[LINK] Conroy abandons mandatory ISP filtering
rene.ln at libertus.net
Fri Nov 9 14:52:49 AEDT 2012
[Accidentally sent this off-list, re-sending to list]
On Fri, 9 Nov 2012 13:24:34 +1100, Michael Skeggs mike at bystander.net wrote:
> Hi Irene,
> Thanks for the details.
> Do you know what happens practically, if a picture is uploaded to
> mySpace (for example) and added to the list?
> Presumably there must be some notification to hostmasters as we
> aren't seeing the big social networking and image hosting sites
> flicker in and out of the DNS system?
I don't know, but my guess (based on much research in recent years
concerning what IWF and and other agencies have said they've found/know) is
that highly popular sites such as My Space and Flickr probably aren't being
used - or were e.g. a few years ago but aren't anymore - because, I think,
that all/most such sites have "report illegal content" buttons etc such
that it seems very likely that an ordinary member of the public would
notify the site and the CSA content be removed before any of the (very few
police) agencies who add domains to Interpol's list would even know the
content had existed.
I also think it's highly feasible, notwithstanding what Interpol says, that
if there's e.g. one image on such a popular site, it doesn't get added to
Interpol's list immediately, if at all, because they know the world-wide
furore that would erupt if the whole site became inaccessible to customers
of ISPs who use their DNS poisoning list. IWF experienced that, re their
URL blocking list, twice a few years ago, when their additions to their
block list resulted in inability to edit Wikipedia, and inability to access
webarchive.org, IIRC in one of those cases because of the manner in which
some UK ISPs had implemented their so-called URL (not domain) blocking
Also, FWIW, my concern is not about the potential blocking of large popular
domains (because, as above, I really doubt that will/does happen, and if it
does it will very likely get fixed/unblocked pronto and probably result in
public pressure for a 'new' system that's less indiscriminate or 'no'
blocking). However, I am very concerned about blocking of much less
well-known file sharing sites, blogs, etc that have e.g. been hacked.
People who've been paying attention to these issues for several years or
more will no doubt recall the discovery that the ACMA had added (hacked)
pages on an AU dentist's and school canteen's site to their (voluntary)
block list which was unknown until Wikileaks published block lists. If the
content on those pages met Interpol's criteria (unknown and irrelevant),
their action would result in blocking the entire domain (well, except to
those who know how to easily bypass DNS poisoning "blocking"). In some ways
that might be good, because the arguably improper block would likely become
publicly known more quickly, but OTOH, I don't think people who host sites
or blogs etc should have their sites poisoned merely because apparently
"authorities" can't be bothered to tell them their site's been misused by
some criminal and giving them a short period of time to fix it, instead of
just adding it to a block list.
More information about the Link