[AusNOG] Conroy announcement on filtering

[Skeeve Stevens]

I don't really get the entire filtering argument or why it is mandated at all.

If I was the government, I would basically offer $$$ (or a tax break, or something) to ISPs who chose to join a filtering programme or offered products based on some sort of filtering standard.

The whole mandatory filtering of all ISP's is kind of bizarre and extreme really and completely pointless.

If users are really screaming for this, surely they would just go and connect to an ISP who is offering the filtering solution.

If there were really a massive demand for this, wouldn't someone have developed their own product by now and selling tons of it?

Or.. is this just the government not trusting people to be adults and responsible - and assuming that there are paedophiles everywhere.

...Skeeve

--
Skeeve Stevens, CEO/Technical Director
eintellego Pty Ltd - The Networking Specialists
skeeve at eintellego.net / www.eintellego.net
Phone: 1300 753 383, Fax: (+612) 8572 9954
Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 / skype://skeeve
www.linkedin.com/in/skeeve ; facebook.com/eintellego
--
NOC, NOC, who's there?

From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Shane Short
Sent: Monday, 4 January 2010 3:50 PM
To: Matthew Moyle-Croft
Cc: ausnog at lists.ausnog.net; Pinkerton, Eric
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Conroy announcement on filtering

I wouldn't mind so much if they either a) mandated ISPs had to 'offer' some kind of filtering, or b) offered some kind of hosted solution.

OR find some CPE manufacturer that'll ship them 'clean modems', with the filtering built in. (does this exist yet)

-Shane


On 04/01/2010, at 12:35 PM, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:



On 04/01/2010, at 2:34 PM, Pinkerton, Eric wrote:

Preventing incoming DNS requests from outside your network could make sence, but stopping your internal users querying any external dns servers seems obtuse, perhaps I am missing something?

...

I was under the impression that the solution proposed combined a DNS and proxy.  The DNS blocks or diverts banned domain requests to say an ad for counciling or whatever without impediment to other traffic, but requests for a page on a domain(or server) that also carries banned pages are diverted through a proxy server with a blacklist.

Take for example Google or OpenDNS's resolver service.   If customers can query those then how are they going to be directed to a proxy?

Ditto for a VPN, things like Tor etc.    Wet tissue paper has a higher security rating - especially if people are going to be avoiding it by accident!  Hilarious.

This isn't about protecting kids or stopping people looking at illegal content.  This is about the government saving face and giving a sop to the religious right.

If the government wanted to do something useful they'd fund more child protection officers and police to hunt pedophiles etc.

MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft
Peering Manager and Team Lead - Commercial and DSLAMs
Internode /Agile

_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20100104/b93bc10e/attachment.html>