Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter

goawaycameron.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 166 posts

Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter

#151

Post by 7952 »

desas wrote: post #99
7952 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Censorship is an excellent demonstration of why network level blocking is a complete lost cause. You hardly need Tor, VPN, or a special browser when SSL is impossible to block in a non-destructive way. You can never effectively control what people do on their computer without controlling the computer itself. It would be much more effective to make blocking the responsibility of web browsers. This would allow settings…

Blocking via web browsers is definitely not going to work. It would require that every browser on each PC, phone, TV and other internet enabled device all activate the filters, all of them have a facility to activate/deactivate the filters, all of them don't allow other web browsers to be installed and don't allow booting from alternative sources. Most parents don't know how to do this. They do know how to tick a box…

So you believe that the best way to help parents is to have network level blocks? People should use poorly designed technology because they are stupid?

But to prevent kids getting around network level filtering you still need to have all the anti-circumvention measures baked into the OS/browser/anti-virus. The UK government have created a network level filter that still needs client level changes to actually work. I understand that most parents would have a hard time doing this, but a government backed effort could have made a difference. I see this as similar to installing antivirus (which a lots of parents seem perfectly capable of).

I understand that it is possible to block SSL by IP address. However, it is also possible to send anything down the same tunnel; but you can't inspect the actual packets to see if they are clean. Some filters perform a MITM, but I think we can agree that is a terrible idea. Browser based filtering lets you filter any site based on its contents and also maintain the security of the data. It also avoids domain level blocks that block other sites by accident.

Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter

#152

Post by summerdown2 »

IanCal wrote: post #146
summerdown2 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the dystopian worry isn't that they're giving individuals access to filtering software. That would be a worthy goal. The real worry is that this system is Government controlled and built into everyone's internet connection. Personally, I'm expecting it to soon have three settings, not two: a) Family friendly browsing (opt-in) b) Access to more adult sites (opt-out) c) Blocking of whatever the government deems…

> The real worry is that this system is Government controlled No it isn't. It's done, individually, by the ISPs. They're not all using the same software either. > and built into everyone's internet connection. Not everyones. > This is why a lot of people don't like it: because we're building the machinery of censorship "for the sake of the children." I'm fully aware of that, I'm just tired of hearing the same incorre…

> No it isn't. It's done, individually, by the ISPs. They're not all using the same software either.

I take your point, but I don't think it invalidates the phrase "government controlled."

I agree they aren't all using the same software, and much is "voluntary." However, the UK web filter is:

a) In the 2010 Conservative Manifesto:

> establish a new online system that gives parents greater powers to take action against irresponsible commercial activities targeted at children;

http://media.conservatives.s3.amazonaws.com/manifesto/cpmani...

b) Announced by the government:

> all internet users will be contacted by their service providers and given an "unavoidable choice" on whether to use filters.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/jul/22/david-came...

c) Implemented voluntarily by the main four ISPs (three down, one to go), but with the expectation all will obey it because it's policy:

> "Preselected" parental filters are now official policy, and should extend to small ISPs, according the the Department of Culture, Media and Sport's (DCMS) new strategy paper.

https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2013/government-wants-d...

... So, yes, it's not on every connection at the moment. But this is a government programme instituted by direction from the Government. When you combine it with the IWF and mobile filtering, it's not a misrepresentation to say that the Government is drawing up censorship lists and is approximately half-way through the job of making them unavoidable.

Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter

#153

Post by summerdown2 »

desas wrote: post #90
summerdown2 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference being that this is centrally controlled. Because of this, it's speed of censorship will be much quicker. Places I expect this to block in future: 1. Discussions of how to bypass the filter (eg Tor) 2. News articles the Government doesn't like (eg discussions barred by injunction such as Ryan Giggs) 3. Information during times of disorder (eg the tweeting by people involved in the Arab Spring). 4. Whate…

This is not centrally controlled. The ISPs that have been pushed into this run their own filters, the government don't run the filters, don't have access to the filtering software and don't recommend a particular filtering product.

I think it's still fair to say it's centrally controlled because the government introduced it as part of policy and sets the rules on what needs to be blocked. The fact ISPs find their own ways of complying doesn't change the fact this is government-driven.

If this was ISP-led, you might find the market reflecting a plurality of option, with consumers having a choice. Instead, this is Government-led, with ISPs expected to fall into line:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachm...

> Across the internet value chain, we expect industry – from retailers to device manufacturers – to ensure that all internet-enabled devices, whether a TV, games console or smart phone, are supplied with the tools to keep children safe as a standard feature

> We expect the smaller ISPs to follow the lead being set by the larger providers.

> And while Government looks to the industry to deliver, through the self-regulatory mechanisms already established under UKCCIS, we are clear that if momentum is not maintained, we will consider whether alternative regulatory powers can deliver a culture of universally-available, family-friendly internet access that is easy to use.

Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter

#154

Post by wbhart »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #127
iaskwhy wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you can help me. I actually paid for the licence this year but during the summer I moved to some other country and thus I'm unable to listen to the BBC radios. Is there a (legal) way around this?

Licenses apply to locations. You bought a license for your previous dwelling - you can get a refund for the unused part but other than that I don't know of any legal method to access BBC's domestic offerings from outside the appropriate geographic area. Don't take this as gospel, I've read the laws that apply to TV licensing a couple of times but I'm not an authority on it.

Pffft. Let me tell you about this so-called refund. I applied for said refund of UK TV license after leaving the UK at the end of September. They told me they could only refund unused _quarters_ of the license, meaning that they would only refund me from the start of December (well in the _future_ at that point). Then they had the hide to tell me that because I was applying for a refund from a _past_ date (Sept) I had to prove that I was no longer in the UK. I sent them a lease, and a letter from my employer in my new country which they required by snail mail. They rejected it and told me they needed a final gas bill from the UK or something equivalent, which I again had to send by snail mail. I wrote them a letter about how the TV license was "a national disgrace, isn't it", and "should be abolished, shouldn't it". So glad to be out of Cameronland.

Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter

#155

Post by summerdown2 »

DanBC wrote: post #139
summerdown2 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference being that this is centrally controlled. Because of this, it's speed of censorship will be much quicker. Places I expect this to block in future: 1. Discussions of how to bypass the filter (eg Tor) 2. News articles the Government doesn't like (eg discussions barred by injunction such as Ryan Giggs) 3. Information during times of disorder (eg the tweeting by people involved in the Arab Spring). 4. Whate…

> The difference being that this is centrally controlled No it isn't. It's pointless having these discussions with people who are thoroughly ignorant of what's actually happening while they're spinning off into wing-nut territory. What is really happening is already really fucking bad. You don't need to invent fanciful nonsense ("News articles the Government doesn't like (eg discussions barred by injunction such as R…

I'm happy to be corrected. But my understanding is that this is a government programme introduced in their manifesto and applied by "voluntary" means by the big 4 ISPs, with a strong government understanding that the others will soon fall into line. That's what I mean by "central".

As for the "control" part, maybe I have misunderstood. Do you mean to say the ISPs have not included things like the IWF into their censorship mechanisms? Because that looks to me like a list of things to compulsorily ban.

Now, I may be putting two and two together, but to me this looks like:

a) The government at a minimum "influencing" ISPs to introduce variable-level filtering.

b) Mandatory filter lists.

c) An onward programme of debate about what should be in or out of the block.

As for the Ryan Giggs thing, that was simply my speculation. However, I'm currently finding a lot about the way that politicians see control measures goes beyond my wildest fancies - eg RIPA used for school catchment areas.

Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter

#156

Post by Gepser »

nly wrote: post #126
dijit wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tor. except where your exit node is another machine in the UK, or you need faster than dial-up speeds. How long until this is also illegal?

You can, in theory, choose your exit node.

You can't choose but you can change your exit node until get some one you want.

Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter

#157

Post by iaskwhy »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #127
iaskwhy wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you can help me. I actually paid for the licence this year but during the summer I moved to some other country and thus I'm unable to listen to the BBC radios. Is there a (legal) way around this?

Licenses apply to locations. You bought a license for your previous dwelling - you can get a refund for the unused part but other than that I don't know of any legal method to access BBC's domestic offerings from outside the appropriate geographic area. Don't take this as gospel, I've read the laws that apply to TV licensing a couple of times but I'm not an authority on it.

I see. Thanks!

Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter

#158

Post by Myrmornis »

RyanZAG wrote: post #115
dagw wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pornography is not created in a vacuum. There is a large industry surrounding it and, at least according to some, some of the practices of parts that industry is troublesome. There are also reasons to believe that watching porn might in some scenarios affect the viewer in negative ways that abstract sexual fantasy does not. Reasonable people can of course disagree to the scope and accuracy of the above objections, bu…

Dildos are not created in a vacuum and has a large industry surrounding it - and a lot of the practices involved in that are troublesome too. Sweatshops? I'm sure there is pornography created by people who want to make it. I'm less sure there are dildos created by anyone who wants to be making dildos (the actual workers, not the boss). I'm sure some people would find a wife using a dildo as degrading to the husband a…

You've totally gone off the rails in this comment. The point is we can draw a line between commodities whose creation involves (a) people using their bodies in ways which vary from completely fine and consensual to coercion/slavery/illegal abuse, and (b) people working in bad conditions. In category (a) we have, e.g. porn and prostitution. In category (b), we have dildos, t-shirts and cell phones. There will be important discussions to be had about categories (a) and (b), but those discussions will be different.

Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter

#159

Post by toddrew »

MisterWebz wrote: post #64
dijit wrote: post #30

As much as this is a brilliant idea (opting out could possibly be recorded) I think the general consensus of the government right now needs to change, I seem to recall a hacker game from years ago (maybe 'Hacker Evolution') which described in it's prologue: "The world has been divided; governments censor and restrict access to the internet that was, hackers and technologists moved away from traditional means of commu…

How do we incentivize people to fight back against every single law that could potentially harm privacy or force censorship? The people making these laws have every bit of incentive to do so, while the regular people have limited willpower, limited resources and limited time. Sure we can pull off another SOPA blackout, but I don't think we can do it consistently. They'll keep proposing harmful laws and we can't stop…

What is the incentive for lawmakers to block pornography?

Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter

#160

Post by xtreme »

toddrew wrote: post #159
MisterWebz wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do we incentivize people to fight back against every single law that could potentially harm privacy or force censorship? The people making these laws have every bit of incentive to do so, while the regular people have limited willpower, limited resources and limited time. Sure we can pull off another SOPA blackout, but I don't think we can do it consistently. They'll keep proposing harmful laws and we can't stop…

What is the incentive for lawmakers to block pornography?

1. Once you have the infrastructure to block some websites set up, you can (ab)use it to block any arbitrary site that you want, including political dissent.

2. The "friends" of the legislators who will actually implement these on government contract stand to gain massively.

Post reply on HN