An interesting article appeared in the The Guardian this morning which detailed plans by the government and the UK’s 4 largest ISP’s to filter porn sites unless the customer specifically requests access. David Cameron is meeting today with the Mothers’ Union to discuss and formally unveil the plans, along with specific marketing culls to stop aggressive targeted advertising.
I find it interesting that when I read this article I immediately started thinking about how they are going to implement it. At first I just assumed they will just forward routes of porn sites to the specified users with an active subscription, but that would be a complete pain to implement given the general complexity of an ISP network.
I guess it could be implemented in ACL’s (Access Control Lists) but this would mean having a vast array of access lists which won’t do much for network performance. So you have to wonder…will they implement it in software?
In that case it is more likely that they analyse all the traffic you are sending/receiving and if you are not subscribed to the adult sites then they filter it. This seems a lot more likely but to me seems like a massive invasion of privacy – let’s face it, would you want all your traffic being analysed in detail?

Perhaps I am over-reacting slightly as there could invariably be a way to implement filtering at a hardware level but it seems to me like this is a cover for tighter controls on the Internet. I firmly believe in protecting children and over the past few years its easy to see young people being exposed a lot more to sex and unscrupulous activities in the media and in everyday life. That being said though the UK has made several attempts of late to control the content on the internet that users see and this just seems like the next step, only using the sensitive topic of kids to push it through.
Additionally it means people who want access to adult materials need to publicly call up their ISP and request it, which can be incredibly embarrassing for the customer, not to mention a massive breach of privacy. For some adults and married couples, pornography is a natural and fun part of their relationship but having a policy like this enforced on the population with no democracy involved means that people risk being exposed to ridicule and general embarrassment for something that is a natural part of their lives. What if some hacker got hold of the list of people subscribed? What if there were high ranking members of society or politician’s names on that list?

Again, I want to stress that I am all for protecting children – but I also strongly support a free and open internet. This sort of thing should be left up to the parents. Don’t want your children to watch porn? Educate yourselves about basic home internet security. Set up parental controls – all computer Operating Systems support this.
Netgear, Belkin and most other major brands of modems and routers support filtering of adult sites or control of internet access to devices on the network – it’s not hard to set up, there are simple easy-to-use guides all over the internet.
This sort of thing shouldn’t be up to the government to control. Yes there are some vile things on the internet. Yes there are people who abuse the system. Yes there are sick people out there. But the World Wide Web is a free medium. It embodies everything about the human race and the freedom to access what we want is a part of it.
At the end of the day – who polices the police?






Super-Zero PhotoBlog