[LINK] Teen hacks 'useless' Govt porn filter

[Glen Turner]

On Mon, 2007-08-27 at 22:46 +1000, Brendan Scott wrote:

> > "But $84 million is just outrageous, I think."
> 
> Is that figure real?
> I can't, for the life of me, understand how they could spend so much even on 3 filters.

It seems to be for the entire National Filter Scheme. It includes
 - the software
 - the block lists, with updates
 - tech support from the manufacturer
 - help line at NetAlert for "pre-sales" and ordering
across three years.

It's unclear if the amount handed to the software manufacturers
is volume-related, and thus if the $84m is a cautious estimate.
Doubtless we'll find out more should Rudd win and Senate Estimates
be held. Although NetAlert is a private company, so we won't
get to see those most in the know asked the tough questions.

But to answer your question, there go three very lucky software
companies.

It's a bit disappointing from a consumer protection point of view
that the government didn't modify some terms of the EULAs. Most
people downloading $0 software wouldn't have expected it to bring
an unlimited indemnification liability.

There's an even better hack than Tom's. Just download and install
the filter before your parents do.  Then you'll know the
admin password. Now set the filter to allow everything.
If the filter is good then your parents won't be able to
remove the filter or alter its settings.  Of course, you
may be sent to your bedroom until you cough up the password :-)

Still waiting for the other shoe to drop. The one where the
recommended filter stops access to government programmes, say
the cervical cancer programme. With the large number of vanity
domains the government uses now it won't be possible for them
to pre-screen all of the AU government websites out of the lists.

Fielding was jumping up and down about this showing that ISPs
need to do filtering.  Which is a bit of a joke given the poor
take-up of Optus' filtered product (about 2% of their customer
base, so <0.5% of Internet subscribers). It's unclear to me why
he thinks all ISPs need to provide a filtered feed -- surely
those people that care can sign up with Optus? And if there's
enough of those them other ISPs won't be slow in developing
competing product.

The Internet has been around now for a decade++. The Internet
has been unfiltered all that time.  Notice any of the dire
consequences that we're told should await us?  Those bad things
the Internet has bought with it can't be fixed by filters.
Worse luck, or we'd have done it by now.

Cheers, Glen