SAGE-AU and Internet Filtering in Australia

Posted on August 6th, 2008 by Drazen Drazic

Thanks to Michael Crawford from MIS for passing this article onto me.
http://www.sage-au.org.au/display/SAGEAU/Press+Releases

Michael also covers it here in MIS in his article; SAGE-AU debunks filter tests.

Related posts on Net Neutrality and Filtering.

Passions run high on this topic and I’m not sure this has been thought out well enough. It all starts with good intentions but how it pans out and potential future abuses need to be considered.

3 Responses to “SAGE-AU and Internet Filtering in Australia”

  1. Shocking. I told you guys I’m out of this country if this goes through… (That may make some people happy though ;)

    Now technically… I am gobsmacked! Go to any Uni and ask them the challenges there… idiots… dumbasses… they have no IDEA of numbers/metrics/challenges/architectures/security etc. We need to get ourselves down as an Expert Advisory Group/Infrastructure Advisory Group for the Trusted Information Sharing Network body asap Draz! Gimme a Securus email account and I’ll consult for free I tell’s ye!

    Why doesn’t the government have a ‘bluehat’ with CIAC, AusCert, SAGE, FIRST, CIS, APNIC, AHTCC etc.. a few minutes on the NANOG NSP-SEC, FIRST mailing lists etc would teach them a thing or two… APOPS etc…

    Best one can hope for without being in a ‘big brother’ state is visibility, surveillance and auditability.. can I hear a chorus of ‘false positive’ from the stalls. We should focus on perhaps packet interception for ISPs rather than for voice and packetised voice[SS7 over IP] alone e.g. mobile/landline -> LELG(Law Enforcement Legal Interception).. also everyone forgets process, organisational overheads and support thereof!

    I tried to get the guys in the mobile telcos to start talking about SEDNode(LELG IP hubs) back in 2004.. fell dead. When did TISN begin anyway?

    Who the hell classifies what and how the hell can you do it real time? Are they gonna’ drop SurfPatrol/WebSense in on a National Scale? How they gonna archive the logs for the whole country, for how long? Idiots.

    Anyway, on a somewhat lighter note, ‘non-blocking’ OOB based surveillance [though there is a fine line TCP RST?], one should go to the Narus guys:
    http://www.narus.com/solutions/intercept.html would be a start.

    Cisco: SCE 2000 http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6151/index.html

    Allot.com http://www.allot.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=611&Itemid=88888929

    From Wikipedia relating to the ACMA(Australian Communications and Media Authority) Internet Censorship http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Communications_and_Media_Authority

    “Since January 2000, internet content considered offensive or illegal has been subject to a statutory scheme administered by ACMA.

    Established under Schedule 5 to the Broadcasting Services Act 1992, the online content scheme evolved from a tradition of Australian content regulation in broadcasting and other entertainment media. This tradition embodies the principle that – while adults should be free to see, hear and read what they want – children should be protected from material that may be unsuitable for (or harmful to) them, and everyone should be protected from material that is highly offensive.

    The online content scheme seeks to achieve these objectives by a number of means such as complaint investigation processes, government and industry collaboration, and community awareness and empowerment. While administration of the scheme is the responsibility of ACMA, the principle of ‘co-regulation’ underpinning the scheme reflects parliament’s intention that government, industry and the community each plays a role in managing internet safety issues in Australia.

    Some people strongly disagree with this approach. They say the Australian constitution does not clearly provide either the states or the federal government power to censor online content, so internet censorship in Australia is typically an amalgam of various plans, laws, acts and policies. The regulator has been criticised for its role in examining internet censorship in Australia and how it is enabled and might further be enabled[1]. Particular criticism has been leveled at the regulator’s technical understanding of what is involved overall in internet regulation and censorship.[2].”

    Draz I am getting very worried about the Minister for Telecommunications and the muppets in charge in the corridors of power…?

    Aside: Who is this chick?
    IT Security EAG - Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts
    email: catherine.overy@dcita.gov.au

    Grrrr… first problem is Oz doesn’t take it seriously to begin with, only minor ministries have three titles :)

  2. Sorry to comment again after such a big one but EFA(Electronic Frontiers Australia):

    http://www.efa.org.au/2008/07/31/efa-says-filtering-trial-a-failure/#more-90

    EFA analysis of the proposal:
    http://www.efa.org.au/censorship/mandatory-isp-blocking/

    By the way, anyone interested in my distributed yet cloud solution to the problem.. gimme a call! Wade buddy?

  3. Declan Ingram Says:

    Dear Government-

    No, you can’t have my SSL certs. Bad Government - no biscuit!

Leave a Reply