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

UK Porn Filter Will Censor Other Content Too, ISPs Reveal

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 176 posts

Re: UK Porn Filter Will Censor Other Content Too, ISPs Reveal

#131

Post by whamill »

javajosh wrote: post #102

You know what would make a lot of sense? Install these filters on every new device sold in the UK. Make them configurable, and even uninstallable, but defaulting to "blocked". That way if and when people choose to unblock something, it's a private matter between them and their device. This achieves both the stated goal of protecting people from malicious content, and the freedom of people to consume malicious content…

Why would installing them on only new devices make a lot of sense? It doesn't achieve the stated goal of "protecting the children" if they are using any one of the millions of devices currently in use.

Moreso, why default to blocked and not unblocked, allowing people to opt-in?

Ah but then we'd be back in the rational and current position of giving people the ability to install blocking software or filters if they so desire...

Re: UK Porn Filter Will Censor Other Content Too, ISPs Reveal

#132

Post by InclinedPlane »

tetrep wrote: post #122
jivatmanx wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>People often dismiss out of hand the notion that tyranny could possibly take hold over the first world democracies of the west in the 21st century I think that the two most famous tyrannies, the Nazis and the USSR, have given us a very narrow impression of how tyranny can take hold. We think, as long as there isn't a charismatic Hitler/Lenin figure agitating for revolution and preaching a radical ideology, that we'r…

>We think, as long as there isn't a charismatic Hitler/Lenin figure agitating for revolution and preaching a radical ideology, that we're safe. i think this is exactly the delusion most suffer from, because there are many people consolidating power instead of just one the concept of tyranny seems farfetched and alien. there isn't a clear target beyond "the government" that is the source of the power creep and so peop…

Also, it's the difference between people who are hungry for power on their own and people who seek to limit personal freedom and devolve power to the state for everyone's "own good". The Mussolini/Stalin route isn't the only way to destroy freedom, it can just as easily happen at the hands of less flamboyant folks believing their acting in everyone's best interests.

It's not the risk of Voldemort taking over, it's the risk of Dolores Umbridge doing so.

Re: UK Porn Filter Will Censor Other Content Too, ISPs Reveal

#133

Post by whamill »

There are two aspects to the current debate: - The 'child porn keyword' web search filter mandated on all UK ISPs with no opt-in or opt-out - The 'opt-out porn block' which will be applied to all internet connections, from which people can opt-out in order to receive unfiltered results.

The first part hasn't received as much attention because it's harder to write a punchy article about the malicious nature of a government-supplied permanent search filter blacklist, and it isn't as easy to attack as the blocking of legal content such as pornography but this is where the real danger lies.

Once the government add all their 'illegal search terms' to the blacklist and have the appartus for such wide-ranging censorship set up, what is to stop them from adding terms unchecked and unguided to filter any "unwanted" material from web searches? If this had existed in the US, for example, when the NSA Verizon/PRISM stories were leaked, how easy would it be for them to simply add "Edward Snowden" or "The Guardian" or "PRISM" or even "NSA" to the search term blacklist? They would easily justify it on the grounds that the material leaked was classified or damaging to national security.

At this stage a majority of people would in hindsight agree that this leak is hugely important and in the public interest, but if these terms were blocked by the government then what?

Re: UK Porn Filter Will Censor Other Content Too, ISPs Reveal

#134

Post by hfsktr »

Karunamon wrote: post #121
gknoy wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does opt-in vs opt-out make a difference, though, once they have enough data? If oppression or data misuse is the goal, it seems like reversing the set selection criteria would be a trivial way of getting the list of people who like their ${badstuff}, even if they did not opt out of a filter": # obviously not real sql select * from citizens where (citizen.id not in opt_in_list) What am I missing?

Probably the fact that only a minority will actually opt in. Requiring positive action almost ensures that miniscule amounts of people will change from the default. (defaultsetting_users) > (nondefaultsetting_users) ..regardless of how desirable the non default setting is. This, for instance, is why Windows Update got a lot more forceful in its later incarnations. People will not update, even when it's good for them,…

Another example: IE being installed on Windows by default.

How many people still think IE == internet...

Re: UK Porn Filter Will Censor Other Content Too, ISPs Reveal

#136

Post by majika »

gknoy wrote: post #119
cmpctyd wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Running a relay to help could be a good start. It's pretty simple[0][1]. The risks associated with being a Tor exit node do not apply to all relay types and the network can be helped greatly by running a standard relay too (standard relays only pass encrypted traffic from A to B). [0] https://www.torproject.org/docs/tor-doc-relay.html.en [1] https://www.torproject.org/docs/tor-relay-debian.html.en

If I were to run an exit node or a relay node, how would I mitigate the rare-but-potentially-life-destroying risk that my machine is identified as trafficking in illegal bits, due to relaying/exiting traffic of that nature from the anonymized network? I would be happy to donate bandwidth, but that risk is something which I don't feel is acceptable.

That isn't a risk for relay nodes, because you would be relaying encrypted traffic. It would just be noise.

For exit nodes, the issue of legal liability for routing other's traffic is less clear. You'd basically run the same risks as providing an open wireless network: https://openwireless.org/myths-legal

Re: UK Porn Filter Will Censor Other Content Too, ISPs Reveal

#137

Post by cmpctyd »

gknoy wrote: post #119
cmpctyd wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Running a relay to help could be a good start. It's pretty simple[0][1]. The risks associated with being a Tor exit node do not apply to all relay types and the network can be helped greatly by running a standard relay too (standard relays only pass encrypted traffic from A to B). [0] https://www.torproject.org/docs/tor-doc-relay.html.en [1] https://www.torproject.org/docs/tor-relay-debian.html.en

If I were to run an exit node or a relay node, how would I mitigate the rare-but-potentially-life-destroying risk that my machine is identified as trafficking in illegal bits, due to relaying/exiting traffic of that nature from the anonymized network? I would be happy to donate bandwidth, but that risk is something which I don't feel is acceptable.

A normal, non-exit relay node will not be identified as "trafficking in illegal bits" by any sane police force. A normal relay will trade from A to B in only encrypted traffic and will not touch websites on the behalf of users, only other relays.

It is rare that an exit node is raided but there has been no known occurrence in which a normal relay was raided.. nor would it make any sense for there to be. Many people run non-exit relays as they are uncomfortable with the risk of exiting for the Tor network, perhaps you should be one of them.

Re: UK Porn Filter Will Censor Other Content Too, ISPs Reveal

#138

Post by cmircea »

I don't understand one thing: how will this filter actually work?

Say I use Google or Bing or whatever over SSL. All traffic is encrypted end-to-end. How will the ISPs know I am searching for a forbidden term? Are they going to request a CA to issue certificates for google.com to ISPs?

Re: UK Porn Filter Will Censor Other Content Too, ISPs Reveal

#139

Post by 7952 »

javajosh wrote: post #102

You know what would make a lot of sense? Install these filters on every new device sold in the UK. Make them configurable, and even uninstallable, but defaulting to "blocked". That way if and when people choose to unblock something, it's a private matter between them and their device. This achieves both the stated goal of protecting people from malicious content, and the freedom of people to consume malicious content…

I am surprised that they haven't tried this as it would be much more affective. Network level filtering always fails because it can't see encrypted packets. To prevent circumvention you need something running on the machine, at which point you may as well just run the filter on the machine. The government could have promoted officially recommended browser plugins. If parents don't know how to protect their children why not help them?
Post reply on HN