This is happening on a “voluntary” basis with the two biggest and a few smaller ISPs. By “voluntary” they mean that the ISPs are filtering content identified as child abuse material voluntarily, not that they are giving their customers who don’t want to look at child abuse material anyway any choice about being gifted with a false sense of cybersecurity.
System Administrators Guild of Australia board member Donna Ashelford said blocking these website addresses should not affect internet speed, but was only a “cosmetic fix” that was easily circumvented by criminals.
“The effectiveness will be trivial because you’re just blocking a single website address (and) a person can get around it by changing that address with one character,” she said.
“Child abuse material is more likely to be exchanged on peer-to-peer networks and private networks anyway and is a matter for law enforcement.”
Some of our previous posts on various iterations of the proposed net filter:
On feeling sympathy with Stephen Conroy
The death of the internet filter
We don’t have a censor sitting in every cinema
Left reasons to oppose the net filter #nocleanfeed