Internode: ISP-level filter goals still not clear
- 15 December, 2009 17:41
- Comments 8
The objectives of the Federal Government's mandatory ISP-level filter plan announced today are still unclear, according to one of the companies likely to be directly affected.
Senator Stephen Conroy today said that he would push ahead the content filter to block URLs that received a Refused Content classification by the ACMA in the face of considerable public backlash.
However, Internode network engineer, Mark Newton, told Computerworld the question of whether the plan is a good idea in the first place, has still not been answered.
“They need to tell the public what they actually want to achieve, and they’ve never done that," he said. "We’ve been talking about this for two years now, and they’ve never once said what their objective is.
“It’s clearly not to keep stuff away from kids, because the data in this report shows that the products they have tested are completely ineffective at doing that.
“It’s clearly not to prevent adults from publishing information that’s inappropriate for kids, because one of the outcome’s of the report is that anyone who is motivated to circumvent these products can."
Newton's comments echo those of other industry figures including telco analyst Paul Budde, and Vocus CEO and one of the found members of AusNOG James Spenceley who described the decision as a bad day for the industry.
The Internode network engineer also questioned the results of Enex Testlab's report into a trial of content filtering run by several ISPs.
“Enex haven’t provided any information about sample sizes when they’ve been giving statistical data. They’ll give a percentage figure without saying the size of whatever quantity they were talking about," Newton said.
“Some of the performance numbers that they’ve given indicate that network performance is better with the censor were in place than without it, which doesn’t make any sense at all.
“They haven’t provided enough information to be able to tell whether the numbers they’re reporting are correct."
The Enex report found that a technically competent user could circumvent filtering technology based on ACMA’s blacklist.
According to the report, initially all filters had issues with loading the ACMA blacklist indicating a need for routine checking to ensure the blacklist is filtered correctly with each update.
On the up side, testing also revealed that ISPs filtering only the ACMA blacklist during the trial had no noticeable performance degradation that could be attributed to the filter itself.
(The full Enex Testlab report can be downloaded from the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy website.)
“As a result of how it was announced today, we probably know less about how it’s going to work than we did this morning, because Conroy says that there will be an independent body to evaluate whether content is refused classification or not," Newton added. "At the moment we’ve got ACMA and the classification board doing that, so it looks like we’re going to have a third body in the government doing censorship with a separate blacklist and we don’t know anything about them yet.
“Where’s the accountability for them? So we’ll have to see the draft legislation to know where that’s at."
Additional reporting by Trevor Clarke
Sign up for Computerworld's newsletters.
Got a tip? Email Computerworld or follow @computerworldau on Twitter and let us know your thoughts.
- Bookmark this page
- Share this article
- Got more on this story? Email Computerworld
- Follow Computerworld on twitter
- Australian Federal Government to introduce mandatory ISP-level filtering
- Budde: Worries remain over ISP-level content filter
- ISP-level filter bad for industry
- Mandatory ISP-Level Filtering report released
- downloaded from the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy website.
- Sign up for Computerworld's newsletters.
- @computerworldau
-
Drupal gains ground down under
-
NBN build gaining momentum daily: Quigley
-
Chambers: Networking's changing competitive landscape
-
The NBN, service providers and you... what could go wrong?
-
NBN build gaining momentum daily: Quigley
-
Windows 7 for Seniors for Dummies®
-
Teach Yourself Visually Windows 7
-
Office 2007 All-In-One Desk Reference for Dummies
-
Windows 7 for Dummies® Dvd+book Bundle
-
Computers for Seniors for Dummies, 2nd Edition
-
Windows 7 for Dummies®
-
Microsoft Office
-
Office 2007 for Dummies
-
MYOB Software for Dummies 6E Australian Edition









Comments
Unforgiven
yay... just what this country needs... more censorship </sarcasm>
Freedom of Speech / Freedom of Expression :is this supposed democratic g'ment going to deny the one of the most basic human rights?
Simon Shaw
In a few years the government in Australia will mandate that all children born must be wrapped in cotton wool as soon as feasible. This is to be kept on until you're buried.
Anonymous
You do realise that "noticeable" performance degradation according to their trial was more than 20%? Even given the lack of information they've disclosed in this report to really judge their testing, they admit a significant percentage degradation to performance. Anyone who says 20% is "not noticeable" has a poor grasp of mathematics. Imagine if 20% of the population were killed in a nuclear blast - there's all of Sydney dead!
Anonymous
Conroy you are such a numpty. Could the Labour party PLEASE hire someone to advise on what is technically feasible? Perhaps you should read up on King Canute.
Anonymous
Freedom of speech went out the window when laws where invented to protect minorities and NOT the majority!
Ralph
What scalability test were done? They've already said sites like youtube would suffer. What if, instead of 1000 clueless users, there were millions? Or if the block list was extended to a relatively useful level?
I know I'm preaching to the choir, but this should have always been a per-household voluntary scheme, like it already was back before they instigated all this nonsense..
Anonymous
Censorship is in itself evil and part of the root of all that is evil. It leads to most of the worlds problems and the key methods bad people use to get away with their operations. It is the golden tool of corruption and cover-ups. We are all not children and should not be treated as such. Don't tell me what I am aloud to see and know.
neilmc
@ Ralph "What scalability test were done?"
I'd like to know that too. There was a podcast recently where Conroy addressed that point.
Did he say they'll get the data out ASAP for that? No
Is it in the Enex report? No
What he did say was that he spoke to Enex about it and they'd told him that scalability wasn't a problem. I'm not sure what that's based on. Any Enex people around who would care to confirm that they've given the tick against scalability?
Post new comment