Internode, iiNet Not Voluntarily Filtering Child Porn

One of the "surprise" elements from last week's filter delay announcement was that Telstra, Optus and iPrimus have all started voluntarily filtering known child pornography websites. But as Renai LeMay over at Delimiter discovered yesterday, Internode is not going to follow suit, while iiNet is waiting to see more details about the voluntary filtering proposal.

Internode are taking the position that home-based solutions are the way to go, rather than responsibility falling on their shoulders. They maintain that responsible parenting and PC-based filtering solutions are a much more effective way of protecting kids.

Meanwhile, iiNet is keen to see more details of the voluntary filter proposal before committing to whether they'll implement it or not. Although reading the quote from iiNet CEO Michael Malone, you'd be forgiven for thinking that the ISP is more likely to follow Internode than Telstra.

Considering 69 per cent of you guys believe that the voluntary filter put in place by Telstra, Optus and iPrimus is all we need, it's clearly an issue that needs more discussion. Hopefully the Internet industry can find a way to agree on exactly what path the entire industry moves down, rather than have us constantly live under the threat of government regulated censorship.

[Delimiter] [Fight the Filter]


Comments

    It's useless with networks like Tor (torproject.org) and Freenet (freenetproject.org). These cannot be blocked or monitored (currently) and will simply evolve if a vulnerability is found.

    It's just an excuse to grab power so they can come down on people sharing music and movies. If you want to fight back. Install Full Disk Encryption like TrueCrypt (which is open source) and setup a Freenet node.

    Do "child porn sites" even exist?

    I've no doubt that there's kiddy porn on the net but I would have thought it'd be pretty hard to host it on a public server without landing in hot water. Far more likely that it would be shared via P2P and other means.

    ....surely there's more to being a pedophile than doing a google image search.. :-P

      Yeah, you have to do an online course before youi get your degree :P

        I once worked for Telecom Australia, Telstra's vurpioes name. The company was then a decent company that was built on the public's purse. As far as I can see, everything they have belongs to us but bcoz little Johnnie, so God-like, sold much of it to people who actually think it belongs to them > what a joke & the ACCC is basically dealing them a hand they deserve.When I worked for Telecom they had an R & D Department that invested around 200 million a year & made it back many times over in returns from OS telecommunications companies. As soon as Optus was brought in they pretty much dumped the R & D. Typical!Look at them now > absolute scum. I'm ashamed of you Telstra, just ashamed!Good luck to the G9ers.

    If there is a list of known child porn websites then maybe instead of just blocking them we should be finding the people that created them? Surely child porn can't be legal anywhere in the world?

    It's like having a list of the names and addresses of people wanted for murder and putting up fences around their houses.

      actually it is more like having the list, and removing them from your GPS so it is harder to get there..

      just get a VPN, or look in someone else's GPS..

        Actually, it's more like walking down the street with your child and seeing another kid across the street getting raped by a grown up... and then putting your hand over your own childs eyes and saying "don't look", rather than doing something to stop it.

    Internode have just blocked a number of torrent sites as of last night..........

    It's pretty obvious that Telstra, Optus and iPrimus are all towing the filter line as they are hoping for a kickback from the government. Anyone able to spell NBN?

    The heading of this story is divisive, painting iiNet and Internode in negative light
    It also detracts from the actual issue at hand and the point iiNet and Internode are making. ‘Responsible Parenting’.
    The same tactic Conroy uses…. Hmmmm. Your not a Labour voter are you Nick? o_O

      Oh, FFS - do you even read the stuff we've been writing? The headline is accurate to the story - nothing more, nothing less.

        Umm Yes I do...
        And since you asked.

        Heading and Opening statement from your Delimiter source -

        Internode, iiNet, VHA won’t filter for now.

        "National broadband provider Internode this afternoon stated that — unlike Telstra, Optus and Primus — it would not voluntarily filter its customers’ internet for websites that are known to contain child pornography and child abuse material, ...while iiNet said it would wait to see the detail in the proposal ..."

        And you left out VHA completely

        Need I go on?

        Wow, LGB, this is why popular movements fail: because there's always someone willing to accuse any voice on the issue of not being 'authentic enough', and then it becomes a shitfight over whether or not the message is being communicated correctly and the message itself gets lost.

        I for one did not automatically presume from Nick's headline that all Internode and iiNet customers must be pedophiles, and VHA was left off because they're not really players in the home broadband market - they're really mobile only. Turn down your paranoia filter, or at least direct it at Conroy where it belongs.

        Although I disagree with LGB, starting off a response to a reader with 'FFS' probably isn't the best professional approach, regardless of how infuriating it might be to you.

        I was a little confused with Internode's response, as they said the blacklist had been discredited, but this is just child porn and child abuse, so is it that part of the blacklist or a seperate list altogether? On top of that, Internode would actually have visibility - but there needs to be better guidelines to maanging it all I'd say.

    There are already POLICE procedures for dealing with child porn websites. Blocking is merely the Catholic church method (dont look here, look at that other thing over there) method of dealing with it.
    Anyway, the Government is quite open in admitting they desire to filter a massively larger wide range of things, but that that this policy is so toxic that they will revisit it and try again after the election.

      Say what? Where is this info? re: internode blocking torrent sites.

    yea lets vote for the Greens...

    My internode connection is letting me visit all the big torrent sites still.

    Conroy is just following orders; these orders!
    http://youtu.be/jCkCWxv3kUE

    wow!
    EVEN THE ISPs ARE CONFUSED!

    again: TWO ISSUES:

    ONE:
    stopping the ABUSE of CHILDREN by making it impossible to view child porn, thus starving the industry, forcing people in Aus not to support it, which is all we can do to stop the INTERNATIONAL child porn industry (we have all the police and arrests and stuff that stop anyone making it here)

    simply tracking down and arresting anyone downloading or in possession of it is also a way of reaching this goal, and is currently being used to much effect.

    TWO:
    protecting CHILDREN from accessing content that is inappropriate for THEM on-line.

    these are SEPARATE THINGS.

    the mandatory filter's 'mandate', and the interim voluntary child abuse filters ISPs are implementing are about issue ONE, NOT issue TWO. do you understand now Internode? I can understand your confusion, almost all of it comes courtesy of the senator.

    for anyone who cares:
    on point one: I don't believe filtering will be in any way effective in reaching this goal because people can easily bypass it, and certainly is not worth the money, time, experimentation, and all the other technical drawbacks that come with implementing such a filter. I commend telstra and optus for trying, and cross my fingers it doesn't have any side effects. I also commend any ISP who simply doesn't bother for the reasons I've just stated.

    on point two: I agree with Internode, as always, protection of children SHOULD be the responsibility of the parents when ever possible, and when the danger is coming to them IN THEIR OWN HOME, I think that is a place where the parents should be responsible. however, parents are n00bs, and I support any isp implemented, OPT-IN 'net-nanny' to make it as easy as possible, whether it be implemented at the exchange, in the modem/router, or as software on the PC.

    in short, I support an OPT-IN net nanny, and I am neutral on the idea of mandatory filtering controlled COMPLETELY by the ISPs and not AT ALL by the gov, with the specific intention of blocking content that's creation directly causes the abuse of people, especially children. it brings us into line with many other western countries, and I obviously support it 100% IN PRINCIPLE, but in reality, I am very skeptical that it will do less harm than good.

    but what Conroy has proposed: effectively a Government linked Mandatory Censorship (literally, they want to use 'Refused Classification' as the filter rule) for everyone, is completely unacceptable, as is his handling of this whole thing, by - through incompetence or not - consistently mixing and matching points from these TWO VERY SEPARATE issues, in order to try and confuse people (including himself apparently) into liking such a stupid policy.

    I have been surprised how the two issues (stopping child porn, vs controlling what children can see) have been rolled together in so many discussions and in mainstream press reports. they require very different solutions.

    Not to mention the government is also out to control what adults can see, or talk about..

    With all the talk about people voting against Labour over this issue, has anyone actually gotten a good lead on the Liberal stance on this issue? Don't get me wrong, I have been a Liberal voter since I could vote, but has anyone actually checked their policy about this issue?

    The framework has already been laid out by Labour, and they will try to push it through this term if re-elected, but who is to say that Liberal won't pick up the ball if they win? At the end of the day, this will help bring Australia into line with the US 773/778 bills, giving the government control of the internet and what information can be accessed in either a real or imagined period of threat.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now