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.



BDFL
49171 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4162

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Subscriber

Topic # 71013 3-Nov-2010 15:16 Send private message

Telecom has confirmed they will join the Dept of Internal Affairs' Internet Filtering System scheme:


TELECOM SUPPORTS INTERNET FILTERING SYSTEM

Telecom has today announced it will join the Department of Internal Affairs’ Digital Child Exploitation Filtering System. The system filters the web content of participating Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to block access to known websites that contain child sexual abuse material.

Telecom Retail CEO, Alan Gourdie says Telecom is committed to assisting the Department of Internal Affairs in this step towards addressing this serious issue.

“The abuse and exploitation of children is intolerable and this filter works to block access to known child exploitation websites.”

The Acting Deputy Secretary of Internal Affairs, Craig Armitage, welcomed Telecom’s decision to sign up to the filtering system.

“We are working in partnership with New Zealand ISPs. This filter provides a service provider with the means to protect their customers from inadvertently accessing these illegal websites and to fight and raise awareness of the worldwide problem of child sexual abuse and exploitation.
The filter is an important tool to reduce the demand for child abuse material currently available on the Internet. Telecom and other ISPs signing up are to be commended for taking this step.”

Mr Gourdie says while participating ISPs are signing up to combat child abuse, people should remain vigilant when taking steps to keep their families safe online.

“This filter does not negate the need for continued supervision and monitoring of Internet use to keep kids safe online. We encourage Kiwis to keep their Internet security up to date – Telecom’s McAfee Security Suite includes parental controls and is free for all our customers with compatible operating systems.

”Parents can also find more information about online safety at netsafe.org.nz and hectorsworld.com.”

The Digital Child Exploitation Filtering System was made available to ISPs in March 2010 following a two-year trial, and is overseen by an Independent Reference Group, of which Telecom is a member.

For more information on the Digital Child Exploitation Filtering System please visit the DIA website. The system will be applied in coming weeks.






View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
 1 | 2 | 3
3264 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 168

Moderator
Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 399666 3-Nov-2010 15:22 Send private message

Just where exactly are these "known websites", because in 15 years of being online I've never been confronted with them, and I've never gone looking for them, so how is it that our children are at risk from them?

Surely there are ways for a person intent on viewing this content to find it and view it no matter where they are or what restrictions are put in place by an ISP....VPN's are the first thing that spring to mind....and considering you have to be technically savvy to be a child pornographer, it's most likely because you're already using things like VPN's,
especially if you haven't been caught by now.

7644 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 254

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 399671 3-Nov-2010 15:29 Send private message

Disappointing.

The DIA filter is a serious censorship issue and is also a complete waste of time and money.

Refer to:
http://techliberty.org.nz/internet-filtering-time-to-let-go/
http://techliberty.org.nz/dissent-the-internet-and-freedom/ 



BDFL
49171 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4162

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Subscriber

  Reply # 399675 3-Nov-2010 15:33 Send private message

It is a disaster. They claim the objective of the filter is to prevent people "stumbling" onto those sites. From what we read those things are done underground, via IM, encrypted chat channels and not in a site that you can find with a simple web search.

As you, I've been using the Internet for years, from 95/96 and never had the displeasure of coming across these things, not even by "accident".

I don't think we need protection. It's a waste of money and resources.

And once you give a government any rights to look at what you are doing, it's really hard to get those rights away from them.

I can't see why a future government, unhappy with critics, couldn't possibly extend this filtering system to simply silence opposition.

Not a good day for the Internet in New Zealand.

The only decent thing to do, since this filter is "optional" for the ISP, is to make it conditional that any change in the filtering system scope would immediately be responded with a withdrawal from the scheme.





7644 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 254

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 399687 3-Nov-2010 15:46 Send private message

They should use the multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars they are spending every year on this waste of time on a taskforce to track down the bad sites and work with hosting companies and international agencies to shut them down.

Would actually be useful, money well spent then.

Currently system makes no sense and has no effect and the potential for future political abuse is alarming!

239 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 1


  Reply # 399690 3-Nov-2010 15:51 Send private message

I agree this is a complete waste of time and money. And to think that government is using resources to acquire a list or actually hiring people to "seek out" contents to be blocked is quite ridiculous.

Plus if and when it leaked, it's just promoting those sites! Exactly what happened to ALL other internet censorships.

If you support the idea that there're some sites people are better off not viewing, then this is not the way to go.

If you don't support it then you already know that this is a complete waste of time.

Great firewall of China must be your idol now, way to go NZ.

5092 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 698


  Reply # 399697 3-Nov-2010 16:05 Send private message

It's not *supposed* to be effective, it's just supposed to be something to make the paranoid general public feel better - kinda like most airport security measures.

2759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 410

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 399766 3-Nov-2010 18:40 Send private message

Speaking entirely for myself - making it explicit, even though it says so in my sig, that I am not speaking on behalf of my employer - I also think it's a disaster for everyone except the bad guys.

An unprecedented level of silently intrusive monitoring and control, practically accountable to no-one. As a grown-up who doesn't need someone else deciding what is best for me to see, or not see, I abhor this decision.

As a parent, I am also fully qualified to offer the opinion that if you're worried about what your kids are doing online then you either need to have them doing it in front of you: on the 42" plasma TV in our lounge room, for example, with 2 kids under 5, or else if you gave them a computer in their own room but are still worried: then you haven't trained them well enough.

This filter WILL NOT SUCCEED at achieving it's stated aim. It will provide the illusion of effectiveness while ceding complete control to a bunch of people who have only their own best interests at heart, namely, politicians & bureaucrats.

EDIT - have we slashdotted them or something? The link is 404.




iPad Air + iPhone 5S + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

SCM

394 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 33


  Reply # 399775 3-Nov-2010 18:55 Send private message


3687 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 125

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 399811 3-Nov-2010 20:19 Send private message

freitasm: As you, I've been using the Internet for years, from 95/96 and never had the displeasure of coming across these things, not even by "accident".

Same here. Got the Internet at home in 1995 and I've never stumbled across this sort of thing.

629 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 5


  Reply # 399818 3-Nov-2010 20:31 Send private message

SaltyNZ: Speaking entirely for myself - making it explicit, even though it says so in my sig, that I am not speaking on behalf of my employer - I also think it's a disaster for everyone except the bad guys.

An unprecedented level of silently intrusive monitoring and control, practically accountable to no-one. As a grown-up who doesn't need someone else deciding what is best for me to see, or not see, I abhor this decision.

As a parent, I am also fully qualified to offer the opinion that if you're worried about what your kids are doing online then you either need to have them doing it in front of you: on the 42" plasma TV in our lounge room, for example, with 2 kids under 5, or else if you gave them a computer in their own room but are still worried: then you haven't trained them well enough.

This filter WILL NOT SUCCEED at achieving it's stated aim. It will provide the illusion of effectiveness while ceding complete control to a bunch of people who have only their own best interests at heart, namely, politicians & bureaucrats.

EDIT - have we slashdotted them or something? The link is 404.


This, plus a million.

List of port 80 sites intentionally hosting child pornography and not run by law enforcement agencies (ie as honeypots):


  • [null set]


List of government filtering/censorship schemes that claim to be for fighting/blocking child pornography but are actually about public "feel good"/votes and/or to enable greater/easier censorship of other, less controversial materials:


  • All of them


19267 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1140

Moderator
Trusted
Biddle Corp
Subscriber

  Reply # 399823 3-Nov-2010 20:34 Send private message

It's a shame that DIA don't actually reveal stats showing how many hits blocked URL's have had.

The whole concept is a bit like locking your door but leaving the window wide open. It's nothing but a feel good idea that doesn't have a hope in the world of preventing people from accessing this type of material.

DIA's monitoring of sites and people on the other hand does do a lot.

485 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 5

Trusted

  Reply # 399827 3-Nov-2010 20:38 Send private message

This is a PR stunt. The filter adds no value - for all the reasons outlined above.
The Civil Liberties side of things i'm not quite as concerned about as some (I am aware of the oversight processes and have some faith theyll work as intended) but i'm aware that this will essentially do nothing, and that says to me the investment is a waste of money.

All IMHO of course. techliberty.org.nz has had some interesting commentary on the filter which is worth looking at.




1582 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 136


  Reply # 399828 3-Nov-2010 20:39 Send private message

Agree with everything said but i have managed to find really bad child porn about 10 years ago and reported it , not sure what happened but that was a fluke and im pretty sure its harder now to find because i have never seen it again (and i never want to)

2329 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 78


  Reply # 400005 4-Nov-2010 09:42 Send private message

They've now added "cartoons/fictional drawings" to the filter list. Whats next, they going to add websites about books or blogs that detail child abuse or someones own experiences?

Feature creep!

157 posts

Master Geek


  Reply # 400057 4-Nov-2010 10:55 Send private message

Looks like someone has to die now...

Which ISPs aren't going to use the filter? By now it seems that all of them will

 1 | 2 | 3
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 »

Trending now »
Hot discussions in our forums right now:

2 x PS4s to give away. Geekzone members only.
Created by BigPipeNZ, last reply by jurax04 on 29-Jul-2014 23:10 (54 replies)
Pages... 2 3 4


Logitech K400r HTPC Cordless Keyboard Half Price
Created by Dynamic, last reply by Blanch on 28-Jul-2014 22:16 (25 replies)
Pages... 2


VF, why you lie to me?
Created by kenkeniff, last reply by kenkeniff on 29-Jul-2014 14:35 (46 replies)
Pages... 2 3 4


2010 Honda Jazz, Suzuki Swift - which has higher maintenance cost?
Created by joker97, last reply by jonathan18 on 30-Jul-2014 09:26 (63 replies)
Pages... 3 4 5


Dick Smith in Continual Sale Mode
Created by Dynamic, last reply by eXDee on 29-Jul-2014 19:23 (65 replies)
Pages... 3 4 5


Checking UHF aerial is working
Created by OnceBitten, last reply by B1GGLZ on 28-Jul-2014 21:49 (21 replies)
Pages... 2


Hierarchy of a mistake: Gerry Brownlee
Created by joker97, last reply by DonGould on 29-Jul-2014 21:57 (93 replies)
Pages... 5 6 7


Is chorus going to deliberately slow adsl internet down
Created by rugrat, last reply by juha on 26-Jul-2014 14:25 (54 replies)
Pages... 2 3 4



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.