Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.

View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9
629 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 5


  Reply # 236739 18-Jul-2009 19:42 Send private message

Aaroona:
Ragnor: It's a classic catch 22...

They don't want to publish the list because it will increase awareness of sites which are illegal under NZ law (namely child pron).


If its on the list, its blocked anyway. So...


Exactly. And if they claim that "well you could get around the filter once you know the list of blocked sites", that just proves the point that it can be circumvented in the first place. It's ridiculous and a complete waste of money, not to mention an extremely slippery slope.

2418 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 23


  Reply # 236743 18-Jul-2009 19:57 Send private message

Screeb:
Aaroona:
Ragnor: It's a classic catch 22...

They don't want to publish the list because it will increase awareness of sites which are illegal under NZ law (namely child pron).


If its on the list, its blocked anyway. So...


Exactly. And if they claim that "well you could get around the filter once you know the list of blocked sites", that just proves the point that it can be circumvented in the first place. It's ridiculous and a complete waste of money, not to mention an extremely slippery slope.


Haha. Exactly.
Clearly the Govt has their judgment clouded.

Either way, I think it would be cheaper in the long run to take these "7000 websites" and shut them down at the host, rather than blocking individual countries?

That way, the Govt's get what they want, they achieve their goal, don't go spending money on crap which could potentially cripple us.

Even if this list was properly maintained, I still feel that there is a much better way to go about this.




This is a signature.

601 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 5

Trusted

  Reply # 236755 18-Jul-2009 21:25 Send private message

It doesn't matter whether or not they want to keep the list private, it is quickly, simply and (pretty likely) undetectably discoverable.

Here’s an attack that will make the list of IP Addresses public:

1) Find a site that is likely to be filtered. WikiLeak’s copy of the Aussie list is good to use.
2) Traceroute the site (or L4 traceroute).
3) If the route shows up as being to the DIA, you’ve got a filtered location.
4) Get a route to an unfiltered location. Google.com is probably good.
5) Find the _earliest_ difference.


Then, foreach IP Address:
1) Send out an ICMP packet with a TTL set to the number of hops to the difference in the traceroutes.
2) When the timeout packet returns compare it to the DIA router.
3) Output the IP address when it matches.


Nice, cheap and easy probes to make the list public. How many UDP packets can you send out in a second?


Once you have the IP addresses:
Google “Find all vhosts for a single IP”


Make the list public, and make additions to the list public.






1216 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 117

Trusted

  Reply # 236784 18-Jul-2009 23:26 Send private message

jpollock: If they want to filter it, they need to do several things:



1) They need to publish the list.

2) They need to go in front of a judge to put something on the list.

3) They need to remove the NGO's from the process.

4) There needs to be very strictly defined legislation around what should and should not be on the list.

5) It should be able to appeal a listing.

6) They need to make an attempt to notify the host of the content.



This is a limitation of someone's free speech rights. There should be the exact same barriers to blocking it that there are for the government stopping a national newspaper or TV network.



Exactly!  I agree 100%  Good call! Smile


Is the mainstream media aware of this?

1931 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 232

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 236790 18-Jul-2009 23:45 Send private message

Ragnor: It's a classic catch 22...



They don't want to publish the list because it will increase awareness of sites which are illegal under NZ law (namely child pron). That kinda makes sense.



However if the list is secret how can we be sure it won't be abused to block content that is political etc.




When/if you get blocked they're not going to send some bunch of thugs your way to beat you up over it, its more for accidental protection for innocent web browsers.

You don't get a 404 if a page is blocked, you get a webpage and message actually saying that the content has been blocked.

I'm amazed by how many people take offense to this kind of protection after news hits the mainstream media, when in reality several ISPs have been doing this for some time now with no one blinking an eyelid about it.

The only people who should be concerned about this is those who actively try to access kiddy porn etc. If that is you (not you Ragnor) then shame, go to another country if you don't like the laws here.




2454 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 220

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 236802 19-Jul-2009 02:36 Send private message

insane:
Ragnor: It's a classic catch 22...

They don't want to publish the list because it will increase awareness of sites which are illegal under NZ law (namely child pron). That kinda makes sense.

However if the list is secret how can we be sure it won't be abused to block content that is political etc.



When/if you get blocked they're not going to send some bunch of thugs your way to beat you up over it, its more for accidental protection for innocent web browsers.

You don't get a 404 if a page is blocked, you get a webpage and message actually saying that the content has been blocked.

I'm amazed by how many people take offense to this kind of protection after news hits the mainstream media, when in reality several ISPs have been doing this for some time now with no one blinking an eyelid about it.

The only people who should be concerned about this is those who actively try to access kiddy porn etc. If that is you (not you Ragnor) then shame, go to another country if you don't like the laws here.



And that attitude right there is the problem.  This sort of topic isn't going to get any reasonable discussion, because someone is going to come along and claim that if you're against the filtering, then you're a paedophile.

I'll tell you what insane, I'm against the filter, and most firmly against the stuff it's supposed to protect us from.  I fully agree with the desire and need to annihilate kiddy fiddlers (preferably with an ICBM.  From orbit) but the way to do that is not to put up a little wall saying "bad things are happening on the other side of this wall".  The way to do that is to stop the bad things happening where you were going to put the wall in the first place.

And of course, there's the massive protential for abuse by a government with ultimate power over what they want users to see and hear.  See: China.

So yes, I am concerned about this filtering concept.  And no, I'm not going to another country.  I sorta like this one.

629 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 5


Reply # 236884 19-Jul-2009 14:47 Send private message

insane:
When/if you get blocked they're not going to send some bunch of thugs your way to beat you up over it, its more for accidental protection for innocent web browsers.

You don't get a 404 if a page is blocked, you get a webpage and message actually saying that the content has been blocked.

I'm amazed by how many people take offense to this kind of protection after news hits the mainstream media, when in reality several ISPs have been doing this for some time now with no one blinking an eyelid about it.

The only people who should be concerned about this is those who actively try to access kiddy porn etc. If that is you (not you Ragnor) then shame, go to another country if you don't like the laws here.


On top of what Kyanar just said, no one is accidentally stumbling across this material. You can't exactly Google it and get a list of 7000 sites. They're hidden deeply. You can only come across these sites if you're looking for them. And if you know how to find them, then you know how to use proxies to get around the filter. So it does NOTHING.

46 posts

Geek


  Reply # 236896 19-Jul-2009 16:10 Send private message

For those of you who are concerned by this. Please take the time to write to your ISP and tell them how you feel about it.

1216 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 117

Trusted

  Reply # 236900 19-Jul-2009 16:24 Send private message

Good idea adam77, however it may eventually become compulsory for ISPs to run this system, writing to your MP & any other MPs / Govt departments involved may be a more effective route.

233 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 37


  Reply # 236933 19-Jul-2009 19:12 Send private message

I can imagine it now...

"We only block child porn sites. The list is secret."
Someone posts the list.
"We only block child porn sites, and sites containing the secret list."
People start to post links to other sites containing the list.
"We only block child porn sites, sites containing the secret list, and sites linking to them."
List gets plastered all over the web.
"We only block... Let's start again shall we?"


1615 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 66

Trusted

  Reply # 237003 19-Jul-2009 23:00 Send private message

It sounds like voluntary at the moment, might work well if it stays that way. If there is any abuse or the blacklist is just maintained badly (such as taking a whole day to fix a mistake) then ISPs will simply remove the filtering. And anyone whos into kiddie porn will stay out of jail because they cant be tracked by internal affairs anymore.

If this stuff is compulsory then its pretty scary stuff, definitely would be abused.




Qualified in business, certified in fibre, stuck in copper, have to keep going  ^_^

1615 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 66

Trusted

  Reply # 237007 19-Jul-2009 23:03 Send private message

And there must have been some cheaper software available somewhere!




Qualified in business, certified in fibre, stuck in copper, have to keep going  ^_^

2418 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 23


  Reply # 237020 19-Jul-2009 23:36 Send private message

webwat: And there must have been some cheaper software available somewhere!


Or they could have just learned from their mistake before making it.

Would have been easier and cheaper.




This is a signature.

1615 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 66

Trusted

  Reply # 237022 19-Jul-2009 23:44 Send private message

adam77: For those of you who are concerned by this. Please take the time to write to your ISP and tell them how you feel about it.

Your ISP does not have any choice about this if it becomes compulsory, and have no interest in complaining on your behalf. They have probably already made their voice heard through InternetNZ etc or made their own comments to any government consultation programme(if they are vaguely interested in doing so). If you want to be heard at all, complain to the both Minister of Communications and the Minister of Internal Affairs. Complain even more to as many other MPs as you feel like, including both government and opposition MPs. If you actually write a physical letter instead of email, the Minister is obliged to reply you.




Qualified in business, certified in fibre, stuck in copper, have to keep going  ^_^

46 posts

Geek


  Reply # 237113 20-Jul-2009 10:34 Send private message


It's definately worthwhile letting any decision makers or lobyists know that you care about this issue, including your ISP, MP, InternetNZ etc.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic




Twitter »
Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:




News »
Symantec opens new office and expands Security Operations Centre in Sydney
Posted 22-Aug-2014 14:18


Westpac signs five year agreement with IBM
Posted 22-Aug-2014 12:00


Dunedin as an innovation hub
Posted 22-Aug-2014 09:06


When venture capital hurts start-ups
Posted 21-Aug-2014 19:54


Long wait for ARM servers
Posted 21-Aug-2014 19:35


Firefox now or no choice later
Posted 21-Aug-2014 08:41



Trending now »
Hot discussions in our forums right now:

CGA. Is it fair?
Created by BTR, last reply by bazzer on 22-Aug-2014 11:02 (86 replies)
Pages... 4 5 6


Vodafone TV multicast settings on pfSense?
Created by kenkeniff, last reply by hio77 on 22-Aug-2014 17:56 (109 replies)
Pages... 6 7 8


Lightbox press event release
Created by freitasm, last reply by Lightbox on 22-Aug-2014 17:04 (469 replies)
Pages... 30 31 32


Free: Smart Button for your Android device
Created by freitasm, last reply by TimA on 22-Aug-2014 16:11 (102 replies)
Pages... 5 6 7


It was hardly 'hacking' was it?
Created by CB_24, last reply by gzt on 21-Aug-2014 22:26 (97 replies)
Pages... 5 6 7


How to refresh WinXP
Created by Rickles, last reply by allan on 20-Aug-2014 14:25 (19 replies)
Pages... 2


Does an HRV system actually "dry" the air?
Created by kenkeniff, last reply by mattwnz on 22-Aug-2014 17:32 (17 replies)
Pages... 2


Fluoride is safe, who knew?
Created by networkn, last reply by networkn on 22-Aug-2014 16:52 (17 replies)
Pages... 2



Geekzone Live »
Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.

Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.