ISP filtering report unlikely to surface: Budde
- 17 November, 2009 06:55
- Comments (13)
The Federal Government commissioned report into the viability of mandatory ISP-level filtering may never see the light of day according to telecommunications analyst, Paul Budde.
Speaking to Computerworld, Budde said the Federal Government’s lack of communication on its ISP-level filtering plans, and its refusal to set a date for the release of its findings, suggested that the Government’s plans had been shelved.
“In my opinion it doesn’t make political sense for [Communications Minister Stephen Conroy] to undermine his work with the NBN by putting emphasis on the whole [ISP filtering] situation,” he said. “[Conroy] has not done anything to suggest that he has withdrawn from the issue, but at the same time it does not make sense [to pursue mandatory ISP filtering]. He is sensible enough to see, and feel and hear that, so why would you pursue something that is really not going to be a winner?”
According to Budde, the ISP industry’s willingness to tackle the issue underpinning mandatory filtering - protecting children online – meant that an industry alternative to mandatory filtering was likely to emerge.
“There is enough common ground that we can start tackling the issue without making such an enormous fuss about it and pointing the finger at the ISPs. [Mandatory ISP-level filtering] is a bit of a non-issue as every serious player in the market … is willing to sit around a table and help the government find a solution to the issue… but the way that the government is going is not inclusive of the whole industry.
“I think in the end [Conroy] would fail with it – it is not an fight he would win and that would undermine his credibility, so why would you do it? So, he might want to take another initiative from here which is more inclusive of the industry, rather than ‘I tell you what to do’.”
IDC telecommunications analyst, David Cannon, said it was likely that the ISP-level filtering report “in some shape or form” would reach the light of day, but the level of detail the report would contain on the viability of the plan was debatable.
Cannon said a number of different solutions were in use by ISPs aimed at addressing the issue of protecting children online, however this did not include major industry adoption of the same kind of filtering at the network layer as the mandatory ISP-level filtering scheme.
“The nature of the internet as a moving target, the administrative cost for ISPs to do it properly, and without any legal exposure you subject yourself to if you advertise yourself as a filtered service mean there aren’t any major movements towards filtering at the network layer,” he said.
In early November, a spokesperson for the Communications Minister, Senator Stephen Conroy, confirmed no date has been set for the report’s release.
Email Computerworld or follow @computerworldau on Twitter.
- Bookmark this page
- Share this article
- Got more on this story? Email Computerworld
- Follow Computerworld on twitter
Comments
Anonymous
Just kill the stupid idea and never revive it ever again.
Anonymous
Why would they implement a filter now? Just wait till everyone adopts FBN, and filter across that?
Not that I'm for filtering, but wouldn't this be the ultimate filter, no ISP has access to the filter and no way for them to by pass it, as ADSL will be a thing of the past.
Ben
I think the government is starting to see the full retardedness of the idea and is blinking.
The article says that implementing the policy will undermine Conroy's credibility. His credibility couldn't possibly get any lower after this saga, could it?
Also, Anonymous at 9.16am, the performance load on the filters would be even worse with FTTH, as it would put a significantly greater strain on the boxes. Even with our current speeds, it would still not be fit for purpose and be an utter disaster.
Anonymous
Are you talking about a filter implimented from the get go of a new network installation?
I am still seeing issues here. Regardless of what filters are in place or what network is used. Data is still travelling along it and can be routed through a proxy or annonimiser service with ease.
Regardless of what countermeasures are put in place.
I dont see how it has anything to do with ADSL at all.
AkiraDoe
“I think in the end [Conroy] would fail with it – it is not an fight he would win and that would undermine his credibility"
You're forgetting his actions to date regarding the ISP Filtering proposal have already undermined his credibility whether he realises it or not.
The man cannot be trusted not only to do the right thing but be in charge of such an important portfolio especially since his repertoire to date only consists of ignoring industry experts, deceit, engineering reports to produce the result he wants, name calling and bullying opponents of the filtering plan.
If only he’d conducted some actual public consultation outside of the filtering vendors or the ACL before trying to force this censorship upon the entire population we might not be in this mess.
The sooner he is out the better Australia will be.
Bryan
Paul Budd makes the assumption that the censorship (filter?) is about "saving the children". If censorship is about control and appeasing AFACT and those that contribute to political parties then continuation with this policy would make more sense to the ALP.
Lets not drop our guard just because Sen Conroy looks silly.
Simon Shaw
Yes, my concern is a filter would be implemented at the NBN level.
This would effectively filter every internet connection in Australia at a few central points, rather than at myriad ISP's.
It would make leakage of the blacklist less likely and be a nice coup for any party wishing to monitor and block traffic.
Don't breathe a sigh of relief yet.
Anonymous
Paul Budde is right as usual, and so are Bryan and others below.
Everyone, except Steve Fielding & Co, now realises that "saving the children" is just a cover. The real reasons seem more related to carrying out the richly funded demands of AFACT, and being able to secretly censor whatever future governments secretly decide they want to.
Anonymous
The current filtering trial was done on today's network speeds. The NBN is meant to be '100x faster', how will the filtering systems cope with that? And no conjuring up Moore's law won't help you.
Also it is quite obvious to me Rudd is the main pusher for this absolute waste of tax payers money and Conroy has been given orders to implement it (not to mention there are no practical government subsidized safety measures for children while this farce is ingoing). The blame should lay squarely on Rudd.
The current government has made children LESS safe online and that point should be pushed home a lot more.
Anonymous
Its hidden agenda guessing time people! Join the dots of ISP monitoring, AFACT control of subscribers, Murdochs delayed plan for abolition of copyright fair use and paywalls for all news information.
Historically, the medium of film was taken over by a few big money studios by buying up cinemas and refusing supply of content to others. So in many areas, one could only watch products from one studio.
How would a two tier Internet controlled by big media work ?
Express speed for preferred sites, trusted and not subject to slow filtering. Big Pond already has free data usage for some backroom deals.
A few ISPs, oriented toward delivery of TV type content, and pay per view film. Subscribe to your Foxtel ISP.
Just like cable TV.
Pay extra, be monitored, have lower priority if your a suspicious weirdo that wants to access "untrusted" sites.
Your guess ?
John
The idea of filtering Australians internet should never have been suggested anyway and was only supported by an tiny minority of wailing right wing Christians (Kevin Rudd included). Lets hope this is the last we hear about web censorship in Australia for a long.
Anonymous
Con(job)roy has been a fool, and has been SEEN to be a fool.
He, and his filter, should be consigned to political oblivion.
Anonymous
Anyone wanting to bypass website filters and traffic analysis can simply use Tor. It's slow on some sites but useful if you need to access the webpage of a certain Queensland dentist or whatever else they decide to block next.
Post new comment