84,000 blocks in 3 months on Telstra filter

84,000 blocks in 3 months on Telstra filter

Summary: Telstra has blocked over 84,000 attempts to access sites on the Interpol's "worst of the worst" child pornography blacklist in three months alone, according to the Australian Federal Police (AFP).


Telstra has blocked over 84,000 attempts to access sites on the Interpol's "worst of the worst" child pornography blacklist in three months alone, according to the Australian Federal Police (AFP).

Telstra was the first to implement the voluntary filter in July, and was soon followed by Optus and a number of other internet service providers (ISPs). The number of blocks was revealed by AFP national manager for high tech crime operations, Neil Gaughan, in Senate Estimates yesterday afternoon, first reported by iTnews.

"I can say that at this stage Telstra is the only ISP that is able to provide us with information in relation to the amount of blocks that are taking place and from the period of 1 July this year to 15 October there were in excess of 84,000 redirections," he said, according to Hansard (PDF).

The list is updated weekly, he added, and people who have attempted to visit websites determined by Interpol to be child abuse websites will be redirected to an Interpol landing page. Gaughan added that although the IP address of the person who attempted to visit that website could be recorded by the AFP, it was specifically left out of this trial.

"Part of the negotiation, if you like, with the trial was that at this particular stage we would not be forwarded the IP addresses," he told the senate hearing.

Gaughan said there was no date for the trial to finish up, but that the AFP would review the program in December.

Topics: Censorship, Government, Government AU, Telcos, Optus, Telstra

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Bid picture--World government. Interpol, a foreign organisation enforcing law on Sovereign Australians. Report that propaganda arm, Zdnet. Real criminals that want to get to the illegal material use TOR and other darknet bypasses.
  • The trial isn't over and they are already talking about using the filter to trace individuals who attempted to access (knowingly or not) blocked material. The next step will be to trace everyone.

    As for claiming they don't track IP addresses now, that is obviously being done. Every website can identify your IP, so redirecting to an Interpol site just makes collecting the list of IPs easier. The AFP can then claim NOT to be collecting IPs, whilst happily receiving updates direct from Interpol.
    Scott W-ef9ad
  • You don't want to catch the eye of the thought police. Better hide all those unsavoury thoughts away. What are unsavoury thoughts though? Who knows, the list is secret.
  • Presumably if attempts to visit certain sites are redirected to Interpol then no crime has taken place? No-one is actually getting through to the blocked site. So there will actually be no point in recording or investigating the IP addresses.
    • It becomes a justification to investigate, and thus will be used as such.

      What constitutes a crime? You can be charged with being 'equipped to steal' (or similar) without actually having stolen anything. It wouldn't take much to allege someone was involved in illegal activities merely because they tried to access material of a criminal nature.
      Scott W-ef9ad
  • Apart from the fact that the 'list' is secret, Conroys cadre of the willing isps are clearly happy little campers basking in the sun of self righteous and more likely self deluded censoring for the greater good. Exactly how many of these 'hits' are individuals trolling around ancient eastern European parked sites, equally ancient credit card traps, and equally relevant semi legal honeypots, and how many are as a result of malware, botnet troilers and misspelt addresses.

    84,000 very naughty boys? Trust an isp who is voluntarily imposing a secret filter with no checks and balances? What a crock of smelly horse droppings...
  • Interesting to note that Telstra are the only ISP willing or able to provide statistics on blocked requests. It raises several questions:

    1. It's a trial, so why wouldn't every involved ISP be providing data? Hard to provde the success of a trial with only limited data.

    2. Why are some ISPs happy to provide this data whilst others aren't? It suggests not all are in favour of the scheme.

    3. Post (the inevitable) implementation, if material is being blocked automatically who cares how many blocked requests are occuring?
    Scott W-ef9ad