Fwd: FC: Australian government publishes censorware effectiveness report

[Michael Peter Schmidt <mpschmidt@netcologne.de>]

>Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 11:24:31 +0100
>To: interpol@vov.de
>From: Michael Peter Schmidt <mp.schmidt@gmx.de>
>Subject: Fwd: FC: Australian government publishes censorware effectiveness 
>report
>
>Hallo,
>
>ich hatte ja schonmal darüber berichtet, wie in Australien die 
>Broadcasting Authority darüber wacht, dass das Internet zensiert wird.
>Jeder muss sich eine Filtersoftware installieren. Bei Vertragsabschluss 
>mit einem Provider muss man vertraglich zusichern, eine Filtersoftware auf 
>seinem PC installiert zu haben, ansonsten darf der Provider den Vertrag 
>nicht abschliessen.
>In der Realitaet ist das nur ein Häkchen in einem Online-Formular und alle 
>User kümmern sich einen Dreck drum...
>Mir persönlich ist kein Australier bekannt, der tatsaechlich Netnanny 
>o.ae. installiert hat.
>Insofern ist das alles Humbug.
>Nun hat die ABA aber einen ziemlich ausführlichen Bericht ueber 
>Praktikabiltaet des Filterns von Internet-Inhalten publiziert, den man 
>gelesen haben sollte, insb. in Anbetracht der Buessow-Debatte in D.
>Es ist davon auszugehen, dass auch bei der Bez-Reg mit dem Thema 
>auseinander gesetzt wird.
>
>Bin selbst erst bei Seite 20, kann also noch kein abschliessendes Urteil 
>geben.
>
>Achja, der im Forward angegebene Link ist falsch.
>Ich habs mal gespiegelt (ist das Seekabel eigentlich immer noch 
>beschaedigt? Der D/L hat ja Ewigkeiten gedauert....):
>
>http://www.wichtig.de/zensur/aba.pdf
>
>
>LG
>
>Michael
>
>
>>---
>>
>>Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 13:08:08 +1100
>>From: Nathan Cochrane <ncochrane@theage.fairfax.com.au>
>>Organization: The Age newspaper
>>To: Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>, Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
>>Subject: Australian Government releases content filtering survey in time 
>>for Philadelphia trial
>>
>>Hi Dave, Declan
>>
>>Call it kismet, providence or good timing, but the Australian Government 
>>has released a 90 page report into the effectiveness of censorware as the 
>>CIPA goes to trial in Philadelphia.
>>
>>http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/200203/msg00184.html
>>http://www.politechbot.com/p-03297.html
>>
>>The report was commissioned by the Australian Broadcasting Authority 
>>(www.aba.gov.au), which is responsible for censoring the Internet in this 
>>country, and conducted by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial 
>>Research Organisation (www.csiro.gov.au).
>>
>>http://www.aba.gov.au/internet/research/filtereffectiveness.pdf
>>
>>"Effectiveness of Internet Filtering Software Products" gives a basic 
>>background to the problems of censoring Internet content. It then 
>>addresses the different approaches vendors use, such as 
>>inclusion/exclusion, content, source and image filtering. It finishes by 
>>reviewing 14 products and services including Cyber Patrol 5.0, AOL 
>>Parental Control 6.0 and Net Nanny 4.0.
>>
>>The report doesn't take a moral or ethical stance, but outlines what can 
>>be achieved with the technology available.
>>
>>Some highlights from the report:
>>
>>"While it is technically feasible to block access to all undesirable 
>>Internet content, no Internet blocking or filtering scheme will ever be 
>>100% effective, or resist a determined and informed attacker, but many of 
>>them will be perfectly adequate in normal use."
>>
>>"A completely safe Internet may well be a very restricted Internet, 
>>especially when new types of content and new distribution technologies emerge."
>>
>>"Many filtering products are based on lists of Web sites that are 
>>supplied by their vendor. These lists are expensive to produce, as they 
>>have to be compiled by having people examine and classify Internet 
>>content, and as a result these lists are often closely held proprietary 
>>information. The secret nature of these lists can make it difficult to 
>>know just what content is being blocked and for what purpose.
>>
>>"These lists also reflect the values of the organisations and people who 
>>compile them, and may not reflect the values of Australian society as a 
>>whole. Some Internet activists (Peacefire) complain that commercial 
>>filtering products reflect US-based conservative and religious values, 
>>and as such may not reflect the more liberal values held by Australian 
>>society. Cultures differ considerably in their concepts of acceptable
>>content and filtering products really have to customise their lists to 
>>meet local cultural norms."
>>
>>"Content filtering is a difficult problem. Even text-based filtering 
>>requires some ability to determine context (and meaning) for words they 
>>discover. Early products were infamous for simplistic filtering, with the 
>>blocking of "breast" cancer content being the most quoted example. 
>>Filtering products have improved since those early days but the task is 
>>still very difficult and moderately high error rates can be expected. 
>>Filtering out non-textual information, such as photographs or video, is 
>>much more difficult and problematic."
>>
>>"All filtering technologies are fallible, and the more effective they 
>>are, the more they risk intruding on general Internet usage. Products 
>>have to strike a balance between filtering out undesirable content, and 
>>allowing access to (possibly unknown) useful content. The white list 
>>products are the most effective because they are the most restrictive and 
>>constrain users to a very small part of the Internet."
>>
>>"Much attention is paid to filtering Web pages but undesirable content 
>>can be found in many places on the Internet, including newsgroups and 
>>file servers. Some of the more tightly filtered Internet services, such 
>>as some of those designed for the educational market, resolve this 
>>problem by completely blocking access to all Internet services other than 
>>the Web and e-mail. This approach is certainly safe, but would be 
>>unacceptable for the general Australian community and so these other 
>>sources may have to be filtered as well."
>>
>>"An emerging problem with filtering Web traffic through the use of 
>>server-side filters is the rapidly increasing use of the Web's protocol 
>>(HTTP) and port (80) for other purposes, such as e-commerce and Web 
>>Services. Filtering all HTTP traffic could result in degraded performance 
>>for major applications, rather than just slowing down
>>interactive Web browsing."
>>
>>
>>
>>*********************************************************************************
>>This email and any files transmitted with it may be legally privileged 
>>and confidential.  If you are not the intended recipient of this email,
>>you must not disclose or use the information contained in it.  If you 
>>have received this email in error, please notify us by return email and 
>>permanently delete the document.
>>*********************************************************************************
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
>>You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
>>Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
>>To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
>>This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>Politech dinner in SF on 4/16: http://www.politechbot.com/events/cfp2002/
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: debate-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: debate-help@lists.fitug.de