A tech blog by your average gamer!

So how to start this? Blog one on the proposed Internet Filter and the idiocy it represents. How it is an exercise in ignorance at best and outright deception at worst. I’ll detail many flaws  of this policy in future posts but I’m going to start with the recent statement by Senator Stephen Conroy that circumvention of the filter will not be illegal and see where this first post takes me.

So let’s summarise the background here. It is proposed that a mandatory URL filter be implemented to stop people going to undesirable sites. Keep in mind this is all in the name of ’saving the children’. This is a super secret list that can never be published so it is never to be open to public scrutiny or are there any publicly announced means of accountability. The list is to be comprised of material deemed illegal or refused classification and largely added to by public complaint.

Refused Classification [RC]:

Senator Conroy: “What we have indicated we will block is content that has been refused classification—material that is not currently available in a newsagent, in a book store, on a DVD, at the movies or on your television. That is the only material that is proposed to be blocked.” [1]

Here we have a large part of what is at least a misdirection. Illegal material is indeed refused classification however all material refused classification is not illegal to possess. The material cannot be purchased in a bookstore, newsagent or watched on your TV. Well of course, refused classification means it is illegal to sell or distribute within Australia.  In most states however  such material  is perfectly legal  to own and view within one’s own home as long as it is not illegal. It is perfectly legal to purchase from an overseas vendor and import privately (in most states). The Australian Federal Police (AFP) and the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) have complete authority over illegal material within our borders and this filter is stated to block only international sites. So why is the target RC content rather than illegal content? The only point could be to stop Australians using the Internet for perfectly legal activities.

So what material is RC? Well that again depends on if it is in print, image, video, etc. Each medium subject to classification varies on what can be categorised and what cannot.  What is perfectly fine in a movie is in no way permissible in a game since games have no R18+ category.  also add in that anything that has not yet been classified is effectively refused classification. Now is a good time to point out  that having any item classified costs between $173 to $685 depending on if it has to be referred to the Classification Board or if ACMA could do the classification themselves. [2]  Let’s just note this for now.

So here is the great deception. First, paint the classification scheme as a model that is consistent in application across mediums and content. That is equate RC and illegal material as the same thing, even use the words RC and illegal interchangeably, and the public in general will view them as the same.  Second, by equating all RC material with particularly repulsive subsections of that material we play on the first connection. From there the Senator can the emotive arguments he has been until now. Let’s not point out facts like it won’t work but I’ll get to that.

Oh just one point to add to the Senator’s rant … Yes, RC material is available on DVD, legally (in most states). DVD is a media format, not a point of sale or means of public broadcasting. Someone should point that out to the Senator.

Not Illegal to Circumvent:

According to the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy (DBCDE) and their internally hosted forum, it will not be illegal to circumvent the filter.

Ok, not illegal to circumvent or to even provide circumvention products [3] but the department would be “concerned” if these things were offered!? I mean come on, a “technically competent” user could get past this? [4] Seriously, how hard is it to type “Free Web Proxy” into Google? I mean the sheer idiocy … no,  arrogance of what they think is technical is scary here. It is easily circumvented and perfectly legal to do so but the department is making veiled threats about ISP’s helping people get around what they don’t want or need!?

Let’s get to the real danger here. Remember, this is all to save the children! These same children that will bypass this in not 30 minutes but 30 seconds. So what is it? Fake or poisoned proxies. Proxies that are designed to harvest information that pass through them. In the infinite wisdom of the DBCDE in their noble struggle to protect the children, they will throw them right to these wolves. Proxies  exist that will quite happily act as a proxy but record your myspace login for later use by the proxy owner. [5] Everything that passes through a proxy is open to viewing by the proxy owner so now the DBCDE is going to force people through them? Don’t they know about these dangers? Actually they do, or at least they did. If you go to the Privacy Commissioner then you could be forgiven to think that the government has a little catching up to do with this very complicated world. Actually this is a massive step backwards for the Privacy Commissioner. If you look back in the Internet Archive here: then you’ll see that once upon a time the Privacy Commissioner was not only on top of these things but also very involved in showing us ways we could protect our privacy online. The tools they had though would circumvent the filter. A branch of the government handing out the very tools required to castrate the flagship policy of the DBCDE? Can’t have that now, can we? So now the Privacy Commissioner is now muzzled and useless as far as the online world is concerned so Senator Conroy can have all government departments on board.

So to protect the children Senator Conroy wants to force these same children into the poisoned arms of information and identity thieves. All useful information the Privacy Commissioner did have is no more. This policy does nothing to protect children and does so much to place them further in harm’s way, not to mention everyone else in the family.

Seriously one has to wonder when everything this policy would do is contrary to the Senator’s stated goals, what is the real point of the filter? I’ll get to that next post over what the filter will cost us.

[1]    http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:chamber/hansards/2010-03-15/0000

[2]    http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/eca_ctte/estimates/add_0910/bcde/acma.pdf

[3]    http://www.efa.org.au/2010/05/03/senate-answers-shed-some-more-light-on-filter/#more-1306

[4]    http://www.efa.org.au/2010/05/03/senate-answers-shed-some-more-light-on-filter/#more-1306

[5]    http://www.instructables.com/id/Steal-Passwords-from-Classmates-with-Proxy/