[AusNOG] Ans So It Begins
phil.pierotti at platformnetworks.net
Wed Oct 6 09:35:07 EST 2010
"The federal government has confirmed that circumventing the proposed internet filter could constitute a
criminal offence, and said it has not received any evidence suggesting the policy will lead to an increase in
encrypted internet traffic."
Maybe I'm just getting old-n-senile but I'd swear that previously we had been *very clearly* told that circumventing the filter would *not* be a crime.
- as an ISP failing to implement the filter is a criminal offence.
- as a customer circumventing the filter is a criminal offence
- giving advice on how to perform criminal acts is (I'd assume) a criminal offence
- so teaching people about ways to circumvent the filter is a criminal offence
I'd say that someone's been watching too many Simpsons episodes.
Network Operations Manager
ph. 1300 854 678
From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Andrew Fort
Sent: Tuesday, 5 October 2010 5:09 PM
To: Andrew Judson
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Censhorship dead and buried?
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Andrew Judson <AJudson at internode.com.au> wrote:
> "And it confirmed that most Australians roaming overseas would be filtered because in the end, their connections would go though a network in Australia."
> so glad I live in Australia, latency must suck OS
So is this just bad journalism or is Conroy's mental illness contagious?
Choice 1: route all my internet traffic via the corporate VPN from a
(for example) Verizon USB modem on the East Coast of the US and be
subject to Conroy's wishes. Three weeks later, after my ACK to that
SYN+ACK, I'll have plenty of time to consider my next keystroke.
Choice 2: route only the 1918 prefixes via the VPN.
Move along. Nothing to see here (apparently).
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
More information about the AusNOG