Australia's de-facto net filter has ZERO regulation A couple of weeks back, Australia's Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) made a mistake: by trying to take down a Website promoting an investment scam*, it accidentally blocked 1,200 sites using the same IP address as the scammer. ASIC was able to attempt the take down thanks to a "Section 313 Notice", a legislative …
Was an old codger who thought the Internet was used in catching fish, which would account for his idiocy.
Instead, and without surprise, I find he is one of those generic younger politicians we find the world over, in every corner of the globe who have absolutely no idea about anything.
It's very worrying that nations are being run by these people.
This post has been deleted by its author
> Fortunately all the law enforcement operatives understand this distinction when they log you accessing an illegal IP address.
> Remember there is no need to worry because they are only logging public traffic data, not anything private so no need for any warrants or protection
You forgot the sarcasm smiley ...
When Senator Ludlam asked whether a rights-holder could ask the police to seek a s313 notice, Senator Conroy responded: “I doubt that an individual citizen can walk in [into a police station - El Reg] and ask for a 313.”
He then continued - 'But it's a good idea, thanks for the suggestion'
Some people have a problem that s313 requests relating to pornsites came with a requirement not to say what URL was blocked. Since this is an attempt to stop people finding content they want, the blacklist was the booklist of choice for the cogniscenti. Clearly, blocking the blocklist makes (twisted) sense in that game.
Arguably also true for bomb recipes.
But the non-porn non-bomb related s313 requests don't come with the same consequences. In fact, quite the contrary: open government demands we know exactly what we're not allowed to see, and why.
So I hope the policy twonks don't assume s313 == automatically not told. If its not related to specific, and understood risks, we should know whats being blocked.
If nothing else, it might stop unrelated third party damage from spreading..
-G
The civil servants have a choice, publish each banned site along with the reasons and be prepared to justify it in court, or at least in the media when you 'accidentally' ban a breastfeeding site or a rape survivors charity.
Or keep everything secret and face no risk whatsoever
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
