Page 23 of 57 FirstFirst ... 31318192021222324252627283343 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 230 of 567

Thread: Government to censor the Internet

  1. #221
    Join Date
    4th Aug 2008
    Location
    The 'Riff
    Posts
    11,335

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1AZRAEL1 View Post
    Kinda funny that this was released at midday, and SMH nor other sites I look at have the article at present. Almost like they don't want to post it
    Big suprise that that SMH still a day later have nothing about iinets press release. Seems to me that they are in on the scare mongering. So much for unbiased news.

  2. #222
    Join Date
    4th Aug 2008
    Location
    The 'Riff
    Posts
    11,335

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hursticon View Post
    That iiNET are running a scare campaign or are misinformed.
    Probably something along those lines lol.

  3. #223
    SGB's Avatar
    SGB is offline Rank 1 - New or Inactive
    Join Date
    22nd Feb 2009
    Location
    Illawarra
    Posts
    1,113

    Default

    Internet filter offers fresh target for hackers

    Right now, many black hatters are planning attacks on the proposed internet filter and its accompanying blacklist. I recently (and anonymously) spoke to one such black hatter who said the plan was not to leak the blacklist (yet again), but to highjack it. Imagine the havoc one could wreak if one could start adding innocuous websites to the blacklist - even just temporarily.

    The first website to be added, of course, would be Senator Conroy's site, followed by The Australian Christian Lobby's site, and those of other groups in favour of the filter. Imagine the embarrassment and the public relations nightmare that would cause Conroy's people.

  4. #224
    Join Date
    19th Dec 2008
    Location
    HK
    Posts
    3,259

    Default

    Actually, that's pretty funny - blacklisting the actual blacklist registry itself (assuming that's possible) would be funny too.

  5. #225
    Join Date
    2nd Mar 2010
    Location
    Dapto
    Posts
    12,777

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ode to a Grasshopper View Post
    Actually, that's pretty funny - blacklisting the actual blacklist registry itself (assuming that's possible) would be funny too.
    I agree that would be funny as , though I tend to think it would send the Servers into an inadvertent loop and crash the farm, that result would still be funny as hell though!

  6. #226
    Join Date
    4th Aug 2008
    Location
    The 'Riff
    Posts
    11,335

  7. #227
    SGB's Avatar
    SGB is offline Rank 1 - New or Inactive
    Join Date
    22nd Feb 2009
    Location
    Illawarra
    Posts
    1,113

    Default

    If anyone's with iPrimus, leave that ISP NOW.

    iiNet, Primus split on filter

  8. #228
    Join Date
    2nd Mar 2010
    Location
    Dapto
    Posts
    12,777

    Default

    Hey SGB, I'm with TPG and to date I've not been able to find anything on their involvement, or lack of, with the Internet Filter testing.

    Do you think you could put your investigative skills to work for me?, I'd just like to know what my ISP's stance is is all. Would be much appreciated mate.

  9. #229
    SGB's Avatar
    SGB is offline Rank 1 - New or Inactive
    Join Date
    22nd Feb 2009
    Location
    Illawarra
    Posts
    1,113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hursticon View Post
    Hey SGB, I'm with TPG and to date I've not been able to find anything on their involvement, or lack of, with the Internet Filter testing.

    Do you think you could put your investigative skills to work for me?, I'd just like to know what my ISP's stance is is all. Would be much appreciated mate.
    TPG weren't involved in the trial last year.

    They haven't commented on the policy as a whole as far as I know, so I don't know what their stance on it is.

  10. #230
    Join Date
    2nd Mar 2010
    Location
    Dapto
    Posts
    12,777

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SGB View Post
    TPG weren't involved in the trial last year.

    They haven't commented on the policy as a whole, so I don't know what their stance on it is.
    Ah good, I'm glad to hear as that could indicate their stance but could also mean that they're not prevalent enough to be a part.

    Yeah, like I said, I haven't been able to find anything either which could mean they don't want any part of it or it could mean nothing at all.

    I hate not knowing.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •