Australian Governments and dilemmas in filtering the Internet: juggling freedoms against potential for harm

This paper examines proposed internet filtering policies in Australia from the 1990s to 2014 and discusses some of their ideological underpinnings. Executive summary The Internet is a revolutionary source of information and its dissemination; and a medium for collaboration and interaction between individuals without regard for geographic location. Since its inception, however, concerns have been raised about the potential for unsavoury characters to use the Internet as a vehicle for distributing pornography and material of a violent nature to young or otherwise vulnerable individuals. Governments across the world have attempted to deal with such activities by various means and to varying degrees. These have included imposing mandatory filtering at an Internet Service Provider (ISP) level and optional filtering at the computer level. In Australia there has been considerable debate about what degree of filtering (if any) should be mandated. The Howard Government favoured an approach which emphasised self-regulation by ISPs combined with a legislative component and education and freedom for families to choose between either computer or ISP filtering based on a list of unacceptable content. The Rudd and Gillard Governments preferred the option of a mandatory ISP level filter, although this too was to be based on a ‘blacklist’ of prohibited content. Both options have been criticised as being expensive and inefficient. In addition, it has been argued that the Rudd/Gillard option would have had a detrimental impact on Internet speeds and that it would set a precedent for future governments to widen filtering to other forms of expression. The Howard Government’s programs were largely discarded by Labor after it was elected in 2007. However, Labor’s own filtering option was abandoned prior to its defeat in the 2013 election. In conjunction with their filtering options , both Coalition and Labor Governments have supported education and information campaigns to assist people, particularly children, to deal with online predators and both have introduced successful programs. The current Coalition Government’s policy on Internet filtering appears to favour light-handed legislation combined with education and information programs. This paper examines the iterations of internet filtering policies from the 1990s to 2014 and discusses some of their ideological underpinnings

Centralized prevention of denial of service attacks

The world has come to depend on the Internet at an increasing rate for communication, e-commerce, and many other essential services. As such, the Internet has become an integral part of the workings of society at large. This has lead to an increased vulnerability to remotely controlled disruption of vital commercial and government operations---with obvious implications. This disruption can be caused by an attack on one or more specific networks which will deny service to legitimate users or an attack on the Internet itself by creating large amounts of spurious traffic (which will deny services to many or all networks). Individual organizations can take steps to protect themselves but this does not solve the problem of an Internet wide attack. This thesis focuses on an analysis of the different types of Denial of Service attacks and suggests an approach to prevent both categories by centralized detection and limitation of excessive packet flows

Censorship and morality in cyberspace: Regulating the gender-based harms of pornography online

This paper is the second of a two part paper. Part one, \u27What\u27s Morality got to do with it?: The Gender-based harms of Pornography\u27, published in the previous volume of this journal, argued that Australia\u27s approach to regulating pornography, namely censorship, fails to specifically address the gender-based harms caused by the production and distribution of pornography. Part one argued that the preferable approach, which specifically addresses these gender-based harms, is the sex equality approach to regulation, first formulated by American feminists Catharine A MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin in the form of a civil rights ordinance. The ordinance allows persons harmed by pornography to sue for those harms on the basis that pornography is an issue of sex discrimination. \u27What\u27s morality got to do with it? The gender-based harms of pornography\u27, Southern Cross University Law Review, Vol. 10, 2006 (AGIS No 20063908)

Internet Filters: A Public Policy Report (Second edition; fully revised and updated)

No sooner was the Internet upon us than anxiety arose over the ease of accessing pornography and other controversial content. In response, entrepreneurs soon developed filtering products. By the end of the decade, a new industry had emerged to create and market Internet filters....Yet filters were highly imprecise from the beginning. The sheer size of the Internet meant that identifying potentially offensive content had to be done mechanically, by matching "key" words and phrases; hence, the blocking of Web sites for "Middlesex County," or words such as "magna cum laude". Internet filters are crude and error-prone because they categorize expression without regard to its context, meaning, and value. Yet these sweeping censorship tools are now widely used in companies, homes, schools, and libraries. Internet filters remain a pressing public policy issue to all those concerned about free expression, education, culture, and democracy. This fully revised and updated report surveys tests and studies of Internet filtering products from the mid-1990s through 2006. It provides an essential resource for the ongoing debate

Caught in the Seamless Web: Does the Internet's Global Reach Justify Less Freedom of Speech?

A federal appellate court will decide this year whether French anti-discrimination law can restrict freedom of speech on U.S.-based websites that are accessible in France. A Paris court ruled in 2000 that the Yahoo! website violated French law because its users offered for sale certain Nazi artifacts. However, to force compliance with the order, French plaintiffs must seek enforcement from a U.S. court. In response, Yahoo! sought a declaratory ruling and a federal district court held that enforcing the French order would violate the First Amendment. The matter is now on appeal. The Yahoo! case presents the question of whether the Internet should be governed by myriad local censorship laws from around the world. U.S. courts have held uniformly that the Internet should receive the highest degree of First Amendment protection. They have been influenced profoundly by the medium's global reach and have invalidated most restrictions so as not to interrupt the "never-ending worldwide conversation" that the Internet makes possible. A contrary result in the Yahoo! case would embrace a very different philosophy -- that Internet speakers must "show their papers" at each nation's borders to ensure that their speech is acceptable to local authorities. Other nations may treat their citizens as fragile children if they wish, or worse, as enemies of the state. But U.S. courts should not permit the seeds of foreign censorship to be planted on U.S. soil by finding that such restrictions are enforceable here

A framework for the forensic investigation of unstructured email relationship data

Our continued reliance on email communications ensures that it remains a major source of evidence during a digital investigation. Emails comprise both structured and unstructured data. Structured data provides qualitative information to the forensics examiner and is typically viewed through existing tools. Unstructured data is more complex as it comprises information associated with social networks, such as relationships within the network, identification of key actors and power relations, and there are currently no standardised tools for its forensic analysis. Moreover, email investigations may involve many hundreds of actors and thousands of messages. This paper posits a framework for the forensic investigation of email data. In particular, it focuses on the triage and analysis of unstructured data to identify key actors and relationships within an email network. This paper demonstrates the applicability of the approach by applying relevant stages of the framework to the Enron email corpus. The paper illustrates the advantage of triaging this data to identify (and discount) actors and potential sources of further evidence. It then applies social network analysis techniques to key actors within the data set. This paper posits that visualisation of unstructured data can greatly aid the examiner in their analysis of evidence discovered during an investigation

China's tackling of online pornography: Puzzles, issues and trends

--Online pornography,obscenity and indecency,People's Republic of China,protection of minors,Internet regulation

Study of Fundamental Rights Limitations for Online Enforcement through Self-Regulation

The use of self-regulatory or privatized enforcement measures in the online environment can give rise to various legal issues that affect the fundamental rights of internet users. First, privatized enforcement by internet services, without state involvement, can interfere with the effective exercise of fundamental rights by internet users. Such interference may, on occasion, be disproportionate, but there are legal complexities involved in determining the precise circumstances in which this is the case. This is because, for instance, the private entities can themselves claim protection under the fundamental rights framework (e.g. the protection of property and the freedom to conduct business). Second, the role of public authorities in the development of self-regulation in view of certain public policy objectives can become problematic, but has to be carefully assessed. The fundamental rights framework puts limitations on government regulation that interferes with fundamental rights. Essentially, such limitations involve the (negative) obligation for States not to interfere with fundamental rights. Interferences have to be prescribed by law, pursue a legitimate aim and be necessary in a democratic society. At the same time, however, States are also under the (positive) obligation to take active measures in order to ensure the effective exercise of fundamental rights. In other words, States must do more than simply refrain from interference. These positive obligations are of specific interest in the context of private ordering impact on fundamental rights, but tend to be abstract and hard to operationalize in specific legal constellations. This study’s central research question is: What legal limitations follow from the fundamental rights framework for self-regulation and privatized enforcement online? It examines the circumstances in which State responsibility can be engaged as a result of selfregulation or privatized enforcement online. Part I of the study provides an overview and analysis of the relevant elements in the European and international fundamental rights framework that place limitations on privatized enforcement. Part II gives an assessment of specific instances of self-regulation or other instances of privatized enforcement in light of these elements

Myspace, Yourspace, But Not Theirspace: The Constitutionality of Banning Sex Offenders From Social Networking Sites

In recent years there has been intense public pressure to enact increasingly restrictive and intrusive sex offender laws. The regulation of sex offenders has now moved online, where a growing amount of protected expression and activity occurs. The latest trend in sex offender policy has been the passage of state laws prohibiting sex offenders from visiting social networking sites, such as Myspace or Facebook. The use of these websites implicates the First Amendment right of expressive association. Broad social-networking-site bans threaten the First Amendment expressive association rights of sex offenders, who do not lose all of their constitutional rights by virtue of their conviction. Although social-networking-site bans are politically attractive on the surface, such prohibitions are fundamentally flawed because they are predicated on a number of widespread misconceptions about sex offenses and sex offender behavior. These misconceptions include the beliefs that all registered sex offenders are violent sexual predators who have extremely high recidivism rates and that Internet predators are increasing the incidence of sex crimes against minors. In fact, there is very little evidence to indicate that this type of legislation will help reduce sexual violence. This Note argues for empirically based and narrowly tailored sex offender policies that will strike the appropriate balance between protecting minors from sexual abuse and respecting sex offenders\u27 constitutional rights. Such an approach is more likely to help rehabilitate offenders and thus protect children and others from sexual predators