"ISPs in AU and NZ start censoring the internet without legal precedent"

[Jeßus]

The nanny state is insatiable in it's desire for censorship:

"ISPs in AU and NZ start censoring the internet without legal
precedent


Several websites including Voat, ZeroHedge, Archive.is, LiveLeak, and
others have been blocked in Australia and New Zealand in direct
contravention to civil liberties that citizens are supposed to have.
The biggest of these internet providers, Telstra, has published a blog
post defending their censorship action – even acknowledging that free
speech has been sacrificed by company decision:

“We appreciate that it is necessary to ensure free speech is
carefully balanced against protecting the community – but with these
sites continuing to host disturbing content we feel it is the right
thing to do to block them.”

In fact, some of the blocked sites have been unfairly lambasted in
mainstream media as “refusing” to take down offending material. Let’s
be clear, each and every one of the blocked websites operates lawfully
– that includes removing illegal material when requested. These
internet service providers (ISPs) in Australia and New Zealand have
taken it upon themselves to play judge, jury, and executioner in their
condemnation of these websites and their visitors just for exercising
free speech.
In New Zealand, mobile internet service providers take it upon
themselves to enact censorship

Starting over the weekend, Spark NZ, Vodafone NZ, and Vocus NZ were
the three New Zealand ISPs that have taken it upon themselves to block
these sites. On their part, the ISPs and smartphone network providers
are claiming that these are only temporary blocks. Temporary blocks
that have lasted multiple days – more than long enough to change
people’s’ browsing habits. Even the perpetrators of this censorship
are aware how unprecedented it is. Geoff Thorn, a chief executive at
New Zealand Telecommunications Forum (TCF), commented to CIO:

“This is an unprecedented move by the telecommunications industry,
but one that they all agree is necessary.”

CIO additionally confirmed that the ISPs are working together to ban
the same sites.
In Australia, censorship also happens at the whim of the internet
providers

Unsurprisingly, the over-reactive censorship has even started
spreading around the world. Starting Monday the 18th, Telstra and
Vodafone in Australia have also implemented these blocks network wide
– that means even the many Australians using Vodafone reseller
networks are affected by Vodafone’s censorship decisions. Of course,
Facebook is not one of the sites that has been blocked.

Are these blocks due to legal request, or is Telstra now censoring
entire sites due to internal policies? Setting a very dangerous
precedent

— James Franklin (@James23235689) March 18, 2019


Vodafone has even confirmed that they were told to place the blocks,
and they will remove the blocks when they are “advised” that the
illegal content has been removed.
Censoring free speech is never “the right thing to do”

The internet providers in Australia and New Zealand are sliding down
an incredibly slippery slope against free speech. Previously, in
Australia and other parts of the world like Russia and Philippines,
ISPs would not censor access to websites unless clearly told to by the
government. The precedent that internet providers can decide when to
start blocking sites seemingly arbitrarily has now both been set and
abused… All in the name of “doing the right thing.”"

https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/2019/03/isps-in-au-and-nz-start-censoring-the-internet-without-legal-precedent/

[Sylvia Else]

Optus are blocking Live Leaks, at the IP address level.

I can't find anything in the terms and conditions that let's them do
that. Looks to me as if they're in breach of contract.

Sylvia.

[Rod Speed]

"Sylvia Else" <syl...@email.invalid> wrote in message
news:gfu5f6...@mid.individual.net...

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of why
no one has ever actually been stupid enough to let you
have any say what so ever on anything to do with the law.

[Computer Nerd Kev]

In aus.legal Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid> wrote:

> On 26/03/2019 1:52 pm, Je?us wrote:
>>
>> The nanny state is insatiable in it's desire for censorship:
>>
>> "ISPs in AU and NZ start censoring the internet without legal
>> precedent
>>

>> https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/2019/03/isps-in-au-and-nz-start-censoring-the-internet-without-legal-precedent/
>
> Optus are blocking Live Leaks, at the IP address level.

Rats, that's all my alternative ISP options down the drain then.
Telstra are blocking at least the DNS, I can't seem to test the
IP address because DNS resolver web pages are giving wrong IP
addresses for some reason (only tried archive.is).

--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#

[Computer Nerd Kev]

voat.co can't be accessed via the IP address because they use
Cloudflare (and they've blocked sites intentionally in the past
as well, though not in this case). Jeeze the internet is getting
messed up with layers on top of layers, mixed in with deliberate
censorship and other filtering.

[Peter Jason]

Even Tumblr has gone all pussy.
...meow.

[keithr0]

If they're blocking the DNS request, simply use another DNS server.

Google 8.8.8.8 or 8.8.4.4
IBM 9.9.9.9
Cloudflare 1.1.1.1

[keithr0]

No they've gone all no pussy.

[Sylvia Else]

Optus, at least, are blocking the IP address.

Sylvia.

[Computer Nerd Kev]

Yes I know, but in my case that requires a bit of documentation
reading, configuration file editing, and rebooting. Anyway, I had
time for that this morning so I tried with another DNS server and
I can access the sites. So Telstra aren't blocking the IP addresses,
just not resolving the DNS queries for blocked domains.

This might be enough for me to switch to an alternative DNS server
permanently. In the past blocks haven't affected any sites that I
actually use, but I have used archive.is before (although I usually
find what I need with web.archive.org) and it could have been a real
inconvenience. I'll have to look into the DNS services better and
compare performance first though. What's bet that after all that
Telstra wake up and start blocking the IP addresses too?

[keithr0]

I use a Raspberry Pi running PiHole as a DNS forwarder, it has a
blacklist that filters adverts and trackers. It's the most effective way
of doing it as it works across all the machines in the house, and all
browsers. It is set up to use Cloudflare, I used to use IBM but
Cloudflare support DNS requests over TLS which is my next step, it means
that my ISP cannot even see what DNS requests that I am making. If they
want to block anything, they'll have to do deep packet inspection, and I
can't see them putting that level of effort in.

A crude check (using ping) shows Cloudflare the quickest by a fair
margin, Google and IBM fairly similar. Bypassing your ISP should improve
performance as it cuts out the middleman.

[keithr0]

Is there anything in the terms and conditions that says that they
guarantee you access to every website in the internet?

[Sylvia Else]

They don't say that they guarantee it - clearly they have no control
over what happens upstream. But they don't say that they will take
active steps to limit access. In their terms and conditions, they
describe the service:

"(b) The service provides broadband access to the internet and related
services, such as email, via an access method."

Absent some express qualification, the expression "the internet" cannot
be deemed by Optus to mean something less than the entire internet.

Now, bear in mind that where one party to a contract sets the terms,
they are construed in favour of the other party. So, Optus cannot turn
around after the event and say "Oh, but what we meant was..."

Optus do say that they may block ports - but not that they may block
addresses.

Sylvia.

[Rod Speed]

"Sylvia Else" <syl...@email.invalid> wrote in message

news:gg2oo2...@mid.individual.net...

They don’t need to when the law requires them to do that.

[Petzl]

Changing DNS alone won't do it, check here what IP's can be seen
always disable IPv6, If you havu uTorrent down load the "Torrent
Address detection" test
https://ipleak.net

You need a VPS that has it's own DNS server does not have logs and
encrypts from your computer to their decrypting server.
once decrypted sends to their DNS the back to their encrypting server,
which then goes to your computer for decrypting.

For me I use this one for Windows 10.
https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/pages/how-it-works/
--
Petzl
Good lawyers know the law
Great lawyers know the judge

[Computer Nerd Kev]

In aus.legal keithr0 <us...@account.invalid> wrote:
> On 3/28/2019 8:14 AM, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>> In aus.computers keithr0 <us...@account.invalid> wrote:
>>> If they're blocking the DNS request, simply use another DNS server.
>>
>> Yes I know, but in my case that requires a bit of documentation
>> reading, configuration file editing, and rebooting. Anyway, I had
>> time for that this morning so I tried with another DNS server and
>> I can access the sites. So Telstra aren't blocking the IP addresses,
>> just not resolving the DNS queries for blocked domains.
>>
>> This might be enough for me to switch to an alternative DNS server
>> permanently. In the past blocks haven't affected any sites that I
>> actually use, but I have used archive.is before (although I usually
>> find what I need with web.archive.org) and it could have been a real
>> inconvenience. I'll have to look into the DNS services better and
>> compare performance first though. What's bet that after all that
>> Telstra wake up and start blocking the IP addresses too?
>>
> I use a Raspberry Pi running PiHole as a DNS forwarder, it has a
> blacklist that filters adverts and trackers. It's the most effective way
> of doing it as it works across all the machines in the house, and all
> browsers.

I don't really see the need for that with my own use. Easier to have
NoScript installed on each browser and blocking everything except
what is explicitly allowed. A "block all except:" approach is safer
than "block these:", and is more easily tailored to minimise the
scripts running on a specific website to only the ones required for
it to do what you want, thereby improving performance as well as
security.

I only regularly use Dillo (can't run scripts in the first place) and
Firefox on my home PCs/Laptop, and don't use any "smart" gizmos, so
I'm assuming that there's some case for a PiHole once they're brought
into the mix (probably all the "apps" that call to things you don't
ask them to, but I'm blissfully ignorant about all that - except
Firefox does a bit of it, which I've tried to reduce by editing
about:config).

I connect to the internet via a router running OpenWRT with a 3G
mobile broadband modem plugged in. Now that I've found the right
commands to put in /etc/config/network, changing the DNS server
should be quicker next time (and I probably didn't need to reboot,
but I couldn't remember which process to restart (and the modem
takes about as long to reboot as the router anyway)).

One thing I am considering is using a Raspberry Pi as a proxy to
forward HTTPS connections to my local network via HTTP. This is
because an ever increasing amount of software (including some that
still receives security updates) seems to be having problems with
specific sites using specific encryption options. 90% are sites that
I don't need to use HTTPS with in the first place because I don't
want to submit any information to them besides the URL, but the
stupid webmasters force it upon their users. The router didn't prove
powerful enough to run the software required to do this, so a Pi is
a backup option - though I hate adding another computer to the mix.

> It is set up to use Cloudflare, I used to use IBM but
> Cloudflare support DNS requests over TLS which is my next step, it means
> that my ISP cannot even see what DNS requests that I am making.

But they can see the IP address, which in many/most cases will tell
them exactly what site you're viewing just as the DNS request would
have. Bringing Cloudflare into the mix just exposes you to the US
government's policies as well as the Aus gov's. Plus you can't trust
them as a company any more than your ISP anyway.

If I switch DNS server it would preferably be to one run by and
Australian company (which will probably rule it out as an option,
but I haven't looked yet (think I did once before though, and I
clearly didn't change)).

> If they
> want to block anything, they'll have to do deep packet inspection, and I
> can't see them putting that level of effort in.

No, they'll do what Optus already did and block the IP address.

> A crude check (using ping) shows Cloudflare the quickest by a fair
> margin, Google and IBM fairly similar.

That's cruder than I'd like, I'll have to find a tool that shows the
actual DNS resolution times.

> Bypassing your ISP should improve performance as it cuts out the
> middleman.

I don't see why that would be.

[Computer Nerd Kev]

In aus.legal Petzl <pet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Changing DNS alone won't do it,

It did.

> check here what IP's can be seen
> always disable IPv6, If you havu uTorrent down load the "Torrent
> Address detection" test
> https://ipleak.net
>
> You need a VPS that has it's own DNS server does not have logs and
> encrypts from your computer to their decrypting server.
> once decrypted sends to their DNS the back to their encrypting server,
> which then goes to your computer for decrypting.

I'm not going to pay a VPN service just so that I can fully use an
internet service that I'm already paying for (without blocking).

Free web proxy sites work to access the blocked websites in this
case anyway. I tested that.

[FMurtz]

I put voat into Duckpond through my republic which uses optus (I think)
and I got the Voat page.

[Petzl]

On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 09:52:33 +1100, FMurtz <hag...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

I use the torent page as a USA TV guide for my streamung TV is now
blocked unless I use my VPN
https://digitalcontentguide.com.au

[Petzl]

Well "our" government is throwing kids in jail for up to 14 years for
watching Christchurch shooting in a terrorist Mosque involed in the
2015/2016 attacks and more!
https://ibb.co/kHdTQSL
OK to watch Moslams using cars to mow down Australians though?

I would guess one needs a VPN who knows when you won't be allowed to
read say One Nation?

--
Petzl
Who doesn't come up with similar such cunning plans every Friday night
at after-work drinks?

The point is that ON doesn't appear to have received any money from
the NRA, in fact I'm not clear if they ever spoke to the NRA, all that
seems to have happened is some journo posing as the NRA recorded some
drunken conversations he had with them.

Seems like a big pile of non-news.

Almost certainly, an investigative report into those who planned the
Al-Jazeera operation would be much more fascinating.

[Jeßus]

On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 19:16:38 +1100, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid>
wrote:

To my knowledge, there isn't anything in the T&C that covers this
scenario.

> Looks to me as if they're in breach of contract.

Possibly, I'm not qualified or knowledgeable enough on the topic to
say one way or the other.

[Rod Speed]

"Petzl" <pet...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:r2vv9e94gc4h1a4hu...@4ax.com...

> On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 22:19:08 +0000 (UTC), n...@telling.you.invalid
> (Computer Nerd Kev) wrote:
>
>>In aus.legal Petzl <pet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Changing DNS alone won't do it,
>>
>>It did.
>>
>>> check here what IP's can be seen
>>> always disable IPv6, If you havu uTorrent down load the "Torrent
>>> Address detection" test
>>> https://ipleak.net
>>>
>>> You need a VPS that has it's own DNS server does not have logs and
>>> encrypts from your computer to their decrypting server.
>>> once decrypted sends to their DNS the back to their encrypting server,
>>> which then goes to your computer for decrypting.
>>
>>I'm not going to pay a VPN service just so that I can fully use an
>>internet service that I'm already paying for (without blocking).
>>
>>Free web proxy sites work to access the blocked websites in this
>>case anyway. I tested that.

> Well "our" government is throwing kids in jail for up to
> 14 years for watching Christchurch shooting in a terrorist
> Mosque involed in the 2015/2016 attacks and more!

Not one kid has been jailed for a minute for doing that.

> https://ibb.co/kHdTQSL

Just because some fool claims something...

> I would guess one needs a VPN who knows when
> you won't be allowed to read say One Nation?

Even sillier than you usually manage, and that's saying something.

[Computer Nerd Kev]

In aus.computers Je?us <j...@j.net> wrote:
>
> "ISPs in AU and NZ start censoring the internet without legal
> precedent
>
> Several websites including Voat, ZeroHedge, Archive.is, LiveLeak, and
> others have been blocked in Australia and New Zealand in direct
> contravention to civil liberties that citizens are supposed to have.

> https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/2019/03/isps-in-au-and-nz-start-censoring-the-internet-without-legal-precedent/

Damned if I can find confirmation online, spent far too long
searching for it now, but I get a clear impression from a report on
SBS news last night that this proposed legislation:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/02/terrorism-crackdown-laws-could-give-greater-power-to-block-australians-from-websites
Has been passed.

The part about Morrison nagging other, more powerful, leaders about
it is true at least. That definately implies that the Australian laws
have been passed, but I suppose you can't rule out hypocricy.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/aug/25/g7-scott-morrison-to-push-for-action-against-online-terrorist-content

Assuming that it has passed, this sets up a terrible precedent for
government-controlled internet censorship. After all one man's
"freedom fighter" is another man's terrorist, and who knows how
blurry those lines might become in future conflicts which Australia
may be involved in?

Besides that, the post-Christchurch censorship shows how large sites
can be blocked due to only a single item of content. Archive.is, a
site that I've used a number of times before for decidedly
non-terrory purposes, is _still_ blocked on Telstra, for example. How
easy would it be for pollys to have sites that they don't like
examined closely to pick out one item that can be considered covered
by the new law, and thereby provide and excuse for blocking all of
it?

[Petzl]

Nero doesn't want "us" reading the writing on the wall
https://twitter.com/alx/status/1156248668468666368?fbclid=IwAR2V5_pkf2gOc32nLsY6NtHdOfWJ3Unm19Gcu16i_hmNV4lTIH8tUGZF5XQ
https://is.gd/XbMSmA
Why is Instagram removing posts that don’t break rules?

CENSORSHIP IS REAL!