Not now that you've mentioned it, no :)
Peers have rubber-stamped the British Board of Film Classification as the regulator for age checks on porn websites, but voiced concerns over delays in issuing guidance. The government's Digital Economy Act requires that spank-viewing UK residents prove they are 18 or over, and it has proposed the BBFC as gatekeeper. In the …
Monday 5th February 2018 12:26 GMT Anonymous Noel Coward
Funnily enough, I was reading an article recently which stated that the government *knows* this won't work and is going to cause an increase in fraud, but is still going to go ahead with it anyway.
Monday 5th February 2018 14:21 GMT Richard Wharram
Monday 5th February 2018 18:24 GMT Bernard M. Orwell
"..going to go ahead with it anyway..."
Yep, because that way they can trumpet their achievements in doing something for the Mumsnet brigade, who are generally just as bloody clueless. I don't think the gov actually want a working technology for this; they just want to be seen trying to get it done and are quite happy to fail and throw their hands in the air because "interweb experts, eh? whatchagonnado? vote for us. at least we tried to protect you from terrorpedoes!".
Monday 5th February 2018 12:40 GMT ukgnome
All that is going to come of this is shared content on apps like snapchat and whatsapp, or multiple copies of files on USB.
If you create a barrier under the guise of protection what you will actually get is the reverse.
The only difference between today's teenage rites of passage and mine is that porn will be saved on USB sticks before hiding them in bushes.
Monday 5th February 2018 12:45 GMT Anonymous Coward
Monday 5th February 2018 13:07 GMT Jimmy2Cows
"If this House approves the regulator today, we will be well on the way to doing that, and we are definitely trying to do it as quickly as possible," he said.
"I am not trying to duck the issues that are still there, but they will come back and I am sure I will have to deal with them."
In other words... "I don't have a clue how to actually do any of this, please please stop asking awkward questions."
Nice to see they've really thought this through.
Monday 5th February 2018 14:14 GMT The Nazz
Ffs How hard can it be.
Supply a scan of your fingerprints and any found to be currently being used to acquire a school dinner are refused.
May rule out a few 18 year olds and a number of teachers, but AIUI the latter group are SO busy they shouldn't have the time to be watching porn.
Monday 5th February 2018 14:40 GMT mark l 2
Who uses a credit card to view pr0n these days anyway?
Even the new stuff from p0rn site is available on forums within hours of it being published on the pay websites to download for free. Or just type whatever fetish your in to on Google images and let it come back with 1000s of hits
All this is going to do is create load of phishing sites that look like naughtyspankglrls.com but with a fake age verification page to harvest credit card details.
And unless the BBFC are suddenly taking on 1000s of new staff to monitor the millions of sites that peddle smut online there is no way they will be able to keep any sort of list up to date.
Monday 5th February 2018 15:59 GMT Andy 97
This is all complete nonsense.
Any person wishing to view "grumble flicks" would simply access sites hosted outside of the UK.
UK" jazz film" publishers all have access for international customers and even a complete imbecile can work out how to avoid ISP filters.
It sounds like a cosy way of secureing funding to me.
Monday 5th February 2018 16:07 GMT The Nazz
What's to stop you .....
doing something like this
Porn site : Are you over 18?
Viewer : Yeah, of course.
Porn site : We're not so sure, have you any evidence of this?
Viewer : "Well, yeah, actually i'm J****** S**** (1) the MP for Wankerland and my private details are D.o .B. xx/yy/zzzz etc
Porn site : Give us a second to look it up and you're in. Yep, fine, wank away.
(1) the name of my real MP has been obfuscated to protect the guilty.
Monday 5th February 2018 16:56 GMT Blitheringeejit
Outsourcing statutory powers to the private sector
"...it is not appropriate for the government to give statutory powers to a body that is essentially a private company," said Labour peer Lord Stevenson."
I agree, as it goes - but it wouldn't be the first time. The Association of Chief Police Officers is a private company, and I believe that its members have one or two statutory powers at their fingertips...
Tuesday 6th February 2018 11:41 GMT Dr Dan Holdsworth
This is sounding unpleasantly like a re-run of Government versus Encryption
Remember all the calls for encryption products to have a back door in them for the use of police? Remember how our Government are completely sure that this is a good thing, completely sure that nobody will abuse the back door and utterly certain that nobody will do horrible and illegal things like install non-backdoored software?
This is more of the same.
This is politicians trying to change reality by averring that such a thing is so, when in fact it is not. Age verification absolutely has to identify the person who is having their age verified, otherwise it is useless. Therefore age verification will identify who looks at what, and said details will be stored on a government computer somewhere, and later lost on a train by some gormless civil servant.
Anyone with any sense will therefore give this age verification system the bargepole treatment, and obtain a VPN from an off-shore supplier. There are lots of different VPN suppliers to choose from, quite a few of which keep no records of what traverses their systems whatsoever.
Somewhere, therefore, an MI5 man is crying into his beer as formerly passable sources of Internet metadata go opaque. Even the fact that someone was using an off-shore VPN was (and probably still is) a useful indicator of either paranoia or nefarious deeds (barring business use, of course).
Alter the pr0n laws so that a VPN becomes a necessary adjunct of anyone who fancies a spot of executive relief, and all of a sudden VPN traffic becomes so common that it isn't a marker of dodgy deeds any more. Hey presto, that's another easy source of intelligence ruined by the politicians.
Tuesday 6th February 2018 12:23 GMT Anonymous Coward
Tuesday 6th February 2018 18:09 GMT David Gillies
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away
Huzzah. Another instance of politicians behaving like a cross between King Canute and Humpty Dumpty. I suppose to a politician all things must have a political/legislative solution, otherwise what is the point of their existence? But really this is tantamount to the attempt in Indiana to legislate a method for squaring the circle. Given that the set (World Population) \ (UK Population) is approximately equal to the set (Everyone), what exactly do Theresa May and her cyber-myrmidons hope to achieve? Clearly the denizens of Italy or New Zealand or Chile are not going to be thwarted by UK age verification in their quest for a crafty J. Arthur, so how, in the name of all that is holy, is this supposed to work? Have any implementation details been made public beyond a vague statement of intent?