ISP-level filter trial vendor happy with results
- 16 December, 2009 11:20
- Comments 11
The vendor that provided filtering products to six of the nine ISPs participating in the Federal Government's controversial ISP-level content filtering trial says the results show the technology works.
After much delay the Federal Government yesterday released the results of Enex TestLab’s test pilot into mandatory ISP-level content filtering, finding 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.
M86 vice-president Asia-Pacific, Jeremy Hulse, welcomed the findings and said it countered theories that Internet speeds would be affected. The vendor provided its off-the shelf 8e6 R3000 Internet Filtering product to six ISPs for the trial along with advice on implementation. However, each of the ISPs configured the product independently.
"It debunks the theory that by having any form of filtering you are actually going to slow down and increase latency – that is not the case," Hulse said about the Enex report. "From a technology perspective I think it was great it showed it was there. But the real thing for the politicians to do is the policy; how it is implemented and how it is run. The biggest thing that came out of it on that side of it was there are many ways you can put a filtering solution in. Some are going to be very effective and some not so effective."
On the back of the Enex findings that filtering only the ACMA blacklist during the trial had no noticeable performance degradation that could be attributed to the filter itself, Hulse cautioned that care needed to be taken in designing the configuration if more extensive filtering was pursued.
"One of the things for me was if they filter just the blacklist then there were a few technologies that could cope with that," he said. "If they then go and offer the extended filtering, putting in more granular controls and rules in for child protection, etc, which is probably where they want to go, the are going to have to be very careful about the technologies they choose."
On the question of technically competent users being able to circumvent the filter, Hulse was adamant the technology could be configured to prevent this.
"It is interesting the level of ability to get around the filter for people that know what they are doing. Interestingly I would say we could configure that to make it a lot lower than the actual results they got," Hulse said. "We could give 100 per cent and that's because of the techniques of the configuration. It is how it is implemented in your environment that is critical."
The full Enex Testlab report can be viewed online.
You can also see how the 8e6 R3000 Internet Filtering product works on the M86 website.
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
-
Wednesday Grok: iPhone on top but Android owns the noobs
-
BTJunkie voluntarily closes file-sharing website
-
More Australians switch on IPTV: Study
-
Microsoft at a loss over Event Viewer scam
-
Battery fires, rootkits and Sony's brand
-
Office 2007 for Dummies
-
Excel 2007 All-In-One Desk Reference for Dummies
-
Windows 7 for Seniors for Dummies®
-
Computers for Seniors for Dummies, 2nd Edition
-
Windows 7 for Dummies® Dvd+book Bundle
-
Microsoft Office
-
MYOB Software for Dummies 6E Australian Edition
-
Windows 7 for Dummies®
-
Office 2007 All-In-One Desk Reference for Dummies












Comments
Anonymous
You know, one-day honest citizens are gonna stand up to you crooked cops.
Dave
First of all how long do you think it will take the filth merchants to get round the filtering? They probably already have! Secondly what's to stop the nanny-in-charge blocking material that is critical of our dear leader.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Highly Concerned.
"On the question of technically competent users being able to circumvent the filter, Hulse was adamant the technology could be configured to prevent this."
technically competent users? My mum knows how to change the proxy used by internet explorer and find a list of anonymous internet proxy's using Google... all proxys outside AU will bypass the filter inc search engines outside Australia.
I would also like to hear Jeremy Hulse talk about how their technology blocks the TOR network, Even China's firewall hasn't been able to completely let alone partially block it from being used for long.
The question needs to be asked why they want this $100m filter when its easily bypassed and can not be adequately enforced? Wouldn't the $100m be better spent on police and have better effect on crime than on technology that gives a false sense of filtering, allows criminals to easily bypass it and do nothing more than cause connectivity issues and other problems for users who are blocked from accessing sites unknown without any status codes to identify the filter as the cause and ways website operators can identify when the filter is blocking another site on their host that's also affecting them?
The way I see it, the technology doesn't stop anyone accessing RC material from continuing to access it and will only serve to make it harder to identify these individuals because it will teach them how to operate encrypted communications which police forces are unable to decrypt and analyze, all while causing issues for legitimate material and people having to deal with Government Censors who impose their view of the world on their content and every Australian "for the sake of Children".
Wake up Australia, The government is really saying Adults are children who need their internet filtered...
Anonymous
WE DON'T WANT THIS
HOW LOUDLY
WE DON'T WANT THIS
HOW LOUDLY DO WE HAVE TO TELL YOU
WE DON'T WANT YOUR STINKING ISP FILTER
Essy
is it still effective when the internet speeds get faster or was this test done on the current (substandard) infrastructure??
Anonymous
Try getting this through Conroy you crook nerd. The greens are going to block you.
Then the Libs or someone will get you kicked from Gov - pray that your next job interview isn't with a gamer or someone who needs to use the internet to look stuff up.
This filter won't stop anyone. I have this on good authority from people who WORK in ISP's. Very few people want this filter in any form.
Anonymous
All the scum will circumvent the filter using encrypted VPNs and make it IMPOSSIBLE for police to ever catch them. Nice work Conroy!
Anonymous
If you fire off an angry email to Senator Conroy about filtering, all you'll likely get is an automatically-generated reply giving you the standard words on the issue. Don't waste your time, waste theirs instead! http://is.gd/5pjGo
Anonymous
So the filter makers are happy with the result?
I'll bet they are. 130 million times happy.
The big content corporations must be pretty happy too, since the filter could be used to secretly block any sites they think might be in breach of their precious copyright.
Ben
How convenient that all the vendors and the technologies were suppressed from the report.
How can we believe that it 'works' if we don't even know the name of the technology?
Anonymous
'All the scum will circumvent the filter'
Many who are NOT scum will also be bypassing the filter.
Myself included.
I categorically REFUSE to let my internet access be interfered with.
By anyone.
For any reason.
Post new comment