Search:  

 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » Up and Running » Security » Security » Australia To Implement Mandatory Internet Censorship
Search Topic:
Uniqs:
16451
Share Topic:
RSS topic:
toggle:
flat / full
normal / watch
Posting:
Post a:
Post a:
Microsoft Security Bulletin Minor Revisions - Sep. 9, 2009 »
« Microsoft Security Bulletin Major Revision MS09-048  
page: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 ...10 · 11 · 12
AuthorAll Replies


ilago
Premium
join:2005-06-28
Australia
·Internode


1 edit
reply to Link Logger
Re: Australia To Implement Mandatory Internet Censorship

said by Link Logger See Profile :

said by ilago See Profile :

There's a lot of resistance. Quite a lot of coverage in the mainstream media as well as forums and the blogosphere. Newspaper and radio on line polls are showing almost consistently that more than 80% of consumers do not want secret censorship introduced.
I wonder how many of the 80% have taken the time to call/write/email their local elected government official and convey their opinion and perhaps how this will be a MAJOR factor next election as its funny how much influence that can have.

I'm not sure how the 'state' can be such a evil thing when the citizens of the state elect it (and if you don't like your choices then run for office and be that choice). Perhaps with percentages of voting public on the decrease, they get the state they didn't bother to vote for and then ultimately perhaps deserve?

Blake
Not everyone will protest formally in writing. The process looks very daunting to younger people without experience in correspondence. If nothing else a number of people will have learned through this experience that the ability to contact your local representatives and government Ministers isn't as difficult as they thought.

There are many letter templates that have been made available on several websites.

One of the major issues is that the policy has changed and is no longer the policy that was published prior to the election. In the lead up to the election, any proposed "filtering" was to be fully reviewed and it was to be an opt-out filter. The issue of choosing to vote for such a policy is a not relevant where the policy has changed after the election.

The current proposal mandates that adults have no access to "illegal" material. Illegal material, as currently defined, is anything over 15+MA (Mature audience only, 15 years and older). That is absolutely ridiculous. With a further layer of censorship on top of that where opt-out it is possible to make the internet "suitable" for 5 years old and up.

EFA has put a lot of effort into reviewing the proposals and commenting. They have letter templates available for download.

There is no definition of "illegal". The blacklist restricts some terror-related newsgroups and is already exempt from Freedom of Information legislation under the previous government's legislation as it was brought into law under the anti-terrorist legislation. The blacklist could include anything a public servant is instructed to included with no appeal and no right of review even if a site is incorrectly blocked. They seem to forget the Scunthorpe problem and the Peacefire problems.

It would take years and a great deal of money to get a case to the High Court where a complainant would probably win but it will be too late.

More information is available from »www.efa.org.au/FOI/foi_aba_2000.htm
Edit:spelling


Khaine

join:2003-03-03
Australia

reply to Its a Secret
said by Its a Secret See Profile :

said by Khaine See Profile :

Most probably think that the government would never be stupid enough to implement.
Never, ever underestimate the stupidity of the government.
Oh, I agree. The Rudd government has already shown its incompetence with its handling of bank deposits. However I do believe the above does indicate the feeling for the majority of people within the 80%


norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback
·WestNet Broadband

reply to SUMware
Just curious if it will affect https? This mention of it at News.com.au has me curious, one of the replies says it doesn't, just how much will affect daily use?

Filter to cause World Wide Wait

INTERNET speeds could slow by 30 per cent under the Government's proposed web filtering scheme, even though it will do little to block illegal content.

That's the warning from technical experts, who also say the plan could expose users' financial details during online banking sessions and see popular websites including Facebook and YouTube banned.

The warnings came after Broadband, Communications and Digital Economy Minister Stephen Conroy confirmed the Federal Government planned to introduce a mandatory internet filter, shelving plans to allow Australians to opt out of the scheme.

Internet service providers, who would administer the filter, have been asked to conduct live trials of the filter before the end of the year.

But System Administrators Guild of Australia president Donna Ashelford said the plan was deeply flawed and would slow internet access down by about 30 per cent according to the Government's own laboratory trials.

Despite this, the national web filter would only censor web content, Ms Ashelford said, and could not deal with the remaining 60 per cent of internet traffic, much of which occurred over peer-to-peer networks such as BitTorrent and LimeWire.

"The bulk of internet traffic is over peer-to-peer networks and the bulk of illegal content is trafficked is over peer-to-peer networks," she said. "There is no choke point at which they can block that material. I do not believe this is an issue that has a technical solution."

Electronic Frontiers Australia board member Colin Jacobs warned the web filter could also unwittingly make the internet unsafe for financial transactions by breaking the secure encryption used by banks online.

Five of the six web filters tested by the Australian Media and Communications Authority this year were able to filter websites using the secure protocol HTTPS, which would leave financial details exposed to the internet service provider in charge of operating the filter.

"If they sit in the middle and get between your web browser and the bank's server it really breaks open the security and leaves the details open to attack," he said.

"Once the chain of encryption is broken you can't say it is secure any more."

Mr Jacobs said the web filter plan would also face significant challenges trying to block illegal or inappropriate material on social networking sites such as YouTube and Facebook where "one video or one dodgy Facebook profile" could see the entire website blocked from view.

The national filter would also fail to block material in online chat rooms, Mr Jacobs said, and could give parents "a false sense of security" when monitoring their child's online access.

The Courier-Mail

--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke


nwrickert
sand groper
Premium,MVM
join:2004-09-04
Geneva, IL
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Midwest

Just curious if it will affect https?
This would depend on how it is implemented.

Blocking IP addresses affects everything. Content inspection won't touch https unless in involves some sort of "man in the middle" attack, and MITM would likely cause browser warnings.

I guess it could also be done with https if there were some cooperation between the banks and the ISPs to make the information available for inspection. I'm doubtful that banks would agree to that. And porn sites using https would be unlikely to agree either.
--
AT&T dsl; Westell 327w modem/router; openSuSE 11.0; firefox 3.0.3


norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback
·WestNet Broadband


3 edits
said by nwrickert See Profile :

Just curious if it will affect https?
This would depend on how it is implemented.

Blocking IP addresses affects everything. Content inspection won't touch https unless in involves some sort of "man in the middle" attack, and MITM would likely cause browser warnings.
And that is where the concern lies,

1. what will they block,
2. what affects will it have on usage,
3. content we are allowed to see,
4. what costs will become the users bill on a market already considered more expensive than other countries,
5. what will be blocked in the future,
6. is it hard ware or software(hardware will basically see everything I'm guessing),
7. Will they then try to hit peer to peer once it settles,
8. How will they get past proxies, VPN etc,
9. what of IM scripting bots, or IM issues full stop with users that are not of a savoury character.

said by nwrickert See Profile :

I guess it could also be done with https if there were some cooperation between the banks and the ISPs to make the information available for inspection. I'm doubtful that banks would agree to that.
I doubt it too, but there is no information out there I can see presently involving this.

The real concern is why it is so secretive, why aren't we involved in this on a public level to at least try to create a usable filter?

We all know too well how public servants can be tied by red tape, so how will this become an effective tool, without years of bad times.
Just look at Child Support in Australia, it took 15 years for it to be turned around so both father and mother have an almost fair deal.(It still isn't fully sorted). This was forced, no questions asked when it was implemented, some dads committed suicide, taking the kids with them. I realise this is not releated to the internet/content filtering, I just can't see the future being too bright for us users who pay for the internet as a tool/hobby/learning/business infrastructure and we know this will not be implemented correctly either.

I fear what will be the real outcome of this.
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke


nwrickert
sand groper
Premium,MVM
join:2004-09-04
Geneva, IL
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Midwest

I fear what will be the real outcome of this.
Short term, there is a risk of censorship. Long term, your politicians will be dragged, kicking and screaming, into the 21st century, when they are forced to realize that censorship does not make any sense.

In the meantime, keep up the protests.
--
AT&T dsl; Westell 327w modem/router; openSuSE 11.0; firefox 3.0.3

SUMware
Premium
join:2002-05-21

reply to SUMware
From The Register
5th November 2008 -
quote:
We spoke to CensorNet, a UK company that provides software that enables official bodies to filter out content in the UK, and which is speaking to a couple of Australian ISPs about this project. Its view is that the slow down feared by ISPs is unlikely.

However, the firm foresees two issues with any solution. Most filters tackle just the HTTP. But HTTP accounts for an average of 25 per cent of a user's bandwidth, with the rest taken up by other traffic, including email, peer-to-peer and instant messaging.

CensorNet uses the RuleSpace technology, which automatically classifies web content before filtering.

A spokesperson for Stephen Conroy’s office tells us that fears are misplaced and nothing has yet been finalised. Rather, they are "in the final stages of preparing an expressions of interest document for ISPs to take part in a field pilot".

They add that $128.5m has been set aside "for a comprehensive cyber-safety program that focuses on education, research, ISP filtering and law enforcement". The focus will be on material such as "child pornography, cruelty or real violence, and sexual violence" that is "already illegal".

Their plans are not unrealistic, because this sort of material "is currently being filtered by a number of ISPs in countries such as the UK, Sweden, Norway and Canada with no impact on network speeds or performance".

This is not strictly true: some minor filtering of web content goes on in these jurisdictions, but nothing on the scale envisaged by the Australian Government.

In the end, what happens in Australia will affect us all. If their filtering scheme falls flat on its face, expect to hear little more of it. If it is implemented and works in however half-arsed a fashion, look forward to proposals to filter the UK internet in a couple of years time.


Its a Secret
Whatever
Premium
join:2008-02-23
U B Funny
·Shaw

reply to SUMware
Perhaps what the Aussies should do is get people to cancel their Inet services, or drop to the lowest tier. It seems the only way biz and government listen is when you hit them in the pocket book.

If enough do it, ISP's will be screaming at the gov to change it. People do have a voice, sometimes you just have to yell a bit louder!
--
"In the future, that which is not mandatory will be illegal"


Khaine

join:2003-03-03
Australia

said by Its a Secret See Profile :

Perhaps what the Aussies should do is get people to cancel their Inet services, or drop to the lowest tier. It seems the only way biz and government listen is when you hit them in the pocket book.

If enough do it, ISP's will be screaming at the gov to change it. People do have a voice, sometimes you just have to yell a bit louder!
The ISPs are already screaming


norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback
·WestNet Broadband

reply to SUMware

I have been having a chuckle to myself on this.

If we get content filtering at the ISP level will it do it's job correctly and filter out all the rubbish?

Advertisements too, which are known can be a source of malware?

I can't help thinking of the implications there!!!
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke

SUMware
Premium
join:2002-05-21

said by norwegian See Profile :

will it do it's job correctly and filter out all the rubbish?

Advertisements too, which are known can be a source of malware?
The filtering isn't designed to eliminate 'rubbish', advertisements, nor malware. It's designed to prevent people from accessing websites and downloading material that the government decides it doesn't want the public to see.

Malware, ads, and government approved rubbish are just fine.


norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback
·WestNet Broadband


1 edit
RFLMAO.

You have me in stiches now.

But it seems to be what this is about, and they will call it an "effecient" system.

SUMware
Premium
join:2002-05-21

said by norwegian See Profile :

But it seems to be what this is about, and they will call it an "effecient" system.
For maximum efficiency I suggest that the Australian government block EVERYTHING, except for malware, ads, and government approved rubbish.


AB
Premium
join:2006-04-04
Leesburg, VA

said by SUMware See Profile :

For maximum efficiency I suggest that the Australian government block EVERYTHING, except for malware, ads, and government approved rubbish.
I thought that was the idea already?


Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
·Verizon Online DSL

reply to SUMware
It's all so sad. This can hardly be what Al Gore envisioned when he invented the Internet.
--
If God wanted us to work with electrons, He'd make them big enough to see...


Link Logger
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
Calgary, AB
·Shaw

said by Blackbird See Profile :

It's all so sad. This can hardly be what Al Gore envisioned when he invented the Internet.
The Internet was just Gore's first act as later he went and invented the environment, is there no limit to Al's abilities, what possibly will he invent next?

Blake
--
Vendor: Author of Link Logger which is a traffic analysis and firewall logging tool


Pizz
Hi

join:2000-10-27
Astoria, NY
reply to SUMware
As another posted - Maybe when the 'aussie' way of life - finally gets shuttered. Common sense will prevail.

was this a worthy quote?

SUMware
Premium
join:2002-05-21


3 edits
reply to Link Logger
said by Link Logger See Profile :

said by Blackbird See Profile :

It's all so sad. This can hardly be what Al Gore envisioned when he invented the Internet.
The Internet was just Gore's first act as later he went and invented the environment, is there no limit to Al's abilities, what possibly will he invent next?
Al Gore may have invented the internet, but it's Republican presidential candidate John McCain we have to thank for the "miracle" of the BlackBerry.

Asked by campaign trail reporters what McCain's experience as chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee does to help him to understand the economy and lead the country through its current turmoil, Douglas Holtz-Eakin waved his BlackBerry in the air, according to The Politico.

"Telecommunications of the United States is a premier innovation in the past 15 years, comes right through the Commerce committe," Holtz-Eakin said. "So you're looking at the miracle John McCain helped create and that's what he did."

The BlackBerry was developed by Research In Motion, a Canadian company.

The comment met with immediate derision across the internet.


-

The FWIW Dept.

From Snopes.com
quote:
Claim: Vice-President Al Gore claimed that he "invented" the Internet.

Status: False.

Origins: Despite the derisive references that continue even today, Al Gore did not claim he "invented" the Internet, nor did he say anything that could reasonably be interpreted that way. The "Al Gore said he 'invented' the Internet" put-downs were misleading, out-of-context distortions of something he said during an interview with Wolf Blitzer on CNN's "Late Edition" program on 9 March 1999. When asked to describe what distinguished him from his challenger for the Democratic presidential nomination, Senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey, Gore replied (in part):
During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system.
Clearly, although Gore's phrasing might have been a bit clumsy (and perhaps self-serving), he was not claiming that he "invented" the Internet (in the sense of having designed or implemented it), but that he was responsible, in an economic and legislative sense, for fostering the development the technology that we now know as the Internet. To claim that Gore was seriously trying to take credit for the "invention" of the Internet is, frankly, just silly political posturing that arose out of a close presidential campaign.

If President Eisenhower had said in the mid-1960s that he, while president, "created" the Interstate Highway System, we would not have seen dozens and dozens of editorials lampooning him for claiming he "invented" the concept of highways or implying that he personally went out and dug ditches across the country to help build the roadway. Everyone would have understood that Ike meant he was a driving force behind the legislation that created the highway system, and this was the very same concept Al Gore was expressing about himself with his Internet statement.


AB
Premium
join:2006-04-04
Leesburg, VA

said by SUMware See Profile :

Al Gore may have invented the internet, but it's Republican presidential candidate John McCain we have to thank for the "miracle" of the BlackBerry.

Asked by campaign trail reporters what McCain's experience as chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee does to help him to understand the economy and lead the country through its current turmoil, Douglas Holtz-Eakin waved his BlackBerry in the air, according to The Politico.

"Telecommunications of the United States is a premier innovation in the past 15 years, comes right through the Commerce committe," Holtz-Eakin said. "So you're looking at the miracle John McCain helped create and that's what he did."
I sent Douglas Holtz-Eakin an internet, but it never arrived.

ht tp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDVoWCZa8hM

SUMware
Premium
join:2002-05-21


1 edit
said by AB See Profile :

I sent Douglas Holtz-Eakin an internet, but it never arrived.
Only one internet? Did you send it in the correct tube?

Perhaps it was re-routed through Australia...
-
Forums » Up and Running » Security » SecurityMicrosoft Security Bulletin Minor Revisions - Sep. 9, 2009 »
« Microsoft Security Bulletin Major Revision MS09-048  
page: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 ...10 · 11 · 12


Saturday, 05-Dec 21:50:31 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.
page compression OFF
Most commented news this week
· [163] Comcast Releasing Promised Usage Meter
· [147] Avast Antivirus Has Gone Mad
· [128] Comcast Makes NBC Universal Acquisition Official
· [121] The Bandwidth Hog Does Not Exist
· [105] Graduate Student Unveils Sprint's GPS Sharing With Feds
· [101] Google Invades ISP, OpenDNS Turf With Google Public DNS
· [85] FCC Ponders Moving From PSTN To IP Voice
· [82] Latest Consumer Reports Survey Not Kind To AT&T
· [80] New Bill Aims To Limit ETFs
· [74] Sprint Defuses GPS Privacy Media Bomb
Most people now reading
· Wife might have to work in.... Iowa for a few months!!! [General Questions]
· False positive in Avast! or is it real? [Security]
· Windows 7 boot manager editing questions [Microsoft Help]
· UPS - What do you people think happened? [General Questions]
· First commercial tool to crack BitLocker arrives (Updated) [Security]
· 3.x Feral Druid - Bear Tanking Guide [World of Warcraft]
· Many Sites Unreachable [Rogers]
· Connecting to Google Voice Via SIP [VOIP Tech Chat]
· [How to] Install Asterisk on an Asus WL-520GU router [VOIP Tech Chat]
· ToC 4th boss - Preliminary Strategy for Twin Valkyr [World of Warcraft]