Filtered Internet for 70% of web users under government deal
- 09 July, 2010 12:27
- Comments 22
Up to 70 per cent of Australians will have filtered Internet access under a deal between Telstra, Optus, iPrimus and the Federal Government, Communications Minster Stephen Conroy said today.
Under the deal, the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) will impose web content filtering for their customers and in turn the Federal Government will postpone its national mandatory Internet content filtering scheme for a year.
The Federal Attorney-General‘s office will also review the filter blacklist - or refused classification content - to be administered by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA).
It is understood the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) will use the Internet filtering technology they employed during the scheme trial earlier this year.
Six of the nine ISPs that took part in the trial used M86 Security 8e6 R3000 Internet Filtering product. However, each of the ISPs configured the product independently.
The Internet content filter service to be put in place by Telstra, Optus and iPrimus will block only child pornography within their networks.
Optus director of corporate affairs, Maha Khrishnapillai, said it welcomed the development but noted it will not dramatically change the operations of ISPs.
“We are welcoming the minister’s review of restricted content and [the filtering development],” Khrishnapillai said.
“It is essentially status-quo, the way it is today. We have always worked with law enforcement in blocking criminal activity [but] the filter allows us to block access to criminal sites hosted overseas.
“We don’t want to make the decision of what is classified as Restricted Content. We have asked for a clear, well-understood process about what gets into the blacklist.”
It is understood that Optus will use Cisco hardware and filtering services used by ISPs in the US and the UK.
Conroy said the blacklist review is geared to bolster confidence in the public to the Internet content filter.
“The public needs to have confidence that the URLs on the list, and the process by which they get there, is independent, rigorous, free from interference or influence and enables content and site owners access to appropriate review mechanisms,” Conroy said.
The government will introduce an annual review of the blacklist content will be conducted by an independent auditor, channels for appeal of classification decisions, and that content identified on the basis of a public complaint be classified by the Classification Board under the National Classification Scheme.
- Bookmark this page
- Share this article
- Got more on this story? Email Computerworld
- Follow Computerworld on twitter
- Enterprise Buyers Guide for Cloud Storage
- Enterprise Buyers Guide for Application Development Software
- Case Study: Keeping information on the move: Clearswift protects Maman, the logistics experts
- Cloud Storage Strategy Guide
- Case Study: Understand How Edith Cowan University has Regained Control of their Storage Environment
- The challenges of business intelligence: Gartner BI summit
- Macquarie Telecom reports 13.8 per cent profit hike
- Microsoft offers free Cloud computing to start-ups
- .melbourne, .sydney and .victoria are go, .nsw a maybe
- In Pictures: Ultimate Man vs. Computer - Garry Kasparov, Deep Blue and the Internet
-
Evolve 2012: TechnologyOne invests $200m in new Cloud platform
-
Hands on: Samsung's Galaxy Note engages, perplexes
-
Apache Web server gets high performance upgrade
-
ING Direct Australia shares 12 BI tips
-
New version of BlackBerry PlayBook OS released
-
Windows 7 for Dummies®
-
Computers for Seniors for Dummies, 2nd Edition
-
Excel 2007 All-In-One Desk Reference for Dummies
-
Office 2007 for Dummies
-
Teach Yourself Visually Windows 7
-
Windows 7 for Seniors for Dummies®
-
Microsoft Office
-
MYOB Software for Dummies 6E Australian Edition
-
Office 2007 All-In-One Desk Reference for Dummies












Comments
Mick
They STILL don't get it.
The ONLY filtering I will tolerate is the kind installed and CONFIGURED by the END-USER.
Telstra, Optus etc, you are sell-outs and traitors.
And no, I don't view porn over the net, or anywhere else.
Jeremy West
"child pornography" is always the first excuse. The next level of censorship will add just another thin layer so as not to arouse angst with the public such as chemistry related information "just in case" teenagers get the wild idea to make firecrackers. Layer by thin layer censorship will choke off reality. Finally all information outing the criminal behaviour of central banking and their bed partner in politic's and mainstream media will be off limits for the sake of "national security". Wake up people, the water is quickly warming in the frying pan...
TrueBlue
Since illegal material has always been filtered in some form I don't see this as a sell out. The issue remains how is material classified and how does the public have a say. Quite clearly Child porn and bestiality should be banned and are already in most countries but that is about the extent of the filtering that can be tolerated (no filtering on ideas you don't like ie Encyclopedia Dramatica etc).
Conroy and Gillard are simply delaying the implementation until after the election and then they will go back to the original plan , does anyone trust the ALP and particularly Gillard.
Geoff
Here's a good pre-election suggestion for Julia, how about you delay the internet filter until 3011 !
Trickery
Be careful that fighting the issue of "censorship" itself does not become the obsession and letting main problems faced by society: the criminality of societal leaders, become secondary. The persecutor's (the ruling oligarchy controlling government as it's public face) use the issue of "censorship" itself as a decoy to more efficiently control those amongst us who are vigilant in nature and ignited by the "censorship" issue into groups leading to a controlled narrowing of the thinking and neutralizing efforts towards problematic issues requiring at least equal attention. Losing ground to the censorship issue can be very demoralizing therefore it is imperative to understand the underlying implications. Always remember that "censorship" is allowed to be fought on the persecutor's terms while it remains the tool to protect the oligarchy grip on power, not the public.
cinco
yes - lets hide this away until after the election. We can pretend its gone away and buy a few votes and then screw everyone over once we are voted back in.
morrgo
"The public needs to have confidence [re] the URLs" says Conroy. So, will the public be show the list of URLs this time?
Barry
Well, this is one way for me to save money. Optus will lose me as a customer after more then 8 years.
Sell outs are all they are.
Furious
Brb voting liberal
Martin Carroll
“The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation.” - Adolf Hitler. Mein Kampf.
RS
#6... unfortunately cinco, it seems Gillard has taken a leaf out of Abbott's book, as the Libs haven't come out and openly opposed the filter and are waiting to be handed government before telling us their actual stance...
Mike Hoffman
#10 While your intentions are good, it helps not to use fake quotes. Yes, it's fake. Google it.
Alan
I personally don't have a problem at all with this move, I don't think many have a problem with blocking child pornography. My problem is with the broad RC proposal.
Russell
1. The internet filter seems like one of those 'stupid' things that politicians get involved in. We should all know by now that any filters can be bypassed by a variety of methods. So why devote time, money and resources to this when only the most technically naive people think it will have some effect on child porn distribution?
2. Give or take, the people proposing this filtering infrastructure are <not> stupid. They <know> it won't work on specific targets like child porn and that these groups will just work around it, quite possibly using methods that will be harder to detect and trace.
So, given 1 and 2, why? I'm sure there are plans to expand this in the future, it's just a wedge. Nothing else makes sense. Please oppose it.
D Newman
Whole heartedly agree with you Russell, the level of knowledge and the speed in which it will be spread to by-pass the filter means at face value what has been proposed makes no sense at all.
Top that with Google and Yahoo already blocking URL,s to 'bad' sites and already liase with Interpol, I question in the strongest terms the real reason for this filter, wether it be pampering to the christian right to garner favour and a voting block or sheer stupidity and a belief that screaming 'Save our children " will really win elections.
The content that they are trying to drum up fear with is already in rapid decline from mainstream public domain thanks to the efforts of Interpol and police forces world wide, even Russia has made in roads in this area, and it was the wild wild west as far as illegal content was concerned.
So yet again I say, I am very very cynical of this filter in its concept, application and purpose.
kj
I will be dumping Optus then and I will vote Libs and they are not any better, If Conroy really wanted to do anything about abuse of children he would be calling the pope and telling him to stand down and all his paedophile mates he covered for that he still lets preach the word of god. If Conroy was so worried he would complain about the child brides the Islamic countries allow, these are real time abuses that go on, that all this hot air from these holy rollers allow and we do business with, the mans a joke. Put more police on the chat rooms Watch and set up people on the p2ps track down where these child porn sites are and get the country they are in involved. They let these radical Islamic dirt bags into our country just so they can censor and dig into our privacy to enable the government and police to have more power and control us mother us censor us, these are the same people who believe in a fairy tale god who created the world in seven days some 10,000 years ago bloody morons aboriginals have been in Australia for 40,000 years these twits run our country and dictate what we do and believe in the tooth fairy. I will be glad to see them ban their dumb ass religions instead of free speech because that is what they will do it start with child porn as an excuse but where is the mandatory sentencing for the crime of abusing a child, no the bloody judges let them off light and why! The filter is a cover for their inaction against the child abusers, starts for one thing and then another, just like all the new power the government and police have because of terrorism but they let the buggers in here, just like they let the heads of their belief and government bodies abuse children and that is all because cover up! just like when you filter information or stop whistle blowers.
Good bye Telstra
My 24 month contract with Bigpond ends in December and I will now be leaving thanks to their filter plans. Internode here I come!
George
I wonder how many customers those telcos will lose.
Not many, I think. Let's face it, most won't even notice that they are being censored. I mean, they can't be very intelligent or they wouldn't be with Big Pond in the first instance.
Troy
Vote Greens, they will vote against the filter
Fred
Hasn't Conroy (and his mate Julia) got it through their dense craniums that filtering out child abuse websites will achieve absolutely nothing because there are NO child abuse websites to filter out? If there were, the owners would be instantly busted by law enforcement.
Those politician clowns don't have a clue about how the internet works because if they did, this idiotic idea would never have been proposed. It's just a total waste of money and resources aimed at getting votes from the technically ignorant religious right.
Like so many others, this time around my vote will go to the Greens and not Labor.
nik
careful voting for the greens, if they don't get enough votes to make them the leading party then the greens votes get added to another party!!!
Russell Good
Politician is from the Greek word polis
Scots/ scottish English - polis means police
Polisen, the Swedish name of the Swedish Police Service
Polis, the Turkish name of the Turkish National Police
from wiki
Post new comment