderstood. I agree completely then

Well, lots of illegal things would trash the filtering system... but could simultaneously take down internet access for millions of people. Bit of an own goal. Don't think that the gubmint wouldn't use the draconian terra-ism laws to prosecute the attacker/s, either.

 

Gotta be a better way.

Well, afaik it would only seize up the filter, not the internet. Dunno though.

Yeah, there is a better way, fight it before it gets set up. I was basically just mentioning a DDOS as a last resort. Mentioning it as a possible retaliation.

 

Dos attacks , that kind of talk will get you no-where and tbh what you have " figured out " is probably the first line of consideration for any type of system ,

 

Your not dealing with dlink adsl routers , cheap enduser firewalls and crappy network configurations , there are Technologies like NLB and HA which make attacks like this from any-one person a pretty pointless excersise ....

 

There will certainly be ways to exploit the system and it will likely be the target of allot of attacks but the concept of Dosing a government infrastructure at the risk of over 45 years in prision to make no effect at all seems pointless to me .

Yeah, I never suggested ddos'ing by oneself I'm not an idiot.

Also I don't think the filters would be set up very securely either. At least not in the first place anyway. There will be a ton of bugs and ddos is just one way I know that would work, but of course I know nothing about the infrastructure they will use, but there will most likely be so many holes in it it's not funny. They don't know shit. Why else would they try to implement a friggin' internet filter.

Anyway, see above for reason why I mentioned it.

 

Oh yeh, not sure if thi has been posted http://stephen-conroy.com/news.php

Edited December 22, 2009 by luciddreaming