[LINK] Senate Standing Committee: NetAlert/Mandatory filtering
mike at somebodythinkofthechildren.com
Tue Feb 19 12:25:38 EST 2008
Glen Turner wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 20:42 +1000, Michael Meloni wrote:
>> Senate Standing Committee update 2: 8:48PM ACMA says they are looking to
>> expand black list. Liaising with International groups.Current sites
>> listed on the trial will only need to block the current ACMA blacklist -
>> just 800 URLs. Expected final black list numbers unable to be answered.
> That's URLs, not IP addresses. So the implication is that ISPs will
> need to place a firewall in the core of their network. Firewalls
> are not reliable devices, so this isn't a good engineering outcome.
> Obviously a ISP can't filter IP addresses if the list is of URLs,
> that would lead to customer contract issues.
> I'd really like to see some details of the ISP trial in Tasmania.
> *Tasmania*! Think about that, how little traffic can we be talking
> about when you struggle to get 155Mbps onto the island? There's
> also one exit point from the island, so a logical place to do
> filtering exists.
> In comparison, AARNet pulls that from a single small university and
> has a multitude of exit points (to prevent failures). In short,
> the trial is rigged to produce the best result.
The ACMA are underestimating the amount of sites/pages that would need
to be included on the blacklist if they are to go with what Conroy wants
(more than just illegal content).
Someone from the department last night commented that international
filtering examples have shown that URLs to illegal sites change rapidly
(due to police action, to avoid detection etc) and as such the URLs on
the blacklist change often. I believe the example they used was around
1500 actives sites on the list at any one time (I cannot remember which
country they were referring to).
If X rated material (or even adult content) was included on the list
that wouldn't be the case. Because it's legal the sites won't be
changing URLs or running from the law. The amount of sites on the
blacklist would be considerably higher than just a list with illegal
sites (where old ones are possibly removed).
What criteria will constitute a success in Tasmania. That I'd love to
More information about the Link