ACMA's blacklist a bigot's battleground
I was never really worried about the government's fabled Internet porn filters, amid all the hoo-ha.
But the recent disinter of the remiss procedures taken by the communications watchdog for arbitrating what online content Australians will and will not be able to visit has been sobering. If the privacy advocates are right — ACMA, I'm still waiting for confirmation whenever you're ready — then Australia's clean-feed Internet will be determined by one lone bureaucrat.
But claims that the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), the fierce protector of the Internet blacklists that frame the content filters, will bend to the whim of any rampant moral crusader wanting to silence dissenting opinion is a presage of things to come.
This week's news that the same government agency will whack any news outlet that dares mention the abortion*blank*.com site, banned by the watchdog after an apparent appeal by a liberal crusader, with an $11,000 fine left myself and most others agog.
Turns out this bloke, a Whirlpool forum member, was trying to give ACMA the pip and test just how stringent the ACMA procedures are for mediating the blacklist.
Pretty damn slack, it seems.
Now the watchdog has banned the infamous Wikileaks site after it committed the same reproachable offense and publish the link to the banned Web site. Clever users have taken the fight closer to ACMA's turf and listed the page on the agency's Wikipedia page (currently in editoral lockdown) to see if the lone blacklist watchman has the gall to ban the page.
I'll concede that Greens' Scott Ludlam was right when he said it's early days and the government can't make head nor tail of how the whole thing will work — funny they seem to use that excuse for a lot of policy — and this rubbish will likely be ironed out, but what about all those now banned Web sites that we didn't hear about?
They may not be removed and, because the nature of blacklists demand secrecy, we may never know.
I expect we'll hear of some changes to the way these blacklists are managed, if the filters don't come a cropper first.
The following report, is based on a global survey of 706 IT and security professionals conducted in the United States, Canada, Germany, United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand. The goal of the survey was to capture data on current attitudes and trends with mobile devices and IT security. This is the third survey on this topic and this report evaluates differences in responses to similar questions asked over the past two years.
For the foreseeable future, a two-tier DDoS protection architecture should continue to provide the flexibility and manageability that today’s architects need to combat the modern DDoS threat. This recommended DDoS protection reference architecture leverages F5’s long experience combatting DDoS attacks with its customers. •Learn the four categories of DDoS threats and the recommended mitigation architectures •Answer why you should consider a cloud based scrubbing service and how to choose one •Understand the benefits to a multi-tier DDoS protection architecture
- Google hypes Android M, Android Pay, Google Photos at I/O 2015
- Seven things Google is doing to please developers
- Skip the waiter and order with this Bluetooth mat
- Despite Google Photos' arrival, Google+ still lives
- The Upload: Your tech news briefing for Friday, May 29
- Daum Kakao hopes social network Path will lead to international expansion
- Google Android M focuses on a better user experience
- Acer rolls out new laptop, desktops with Windows, Chrome
- Windows takes early lead over Android in Cherry Trail tablet battle
- Lenovo seeks to be hip 10 years after ThinkPad buy
- Computex focus shifts from PCs to wearables, IoT
- In Pictures: A match made in heaven? 10 tech mergers that defined the industry
- In Pictures: 20 best iPhone/iPad games
- In brief: Lakeside Software opens Sydney office