ACS gives conditional thumbs up to internet filtering

 

Insists on checks and balances before filter can be introduced.

The Australian Computer Society has released a report that flags conditional support to ISP-based internet filtering from a technical standpoint, based on a series of boxes that need to be checked before giving the scheme the green light.

Six experts from the ACS said that filtering of the internet is plausible, but suggested a number of steps, summarised below, that the Federal Government needs to first address.

"Filtering alone is unlikely to adequately address cyber security issues or significantly impact those who deliberately produce, distribute or search for illegal material," said Australian Computer Society chairman and president Kumar Parakala.

1. Define the purpose served by a filter

The computer society said any filtering system needed to be based on a clearly-defined goal.

The government is yet to make clear whether the filter aimed to avoid inadvertent viewing of RC and illegal content, or to prevent such content from being published or circulated, the report said.

2. What are we filtering?

The report said that the goals around any successful internet service provider filtering initiative should be "clearly established".

"While recent Government statements indicate that ISP level filtering will apply to RC material that is on the ACMA blacklist, there is still a considerable amount of confusion amongst the ICT sector on exactly what content will be filtered," the report [PDF] said.

"The definition of material to be filtered must be unequivocal and clear if the initiative is to be successful."

3. Consistency across online and offline content

The report also recommended "consistency in the criteria used to classify all media and entertainment content regardless of whether it is available online or offline".

The particular reasons content was classified as RC (refused classification) or illegal (included on the ACMA black list) should be "transparent," the ACS said.

"If filtering is to be acceptable and credible, then we need to have clear and transparent criteria to classify content that applies equally across all media including both online and offline content."

The ACS also recommended a national, voluntary 'content rating system' under which content providers can voluntarily rate the material on their site using an easily understood standardised metric.

4. Transparency and an independent body

The computer society also pushed for the blacklist to be "transparent."

"Transparency and credibility should include an independent oversight, a system of checks and balances that incorporates a system of appeals and an independent auditing process," the report said.

"While the Task Force agrees that the ACMA black list is not suitable for public dissemination, it is equally essential for the Government to establish greater transparency and accountability in the criteria and processes for incorporating sites onto the black list.

"The Task Force believes that the Government should consider establishing an independent over sighting body and an annual auditing process for the black list to provide an appropriate oversight and ensure the highest public confidence in the black listing process; such a body can also act as an independent central authority to ensure greater transparency around the blacklist and to which appeals and other complaints about the black list can be directed," the report said.

5. More proactive steps

Blocking websites was not enough to stop illegal websites from appearing, the report said. 

The ACS suggested the Federal Government work with the internet corporation for assigned names and numbers (ICANN) and encourage it to reject domain name applications that were likely to contain illegal material.

"The Task Force believes that the Government should explore this pathway as an integrated part of its cyber safety strategy to improve the security and processes around domain name registration. It will be effective not only against illegal sites but also against sites being used for cyber crime such as phishing and other fraudulent activities.

"At a minimum this should require accurate Whois information and independently verified identity and address details for domain name registrants," the report said.

The report concluded that "there is no single mechanism that can filter out or block illegal material on the Internet accurately 100 percent of the time.

"The technical assessment of the task force is that there is no technological substitute for appropriate education and parental supervision of young people who are using the Internet."


ACS gives conditional thumbs up to internet filtering
"Maxxi wrote: Sorry Sams, the internet is not outside of Australian law when used in Australia. Live with that. I didn't say it was. You said the laws didn't change, I said they did. ..."
By Sams
 
 
 
Comments: 16
John
Oct 12, 2009 9:05 PM
Its really sad to see civil liberties undermined in this way...
prosmart
Oct 13, 2009 7:33 AM
I am absolutely disgusted with the ACS even agreeing to be involved with this madcap scheme. It has confirmed my worst suspicions. Our civil liberties have been eroded enough. And "yes" I do have children - it's our responsibility to look after them - not the "Nanny" state. With thirty years as a computing professional I am happy to say that I would not now even entertain the idea of ACS membership.

Disgusted.

anonymous
Oct 13, 2009 8:01 AM
Sadly, it seems ACS may be more interested in chasing the jobs involved in running this political censorship scheme than they are in using their professional standing to point out the many technical and political problems it will create?
daffy
Oct 13, 2009 8:59 AM
And everyone was paying out on China during the Olympics...we are all headed down the same path. Once the system is up and running, anything can be put on that list. The Internet is slowly becoming like a public library...you can only get info 'they' think you need.
JSL
Oct 13, 2009 9:27 AM
I still to this day have no idea why ACS even gets a say in anything.. ACS is a joke. They don't represent the real IT workforce in Australia.
BrettWinterford
Oct 13, 2009 9:41 AM
Wow - are we copping some flak today over our take on the ACS report! Do me a favour, have a read at http://www.acs.org.au/ispfiltering and let us know what you think.
I took the reading that the ACS is implying conditional support - i.e. that when you offer a checklist of what needs to be done before a filter is introduced, it is assuming a filter is supportable (or perhaps politically inevitable). But I've heard from some pretty learned folk that disagree with me.
What's your read of it?
Sams
Oct 13, 2009 12:05 PM
The ACS is mostly irrelevant in the IT industry, but is closely tied in with IT academia (I went back to uni lecturer for a couple of years). A lot of the high up IT academics also have close links to government. ACS seems to be a self-gratifying circle of academia and government, with ACS fellowships and Order of Australia's being lavished upon those that adhere to the party line. Remember, these are the same people that reasoned: car drivers have to have a license, so computer users should have to have a license to drive a computer. As such I skimmed the document only, not wanting to waste too much time on the ACS.

The document appears to try to appease parties on both sides of the fence, and smells heavily of political machinations. It reads like it was heavily and repeated edited - probably so as not to upset ACS members of any persuasion. Statements line this in section 8 however:

"The Task Force believes that while ISP filtering techniques can be useful in helping to reduce inadvertent exposure to child pornography or other illegal material, filtering alone is unlikely to solve the underlying problem or significantly impact those who deliberately produce, distribute or go in search of this material."

leave little room for ambiguity, and indicates support for ISP level filtering. albeit qualified. Beyond that, in terms of policy, the document seems to do nothing more than ask the government for more clarification. The rest appears to be all about the technical aspects of filtering, much or all of which can be obtained elsewhere.
RDEFCON1
Oct 13, 2009 4:56 PM
Censorship reflects society's lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime.
-Potter Stewart

The fact is that censorship always defeats its own purpose, for it creates, in the end, the kind of society that is incapable of exercising real discretion.
-Henry Steele Commager
Maxxi
Oct 13, 2009 5:24 PM
Oh Brett, there is a hard core group out there who turn immediately on anyone who does not unconditionally denounce the ISP filtering trials and proposals...

Any pollie, person, group or organisation can go from being their best friend and visionary to being the dictators right hand and devoid of any intelligence, morals, ethics and democratic thoughts within minutes...

It was fun to obsrerver them yesterday as different media outlets and jouralists brought out their varied take and articles on the ACS report. There was initially a buzz of "Great and super ACS" turning quickly to "miserable and meaningless ACS" from asmny, without them having read the report at all.

Just your articles were enough to have them raging and then raging down again...

Now the ACS will be soundly denounced as meaningless and on the payroll of the government, as apparently only people paid by the government see any positive aspects at all in the proposed systems...
Maxxi
Oct 13, 2009 5:26 PM
Oh Brett, there is a hard core group out there who turn immediately on anyone who does not unconditionally denounce the ISP filtering trials and proposals...

Any pollie, person, group or organisation can go from being their best friend and visionary to being the dictators right hand and devoid of any intelligence, morals, ethics and democratic thoughts within minutes...

It was fun to observe them yesterday as different media outlets and journalists brought out their varied take and articles on the ACS report. There was initially a buzz of "Great and super ACS" turning quickly to "miserable and meaningless ACS" from many, without them having read the report at all.

Just your articles were enough to have them raging up and then raging down again...

Now the ACS will be soundly denounced as meaningless and on the payroll of the government, as apparently only people paid by the government see any positive aspects at all in the proposed systems...

(Good to spell check before hitting submit...)
Maxxi
Oct 13, 2009 5:32 PM
Censorship in a democracy is the hallmark that the public and previous governments have allowed too much sleazy crap and otherwise illegal materials onto their various forms of media and entertainment...

Cocaine is censored in Australia, do you have a problem with that? Is that authoritarian? Should cocaine be available to everyone, and we rely on parents taeching their kids that is bad and do not try it out?

Like yeah that will ever happen or work...

Censorship defeats it's own purpose when you have an authoritarian regime, which Australia does not have. We have a stable and resilient democracy. (You may not have noticed that mate...)

The laws of Australia did not change when the internet arrived, and now they will be applied to the internet as well.

Like it or not.

Sams
Oct 14, 2009 7:20 AM
"Cocaine is censored in Australia"

No, it isn't. But irrelevant anyway. The argument that X should be banned because cocaine is banned, for any choice of X, is moronic.

"Censorship defeats it's own purpose when you have an authoritarian regime"

And in other cases.

"We have a stable and resilient democracy."

In theory yes. In practice, no, not really.

"The laws of Australia did not change when the internet arrived"

Yes, they did.
anonymous
Oct 14, 2009 9:23 AM
Yeah, Maxxi x3, let's be fully consistent with our demand for secret political censorship in our non-authoritarian regime. Every letter must be opened and every phone conversation must be listened to, in case someone says a rude word (or worse still, criticises the government). Just think of the job opportunities this could mean for your good self!

Your reference to "sleazy crap and otherwise illegal materials" shows how silly your argument is, because the Great Australian Rabbit-proof Filter will not be confined to secret censorship of illegal material. The Great Rabbit Trapper has made it clear that anything deemed "inappropriate" will be secretly censored, but we'll never know what that will mean because it's a secret.
Maxxi
Oct 14, 2009 9:40 AM
Sorry Sams, the internet is not outside of Australian law when used in Australia.

Live with that.

Of course cocaine is censored in Australia. It is a prohibited substance and is legally not accessible for Australians...

If you do not believe in our democracy, then run for the Sumatran hills fast, cause they're commin' to get you!

Commies under the bed! Nazis behind the curtains! Iranian secret police hiding in the rubbish bins ready to grab ya!! Quick run for cover....!

lol

Sorry to blow your bubble, but we have one of the most stable and resilient deocracies on the planet, and really really sad are those that cannot see that...

Anonymous, here you go again being ridiculous... One needs to be able to understand that the internet runs somewhat differently to postal items, however you may have missed that... Censoring of gov criticism? ROFL...! At least be a smidgeon reality based.

Now I seem to have missed the announcement that rude words were now illegal, but well found, or well fantasised...

But's that's OK, you focus on your "rude words" while others try and keep pix and movies of raped kids off our part of the internet... If that principle is "silly" for you, then that might explain a lot.
anonymous
Oct 14, 2009 6:05 PM
@Maxxi "we have one of the most stable and resilient deocracies (sic) on the planet". Not sure we need to be part of your deocracy (rule by the gods), but we sure don't need the Great Rabbit Trapper to declare pedophilia abhorrent because it is rightly already illegal and always has been.

As for the political part, if we allow politicians to secretly censor what we can see, then sooner or later they will use that power to secretly declare that cticism of their actions is "unacceptable". The possibility of corruption always leads to its fulfilment.

We have a stable and resilient democracy only because we have the right to say we reject fuckwit ideas that would trample on that democracy.
Sams
Oct 15, 2009 5:55 PM
Maxxi wrote:
Sorry Sams, the internet is not outside of Australian law when used in Australia. Live with that.


I didn't say it was. You said the laws didn't change, I said they did.

Maxxi wrote:
Of course cocaine is censored in Australia


You don't understand the word "censored".

Maxxi wrote:
Sorry to blow your bubble, but we have one of the most stable and resilient deocracies on the planet, and really really sad are those that cannot see that...


The only bubble here is your hot air. I work with three political parties on a day-to-day basis, so spare me the patriotic garbage. About 13% percent of people that turn up at a polling booth only decide then who to vote for. Most Australian's knowledge of their own political system and situation is at best poor and easily swayed by pork barrelling and the like. That is not a properly functional democracy in my books - there is a lot of room for improvement.
Comments have been disabled for this article.
 
 
 
Top Stories
Vito Forte: A CIO for tough times
Fortescue Metals CIO talks vendor management and innovation.
 
Telstra shifts BigPond email to Windows Live
All data to be migrated to Microsoft cloud.
 
Vodafone Australia churn nears half a million for 2011
British joint owners 'not pleased'.
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...

Latest VideosSee all videos »

Latest Comments
Polls
Would you be concerned about your business' email data being hosted offshore?

   |   View results
Yes
  83%
 
No
  17%
TOTAL VOTES: 245

Vote