Posts by Emma Hart
-
I have just been emailed a media release by Trevor Henry of the DIA. It appears to be a reaction to the media attention the filtering is now attracting. In the interests of fairness, I'm going to reproduce the whole thing here, and not comment on it, at least immediately.
Media Release 16 July 2009
Web filter will focus solely on child sex abuse imagesA filtering system to block websites that host child sexual abuse images will be available voluntarily to New Zealand internet service providers (ISPs) within a couple of months, Internal Affairs Deputy Secretary, Keith Manch, said today.
The Digital Child Exploitation Filtering System, funded with $150,000 in this year’s Budget, will be operated by the Department in partnership with ISPs, and will focus solely on websites offering clearly objectionable images of child sexual abuse, which is a serious offence for anyone in New Zealand to access.
“The filtering system is a response to community expectations that the government and ISPs should do more to provide a safe internet environment,” Keith Manch said. “It is not a silver bullet that will prevent everyone from accessing any sites that might contain images of child sexual abuse, but it is another important tool in the Department’s operations to fight the sexual abuse of children.
“The distribution and viewing of images of this abuse – wrongly called child pornography – is trading in human misery. It is the result of real children being sexually abused and exploited in the worst possible way. Each time anyone anywhere in the world accesses one of those images, the child depicted is victimised again.”
Keith Manch said the filtering list will not cover e-mail, file sharing or borderline material.
“Anyone trying to access websites offering child sex abuse pictures will receive a screen message saying the site has been blocked because it is illegal,” Keith Manch said. “The Department is developing a code of practice, which will be publicly available, to provide assurance that only website pages containing images of child sexual abuse will be filtered and the privacy of ISP customers is maintained. An independent reference group will also be established to oversee the operation. Anyone who feels that their access to a website has been wrongly blocked will be able to ask anonymously for the filter to be checked. The filter will not be used for law enforcement. “
The filter was successfully trialled with Ihug, TelstraClear, Watchdog and Maxnet over two years. It filters out over 7000 objectionable websites with no noticeable impact on internet performance.
“We understand that Internet NZ is happy with our plans but the society will be able to review the hardware setup to ensure it complies with industry best practice.
“Joining the filtering programme is voluntary and if any ISP subsequently is unhappy it will be able to withdraw. This is another way of ensuring that the Department gets the filter right.”
The Department has entered into a partnership with ECPAT New Zealand, part of a global organisation the purpose of which is the elimination of child prostitution and pornography and trafficking of children for sexual purposes.
“ECPAT is operating a hotline through its website (www.childalert.org.nz) so that members of the public can report suspect sites, not already identified by the Department.”
The Department will not disclose the 7000 objectionable websites which have been compiled through its own forensic work and with its international law enforcement partners.
“If we did, inevitably some people would visit them in the interim, effectively facilitating further offending and making the Department party to the further exploitation of children,” Keith Manch said.
-
Big earthquakes usually happen around new moons and full moons, and a week either side.
Can't argue with that.
-
Counter-counter-point: So do you. Unless you going for the uberpedantry of "tattoo" vs "tattoos".
I think it's the only identifier (think harder, Emma, we're both pakeha too) that you couldn't use to tell me and Hadyn apart.
David Haywood has suggested I get the ISBN of my forthcoming book tattooed somewhere on my body. It's a bloody tempting thought.
-
Pedant's point: the name of the place was noted in the SST report in Emma's post - 25 Cross Street, which is obviously also its street address.
Pedant's Counter-point: Hadyn's post. We're easy to tell apart: Hadyn's the one with the tattoos.
-
Someone on Slashdot a couple of days ago was claiming that your actual traders of kiddie porn post encrypted DVDs to each other, which strikes me as plausible.
Arrests have been made in Australia which involved staking out a PO box and waiting for someone to take delivery of actual physical DVDs. So certainly the postal service is being used to some extent. Obviously by Australian standards, this should mean stopping and inspecting every packet.
-
I know nothing about how paedophiles collect their material, but I wonder how much this software will stop. If it's torrented or emailed in zip files then this system won't do anything?
I've seen a '90% peer to peer' figure bandied around, but no basis for it. But if you think about how you would go about spreading illegal material without getting caught, sticking it up on a static website isn't going to be high on your list, is it?
But if they came and searched your computer, there would still have to be illegal stuff on it in order for it to go further.
And I will say, as far as good things go, 'on your computer' no longer includes 'in your cache'.
It is possible, with the stuff I do in the course of a day's work, I have a higher chance of running across this kind of stuff than a 'normal' (don't know other meanings etc) person would, which means I have a higher chance of doing it repeatedly and becoming a 'person of concern' for the DIA. But in a decade of pron-surfing and writing and commenting, I've never run across any child pornography, not once.
-
But I just wonder what are we doing to our kids when they cannot say to themselves 'I'm in a bad space here, I'm leaving', whatever that situation may be.
John, I was a kid who grew up in an abuse household. It has, without a doubt, left permanent mental scars on me.
But it also meant that the first time I was ever hit by a boyfriend, and he apologised straight away and was absolutely distraught, I recognised enough of my father's behaviour in him to get up and walk straight out and refuse to see him again.
I am quite sure that my mother feels guilt for not getting us kids away from him faster. But I also understand how massively difficult it was for her, and how much worse what she went through was than what we had to endure.
-
Independent auditing was one of the things my partner suggested while we were discussing this, and the problem is who does it, not least because they have to have the appropriate knowledge base. Would it be an improvement? Yes.
I should say, in case it sounds otherwise, that it's not that I don't trust the censors or think they're currently doing a good job. It's about protecting the process from potential abuse, when it's all happening behind closed doors.
-
Having never hit my wife or children I am not able to empathise in any way.
And there will be some women who, never having been in this position, can't empathise with Dunne-Powell. Just being female doesn't give you any particular insight into another woman's situation.
strangely perhaps, now he's gone I want him to be remembered for his good qualities.
CD, if it's any comfort, my mother felt the same way about my father.
-
Is that last question ripe for its own Ministerial or OIA request?
Might I have spent the last couple of days trying to frame weird indirect questions that might actually get answered? Like, asking about what's NOT on the list? Or OIA-ing them every couple of months and asking if they've blocked any site for any reason other than child pornography? Had occured.
I have a book to write...