Australia trialling mandatory pr0n filter

Author: Gareth Halfacree
Published: 28th February 2008
Comments (26) Stumble
Unlike the previously released - and ultimately useless - downloadable filters, this one's mandatory.

Unlike the previously released - and ultimately useless - downloadable filters, this one's mandatory.

Australia is due to start preliminary testing of its new internet filtering system which, officials hope, will block Little Timmy from seeing smut online.

Under the auspices of Enex TestLab – the company awarded the official contract for the project by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, Oz's answer to the FCC – several companies will try out their services in turn to see which offers the best block-to-boob ratio.

Unlike optional – and often at extra-cost – filters offered by individual ISPs this system is planned for a default-block policy. Should the project hit full-scale development (something that will largely depend on the results of this first public test) then all web traffic in the country will pass through the filtering system. Anyone wanting to download artistic images to test the flesh-tone colour reproduction of their monitor will be faced with the potentially embarrassing prospect of phoning their ISP and asking for the filter to be deactivated.

“Hello, I'd like to browse porn please. Could you arrange for that to happen? Thank you ever so much.”

Although the Australian government has dabbled in Internet censorship before, with a £58 million project to use optional PC-level filtering (which flopped massively) this marks the first time a major government outside China has opted to install mandatory filtering which blocks legal content.

As anyone who has used a filtered connection at a school or university will confirm, filtering solutions are imperfect: there's the ever-present threat of false positives blocking legitimate sites due to the innocuous presence of certain keywords, and they are often as easy to bypass as using a different DNS server.

The testing will begin in a closed beta in Tasmania, and then be rolled out in stages at the end of July this year.

A worrying sign of increased government intervention in the web, or a useful way to prevent minors from seeing grot online? Share your thoughts over in the forums.
Quote Leitchy 28th February 2008, 09:38
bah waste of money. At least you can phone up to have it disabled though. They should just invest in programs like Net Nanny and educate the parents how to use it and protect there children from the horrific nature of Paris Hilton movies.
Quote DXR_13KE 28th February 2008, 09:48
so nice to see Australia jump into bandwagon issues again...
Quote specofdust 28th February 2008, 10:05
Austrailistan? Is that you?
Quote taliban_raider 28th February 2008, 11:48
I will be certain to notify my local members of my displeasure at the proposal, I suggest all Australians who feel likewise do the same.
Quote Fly 28th February 2008, 13:25
All internet filtering is bad and simply a way of ignoring problems that need to be eradicated at source whilst showing that you are doing something about them. Parents should be doing a better job at supervising their kids. With this mindset I can see children being trusted to surf unsupervised because "the filter will stop them looking at porn" when in reality the dangers to children from the net are far worse than Jenna Jameson and Ron Jeremy.
Quote CardJoe 28th February 2008, 13:35
M'eh. You just don't want to have to change your avatar. :P
Quote Firehed 28th February 2008, 13:48
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
M'eh. You just don't want to have to change your avatar. :P

And YOU don't want Aussie's blocked from Bit because of it ;)
(and in any case, Fly's completely right - parents who trust technology to do their job for them aren't parents)
Quote Nova 28th February 2008, 13:58
this is just the paper/printing lobbyist trying to keep the printed porn alive. that way little timmy has to keep to stealing dads playboy.
Quote Shadow_101 28th February 2008, 14:11
“Hello, I'd like to browse porn please. Could you arrange for that to happen? Thank you ever so much.”

^^ heh i'd have no problem asking for that.
Quote Aankhen 28th February 2008, 14:28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fly
All internet filtering is bad and simply a way of ignoring problems that need to be eradicated at source whilst showing that you are doing something about them. Parents should be doing a better job at supervising their kids. With this mindset I can see children being trusted to surf unsupervised because "the filter will stop them looking at porn" when in reality the dangers to children from the net are far worse than Jenna Jameson and Ron Jeremy.
Spot on. I don't condone porn, but this entire thing is a colossal waste of money.
Quote pendragon 28th February 2008, 18:18
Welcome to Communism, Australia :-P heh ... I don't support this on any level.
Quote freedom810 28th February 2008, 18:48
Pretty good idea if you ask me, nice idea to have the option of doing it. I mean the kids wouldnt notice it on probally anyway so its all good :)
Quote specofdust 28th February 2008, 18:52
Quote:
Originally Posted by freedom810
Pretty good idea if you ask me, nice idea to have the option of doing it. I mean the kids wouldnt notice it on probally anyway so its all good :)

Your name is quite ironic given that comment.
Quote Woodstock 28th February 2008, 19:25
im supprised that tasmanina has the internet to be able to test this
Quote E.E.L. Ambiense 28th February 2008, 20:56
Quote:
Originally Posted by specofdust
Your name is quite ironic given that comment.

LOL.
Quote 1ad7 28th February 2008, 21:09
Why cant we all just agree on the easyist most acceptable and cheapist fix...

www.freepr0n.xxx

wtf.... I know my country knocked this down(usa)... why it might hurt there accidental page views but its not really a big deal... but then again I dont own a porn website yet. I cant wait to see what it accidentally blocks!
Quote r4tch3t 29th February 2008, 03:08
Hmmm, if this goes through maybe I can get my internet paid for by Australians :D
I agree with 1ad7, if they want to prevent kids or any specific person viewing artistic photography, they should just use the .xxx domain, easy.
Quote Amon 29th February 2008, 07:15
I honestly don't see how blocking off pornographic websites will improve surfing habits. I'm baffled by how the debate over the .xxx domain a few years ago hasn't concluded.
Quote naokaji 29th February 2008, 08:34
and then they go complain about other countries censoring the internet...

Politicians are liars and have double standards.
Quote completemadness 29th February 2008, 16:04
What stops people using a proxy?
Quote Amon 29th February 2008, 19:17
Quote:
Originally Posted by completemadness
What stops people using a proxy?
My understanding is that they are proposing to block all adult traffic at the actual ISP, not the user. So proxifying yourself will still not work as long as you are using an affected Australian ISP.
Quote DXR_13KE 29th February 2008, 22:14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amon
My understanding is that they are proposing to block all adult traffic at the actual ISP, not the user. So proxifying yourself will still not work as long as you are using an affected Australian ISP.

so basically they are scanning everything you do?
Quote naokaji 29th February 2008, 23:54
Quote:
Originally Posted by DXR_13KE
so basically they are scanning everything you do?

exactly and at the same time they accuse countries that do the very same thing of being evil.
Quote ou7blaze 2nd March 2008, 19:05
No pr0n what will I do?!
Quote completemadness 2nd March 2008, 22:24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amon
My understanding is that they are proposing to block all adult traffic at the actual ISP, not the user. So proxifying yourself will still not work as long as you are using an affected Australian ISP.
Umm .. that depends if your proxy sends its data without encrypting it in some form

Then again, i usually send my internet (when i need to(no not for pr0n)) over SSH, not sure if "encrypted proxies" really exist
Quote Cthippo 3rd March 2008, 01:57
If it works like a standard filter then it will just work off a blacklist. I don't think they're doing actual packet sniffing to discern content.

While I obviously don't approve of this, the fact that you can opt out makes it almost palatable. The bottom line is that i think it's unreasonable to prevent the entire country from doing something which is legal in order to "protect children".
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.





Stats: 0.033 seconds