Report Highlights 10 Sites Unfairly Blocked By UK Mobile Internet Censorship

Mark.JUK writes "The Open Rights Group (ORG), which works to raise awareness of digital rights and civil liberties issues, has published a new report that examines the impact of internet censorship on UK mobile networks and lists an example of 10 legitimate websites that often get unfairly blocked (PDF) by adult content filters (over-blocking). The study is important because similar measures could soon be forced upon fixed-line broadband ISP subscribers by the UK government. Some of the allegedly unfair blocks include censorship of the 'Tor' system, a privacy tool used by activists and campaigners across the globe, and the website of French 'digital rights' advocacy group 'La Quadrature du Net.'"

Comments

Britain leads the way yet again...

[dryriver]

Having the highest density of CCTV cameras anywhere in the world (London) isn't enough. Toying with biometrics (face-recognition specifically) at every opportunity isn't enough.Trying to pass national data retention laws that would log and store every little thing any UK person does on the internet in a data center for 24 months isn't enough. Trying to extradite Julian Assange to the United States on nebulous charges isn't enough. Putting anti-aircraft missiles (2012 Olympics) on the rooftops of London housing estates isn't enough. Putting a battleship on the river Thames (also 2012 Olympics) isn't enough. ---------- Now add to that list UK mobile/cellular phone operators randomly censoring websites you can('t) access on smartphones. --------- All of this and more makes me glad at times that I don't live in the UK. ------ What's wrong with the UK these days anyways? I used to think that Britain was the "cradle of democracy" with its televised Parliament debates, quality newspapers, speaker's corner and such. -------- What happend to you, UK? Why is all this negative stuff happening in the UK?

Re:Britain leads the way yet again...

[Raenex]

Rather than do it via DNS or IP blocking they commanded banks and payment processors to block financial transaction to those sites instead.

Later on, they seized domains too: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04/16/feds_online_poker/

False positives are a surprise?

[redelm]

Any sort of selection or filtration system is going to have TWO very different forms of error: false negatives and false positives. Missed badguys and caught goodguys. Most of the testing is done to reduce false negatives, so that you're not embarrassed by a glaring badguy getting though. As a result, lots of false positives are generated because they are less unacceptable. Do not expect rationality from censors -- that is not their objective.

The real customer's objective is to minimize the total cost both of false negatives and false positives. It doesn't help until people realise the [often high] cost of a false positive -- a large sales order that was missed & lost by a spam filter.

Some areas like police, do not have any notion of a false positive -- "It's all good -- they needed a warning".

Re:Some of the most popular sites...

[houghi]

I read about Sodom and Gomorrah in The Bible.

On a more serious note, when I was 15, I wanted to see a movie, but for that you needed to be 16, so I bought the book instead.

Years later I saw the movie and I must tell you that the book was much more, uh, adult then the movie. So kids, if you want to get around censorship on the Internets, go to the library. Shocking amount of books with adult content available.