Mandatory Internet Filtering
There has been a mountain of publicity over the last few weeks, in respect to the Federal Government's plan to attempt filtering the internet at the Internet Service Provider (ISP) level. Whilst we are in support of preventing harm to children and do not condone any illegal actions, we are vehemently against any sort of filtering or censorship of the internet.
This document explains the complex issue of filtering the Internet and EscapeNet's position on the Mandatory Filtering as proposed by the Federal Government.
Simply put, our position is that we are strongly opposed to the Government's proposed filtering scheme. Our key objections can be summed up in six main points as detailed below.
| It is trivial to circumvent | Let's face it, our children know more about computers than we do. We commonly turn to them for solutions to our computing problems. Circumvention1 therefore, is going to be a trivial and easily achieved objective by the very people we are trying to protect. |
| It will not work | Filtering technology is nowhere near perfect2. Unintended consequences are over-blocking (ie block legitimate sites) and under-blocking (allowing illegitimate sites). Tests, commissioned by the Government, and independently conducted by CSIRO, RMIT, OVUM and ENEX3 all indicate a significant failure to filter. |
| On a cost/reward basis is very expensive to implement | We believe that the money the Government is allocating to this problem would be better spent trying to actually catch the criminals themselves, rather than trying to block our access to the internet. Legitimate internet users have no interest in illegal content and as such would seldom access such pages. |
| There is no demonstrated need for the "solution" | The former Government made available via its Netalert4 Program, free filters to all Australians. Only 140000 users downloaded the filter, and the Government will not release the number of customers who continue to use the software since then, but report it as some 2%5, which ends up at about 2800 people Australia wide.5 |
| It will enable child abusers | As the black list will need to be distributed to ISP's several thousand people will have access to these illegal sites. Inevitably the black list will leak, and will fall into the hands of the unscrupulous type, essentially enabling crime. |
| It will slow down the Internet | It will slow down the Internet at a time where we all want faster connections. One study showed that ISP Filters slowed down access speeds by 86%6. |
Now, with our objections to the Government's proposal, they would have you think that we are pro child abuse. This is the most childish, unfounded and just plain ridiculous argument that any educated person could mount. We respond to them with the request to intellectually address our key objections detailed above.
We believe that the Government should focus its efforts on tracking down the perpetrators of the illegal content and or acts, and not the passer-by.
One may genuinely ask why do we need such a system? Are we looking to mimic China's, Iran's or Saudi Arabia's repressed policies? Censoring or preventing access to an illegal site does no justice to the victim. No effort has been placed on solving the crime, or removing the content. One must consider the hidden agenda that the Government has in delivering such a "solution", or at the very least the ability for it to be misused and abused.
In the meantime the best solution for protecting children, is supervision by parents who have the best interest of their children at heart. Armed with the ability to explain or educate their children about the content. We do provide (commercial) software to help parents minimise the risk against undesirable content.
Please don't take this document as a be all and end all to base your decision on. If you are still thinking that the Government's proposal is feasible, we recommend that you read http://www.efa.org.au/censorship/mandatory-isp-blocking which has very comprehensive arguments about the various points, and more importantly is FACTUAL not fiction.
Conclusion
The lack of a coherent and well thought out, intellectual argument from the government is troubling, and an insult to Australians. Their constant refusal to address legitimate concerns leaves much to be desired. We urge you to write a letter to your local member informing them of the serious flaws and outright lies that are being distributed to them via the Government.
Links
http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com
1 https://vpnout.com - Encrypted VPN @ US$5 per month; http://www.secureix.com/personal.shtml - Encrypted VPN available for free, limited to 256kbps, upgradeable to unlimited speeds for US$5 per month
2 http://www.itnews.com.au/News/81637,sageau-slams-cost-of-content-filtering.aspx 3% error rate corresponds to over 3000 "bad blocks" per second on medium-sized ISP backbones.
3 http://www.dbcde.gov.au/__data/assets/file/0016/10915/Ovum_Report_-_Internet_content_filtering.rtf
http://www.netalert.gov.au/advice/publications/reports/a_study_on_server_based_internet_filters/executive_summary/background.html
http://www.acma.gov.au/webwr/_assets/main/lib310554/isp-level_internet_content_filtering_trial-report.pdf
5 http://www.aph.gov.au/HANSARD/senate/dailys/ds031208.pdf - Pg64 - Senator Conroy in question time "..I am happy to get him the exact figure; possibly two per cent are still using it after.."
6 http://www.abc.net.au/rn/mediareport/stories/2008/2405376.htm - Mark Pesce: "Well as near as we can tell, with the small test that they ran, it slowed down access speeds by about 86%, so it would take us from a nation that's not particularly fast in our broadband, to a nation that's much more molasses-like in broadband."