Home » ISP News »

UPD4 Child Internet Safety and Censorship Measures Unveiled for UK ISPs

Posted Monday, July 22nd, 2013 (8:30 am) by Mark Jackson (Score 2,877)
censorship online

The Prime Minster of the United Kingdom, David Cameron, has unveiled the government’s plan for helping to protect children online. As expected it includes a series of solutions including one that requires all of the country’s largest broadband ISPs to adopt strict network-level filtering blocks for adult websites and content (Parental Controls).

It’s no secret that the government and many politicians in general have been working to clamp down on online porn and illegal child abuse content for the best part of two years now (note: the IWF already works with ISPs to block child abuse content). Today the outcome of that effort to create a new Code of Conduct will be published, although the Prime Minister has already revealed the basics of what will be included.

Summary of the New Measures

* Adult content filters to be enabled on all new mobile phones (this already happens for most people).

* Adult content banned from public Wi-Fi services (some public hotspot operators already do this).

* It will be a criminal offence to possess pornography that depicts rape.

* Videos streamed online in the UK will be subject to the same restrictions as DVDs and BluRays sold in shops.

* Google, Bing and other major internet search engines will have to block any results/sites and specific search terms blacklisted by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (i.e. this mostly relates to child abuse content). It should be said that Google and the like already remove related sites once they’ve been notified.

* The Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP) will also gain new powers to examine P2P (internet file sharing) networks for child abuse content and to hopefully help trace their users (working alongside the police).

* People whom attempt to access websites that contain child abuse content will also be met by a strict warning about the risks of doing so.

* The country’s largest broadband ISPs (BT, Sky Broadband, TalkTalk and Virgin Media) will all need to enable automatic network-level filtering of adult websites (i.e. Active Choice+), although you will be given a choice to opt-out (though the opt-in “Yes” box will stay pre-ticked if you ignore it).

The government expects all of these new measures to be introduced by the end of 2014 (though the network-level filtering must be ready for new users by the end of 2013) and the communications regulator, Ofcom, will be tasked with overseeing this effort. But arguably one of the most contentious elements continues to be the enforced adoption of network-level filtering.

Essentially network-level filtering means that the broadband provider controls the website blocking at its end of the service and this allows the restrictions to be imposed across all of your networked devices.

ISPs will also give customers a list of options for blocking other non-porn types of “adult” content (e.g. social networks, gambling, self-harm sites etc.). Admittedly this makes it a lot easier for parents to use but it’s far from perfect (we’ll get to that later) and could give some people a false sense of security.

David Cameron, UK Prime Minster, said:

When someone sets up a new broadband account the settings to install family friendly filters [Parental Controls] will be automatically selected. If you just click ‘next’ or ‘enter’, then the filters are automatically on [and] they will cover any device connected to your home internet account.

No more hassle of downloading filters for every device, just one click protection. One click to protect your whole home and keep your children safe. Now once those filters are installed, it should not be the case that technically literate children can just flick the filters off at the click of a mouse without anyone knowing.

So we have agreed with industry that those filters can only be changed by the account holder, who has to be an adult. So an adult has to be engaged in the decisions.”

The government will most likely attempt to spin this as a “default-on” solution (ISPs don’t like that) but in reality most of the big ISPs have already advised us that this is a moot point since everybody would be asked to make a decision about whether the filters are enabled or not (How the Filters Work). Never the less, if the new measures are not introduced as required, there’s also the ominous threat of legislation for future consideration.

It’s worth pointing out that many free Parental Control solutions already exist and most people probably have access to them already but probably never realised (e.g. on your router, Windows 7/8 PC, MAC OS computer, iOS, OpenDNS etc.). In that sense the new network-level solution will certainly be a lot easier to find and use but is it really better?

Technically speaking ISPs are only conduits of information and thus any “block” they impose can only ever be skin deep because they have no control over actual online content like web hosting providers. A competent child, sometimes even the youngest ones, will also quickly be able to figure out any number of different ways around such filters. It’s not hard and as we all know from our own childhood, school yard solutions spread like wildfire.

Many such filters often also block legitimate sites too (e.g. the national lottery, big shops that include underwear sales, sex education or general news content that merely talks about related topics) and provide no effective means by which unfair restrictions can be appealed or reported. O2 for example blocks websites that have been setup to help men whom suffer from domestic violence (here).

Many of the mistakes mentioned above occur due to technical errors but incorrect categorisation is also a clear problem. Suffice to say that the scope for mission creep and overzealous censorship is a serious concern and putting too much power in the hands of commercial ISPs can be dangerous. But at least the Daily Mail will be happy, unless ISPs block them too over the racy pictures on their website.

Adrian Kennard, Director of UK ISP Andrews & Arnold (AAISP), said:

The problem is that it is a call for censorship, and that is bad. We need open communications in the world to keep governments in check. The second we go down the road of censorship we are opening Pandora’s box. This is not speculation as we have seen it – filters put in place only for IWF blocking of child abuse images are already being used to block alleged terrorist sites and by civil court orders to block sites alleged of encouraging copyright infringement.

Something so far from child abuse images you could not get – copying material for personal use is (as far as I know) actually legal in some countries, and even here it is often a matter of a civil wrong justifying damages, and not an actual crime – yet the same systems designed to stop only the most heinous crimes is being used to stop something considered “OK” by a lot of the population and even some whole countries. It shows how these things get distorted – no system will ever stay as intended, no matter how pure those intentions are.”

Jim Killock, Executive Director of the Open Right Group, added:

Cameron’s announcement is symptomatic of the way the Internet is viewed and treated by policy makers. The technical challenges and consequences of policies are viewed as less important than the moral purpose justifying calls for action. Policies are announced before they have been properly considered. And worse, these announcements risk being another case of blaming the commercial intermediaries because that is easier and cheaper than doing what is really necessary.”

As a side note it is worth mentioning that the new ISP and search engine rules will only be applied to the largest ISPs, which account for around 95% or more of home broadband subscribers.

Smaller ISPs and the many thousands of lesser known unfiltered search engine websites will be unaffected. Part of the reason for this is because smaller ISPs are unlikely to have enough money to develop their own network-level filters without help from the government.

UPDATE 10:18am

Incidentally AAISP has just added a new option on their order page that gives customers a choice between Censored and Unfiltered Internet access. The catch is that you can’t subscribe if you choose to have filtered access and are told to pick another provider.

aaisp_internet_filter

UPDATE 12:47pm

Cameron’s full speech is now available from the official Number 10 website (here).

UPDATE 1:41pm

Added a comment from the Internet Service Providers Association.

Nicholas Lansman, ISPA Secretary General, said:

Online child safety is a priority issue for the internet industry. We’re pleased the government recognises and has welcomed the considerable work ISPs are already doing. They are investing a great deal of time and expertise into offering customers a choice over installing free and easy-to-use content filters.

However, filters, which can lead to over and under blocking and can be easy to circumvent, are only part of the solution. As recommended by the last government review, a more holistic approach involving retailers and manufacturers is required, along with an emphasis on education, awareness and parental mediation.

On the separate issue of illegal child sexual abuse images, in 1996 the industry set up and has continuously supported the Internet Watch Foundation and this has resulted in the reduction of child abuse images hosted within the UK down to less than 1% of the global total. The blocking of child sexual abuse images plays an important role in preventing users from stumbling across this material inadvertently but the most effective means to actually protect victims and prosecute those committing crimes it to remove images at source. For this, we will continue to follow established procedures, working with law enforcement, particularly CEOP, who need to be provided with the necessary resources and tools to identity and prosecute offenders.”

UPDATE 23rd July 2013

Something we overlooked in Cameron’s speech is the part where he encourages smaller ISPs to adopt the same solution. “I want this to be a priority for all internet service providers not just now, but always [and] that’s why I am asking today for the small companies in the market to adopt this approach too“. But without funding most would be unlikely to do that.

Delicious
Add to Diigo
Add to Slashdot
Leave a Comment
11 Responses
  1. Rob Anderson

    Quote: “The catch is that you can’t subscribe if you choose to have unfiltered access and are told to pick another provider.”

    Errr… that should be “filtered access” :-)

  2. dragoneast

    As political parties implode, the politicians will canvas every pressure group they can find; with the desperate press leading the charge. Fun and games ahead.

    Nice to see there isn’t anything that can’t be turned into a marketing campaign, though.

  3. Bob2002

    Cameron was interviewed by Jeremy Vine on Radio 2 (select the popout player and set the time to 1:05:40) -

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0375cm2

    He actually said the filter would block porn and self-harm sites but not Page 3 or 50 Shades of Grey. What a complete and utter intellectually dishonest, lowest common denominator, attention seeking, ****head.

  4. timeless

    strikes me that this has nothing to do with porn itself.. what they hope to achieve is more votes for the next election that they are gearing up for because lazy parents complain their children can access porn because they allow them computers in their bedrooms and they expect someone else to keep their kids safe rather than keeping an eye on their childrens internet usage…

    however l also believe that there is an ulterior motive in pushing for these systems.. after all it would be so easy to add bloggers who post stories that the government doesnt want out a good example would be the NHS and welfare reforms.

  5. dragoneast

    If you want to make something popular, ban it. So if Dave wants all kids to see porn just through peer pressure alone, he’s going the right way about it.

    Paedos and the rest of them thrive on the danger as much as the perversion. My parents believed that Saville and his ilk couldn’t have been up to anything as “look at all the technology and people around – they’d know”. Yeah: as a kid I knew better.

    I can’t think of a single case where Government mandated-technology has worked as it “should”, and they’re still obsessed with throwing money at it.

  6. zemadeiran

    Back handers my friends, back handers…

  7. cyclope

    Election winner by blocking anything that he don’t like, well he’ll probably try that,

    Surely he must know by now the he & his cronies will be out come the next election,The man is a raving lunatic, First all the cuts that have had little effect on the group of people they where aimed at, but have made those who got the least in benefits deeper into poverty,

    And so far hasn’t attacked the pensioners, but they will if they win the next election , and seeing as we are so poor why is this tool waisting money on this blocking nonsense ?
    As for the smaller isp’s adopting this crap, not a chance they will be waving 2 fingers at him on that front i’m sure, Can we not have a referendum or get the other mp’s to pass a vote of no confidence to get rid of him like tomorrow ?

  8. Peter Cook

    I heard Cameron’s interview on BBC radio yesterday morning about this topic. Despite being told that you can’t access the type of child porn he is trying to stamp out through Google or similar search engines he still insists that he’s going to stamp out access to this sort of material through the search engines and he will legislate if it doesn’t work. My first thought was that the man is bonkers. Then you realise that what ‘they’ are up to is using stamping out child porn (which the bulk of ‘us’ would think is a good idea and which will lead people to think of Cameron as a man of principle), to introduce general internet censorship that they don’t think they would get away with if they admitted that’s what they are up to. Damn clever these politicians.

  9. Eye to the left

    Very Good assessment of the situation in the following blog; https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/07/great-wall-of-cameron

    • dragoneast

      In a way I wish someone would ask him why he wants to promote porn to kids (which is what you do when you ban anything – see drugs), and encourage physical child abuse (by keeping it easier to hide).

      Or what planet he’s living on? On the other hand, it would be a waste of time; we know he’s not on the same one as the rest of us.

IMPORTANT: Javascript must be enabled to post (most browsers do this automatically). On mobile devices you may need to load the page in 'Desktop' mode to comment.


Comments RSS Feed

* Your comment might NOT appear immediately (the site cache re-syncs periodically) *
* Comments that break site rules, SPAM, TROLL or post via fake IP/anon proxy servers may be blocked *
Promotion
Cheapest Superfast ISPs
  • PlusNet £3.75 (*14.99)
    * Speed: 38Mbps - Unlimited
    * Gift: None
  • BT £5.00 (*15.00)
    * Speed: 38Mbps - 20GB
    * Gift: £80 Sainsburys Voucher
  • Sky Broadband £10.00 (*20.00)
    * Speed: 38Mbps - Unlimited
    * Gift: None
  • Virgin Media £10.00 (*15.50)
    * Speed: 50Mbps - Unlimited (FUP)
    * Gift: None
  • TalkTalk £11.75 (*13.50)
    * Speed: 38Mbps - Unlimited
    * Gift: £120 Love2shop Voucher
Poll
* Javascript must be ON to vote *
The Top 20 Category Tags
New Forum Topics
Promotion

Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved (Terms, Privacy and Cookie Policy, Links (.), Website Rules)