UK Mobile ISP Blocks VPN, Citing Access To Porn

New submitter santosh.k83 writes with this snippet: "TorrentFreak has learned that VPN provider iPredator is already blocked under the 'adult filter' of some, if not all, mobile providers. TorrentFreak has seen communication between the mobile provider GiffGaff and iPredator which makes it clear that the VPN's website is blocked because it allows kids to bypass the age restrictions. Based on the above it is safe to say that censorship is a slippery slope, especially without any oversight. VPNs are used for numerous purposes and bypassing age restrictions is certainly not the most popular one. If this holds up then proxy services and even Google's cache may soon be banned under the same guise."

Politicians are retarded

[kheldan]

When are they going to figure out that they're not qualified to make public policy on technology matters? Censorship sucks (and doesn't work), filtering doesn't work. Here's a suggestion for you instead: How about you get parents to actually pay attention to what their kids are doing instead of making the internet tougher and more annoying to use for everyone?

Spooks

[EEPROMS]

Or the spooks have been putting a bit of pressure on the CEO's. You would be surprised what you can do with a bit of information regarding the lifestyle of board members of an ISP.

Re:You can switch it off.

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if opt-out, this is NOT acceptable, NOT negotiable.

This is parasitic madness and shall be treated as such.

Re:You can switch it off.

[linuxci]

Yes, I'm on giffgaff and have turned off all restrictions. It's mostly to do with Camoron wanting all UK ISPs to 'think of the children' and opt out of censorship.

If our Prime Minister gets what he wants it's going to be an awkward time for people who host a lot of different types of website. Many that allow users to submit their own content such as forums may be blocked too, perhaps even slashdot.

That said, if the blocks are too tight then most people will opt out, but this censorship needs to be nipped in the bud before it gets too out of control. At the beginning it's marketed as a way of keeping children safe from porn and other possible controversial content, but when the infrastructure is in place it'll be easy to block anything the government doesn't want.

Re:You can switch it off.

[KiloByte]

Few people know they can do so. For the vast majority, there's no option but the default.

Re:Politicians are retarded

[10101001 10101001]

When are they going to figure out that they're not qualified to make public policy on technology matters?

Depends on what you mean by "not qualified". You're also presuming a lot on the politicians (and their supports) stating their true intentions.

Censorship sucks (and doesn't work), filtering doesn't work.

For people who want censorship, censorship is great. To the extent that the filter hassles anyone, the filter is working. You have to understand, the purpose isn't to really block porn. It's to stigmatize it and those who would commit actions that seem designed to be able to view it.

Here's a suggestion for you instead: How about you get parents to actually pay attention to what their kids are doing instead of making the internet tougher and more annoying to use for everyone?

Except that's the whole point. It's to (a) allow irresponsible parents to have the ISPs (through UK government mandate) be a babysitter. More importantly, it's to (b) allow busybodies to force their viewpoint on group (a) because group (b) believes they *are* responsible parents and it's everyone else's kids who are doing all sorts of evil things, spurred on by lustful things like pornography. The more annoyed they may people of group (a) and the more vocally against the censorship group (a) is, the more group (b) can counter with vocal chastising of "irresponsible parents". Because if those in the media chose to voluntarily not make moral judgments in their news reporting, that's oppression of (b) and their God. But, if group (b) actively uses the government to suppress access to pornography against the wishes of more liberal-minded, responsible-acting parents, well, that's just fine--because you can always get your name added to the, possibly made pubic in the future, opt-out list.

Re:You can switch it off.

[girlintraining]

It's mostly to do with Camoron wanting all UK ISPs to 'think of the children' and opt out of censorship.

Anyone who uses a 'best interests of the children' argument should be immediately shipped to an island populated entirely by other people just like them.

They are invariably the lowest form of scum humanity has to offer, worse even than rapists and murderers... because at least you know where you stand with them, and you know they're evil. "For the children" people are just as evil, but they wrap themselves in robes and go about talking about how holy they are. Put them all on the island, setup cameras, and wait.

I assure you, within a few months... most of them will be dead, because they'll all be trying to one-up each other with dogmatic proclaimations... and invariably when you have a high concentration of such ideology... people start dying. A lot.

Great news!

[LihTox]

The tighter the filter, the more people will be annoyed by it and turn it off. And if it really were strictly a porn filter, people might be too embarrassed to opt-out. Now everyone has plausible deniability: "I need to run a VPN for work" or whatever.

Re:I thought the "point" of the filter...

[gagol]

Naked people loving each other = bad, extreme violence on tv = okay, snafu.

In the beginning

[lapm]

In the beginning it was "Think of children". In my country they drived throw illegal censorship (Our constitution denies censorship). They claimed it would be overseen, etc... It wold only effect servers not in our country.. Today its used for much more then just what it was originally intended. It censors sites critical to to this censorship system, it censors pirate sites (not even claimed to distribute child related material), etc... Censorship is such a dangerous road. Once you take the first step, its so easy to take another and then another and then another.... Until you are light year away from what was originally intended. Theres no oversight of system. List is classified, Who manages that list is classified, and theres no court oversight of it. So if you are wrongly places on censor list, theres no way to get out. It volantery system for ISP to be part of, except if you dont implement it volantery theres law we can make it... Personally i believe its problem of democracy. Too many old folks on power that dont understand modern world. They think sweeping problem under the rug is doing something, because that seemed to work in past. Child related issues will not go away if you put them under the rug, you need to take action... Unfortunately censorship is the wrong choice of action. Smoke and mirror trick that leaves problem un-handled..

Re:You can switch it off.

[vux984]

however, when we old-timers made due juuust fine with our dads' stash of Playboys, and turned out well enough.

For what its worth, that stash of playboy's is not the same as the porn online.

Going online is like finding your dad's stash of hardcore gangbang masochistic anal humiliation fetish porn. Except my dad didn't have a stash of that. So although I was exposed to porn as a kid, it wasn't anything like that. And frankly, I'm not sure kids starting to look at porn should be dropped headfirst into the deep-end of the porn-pool.

It would be nice if one could somehow start with "playboy",and then move up from there in the modern world. The main pages of modern internet porn hubs are crammed full of stuff that doesn't look like fun, doesn't look pleasurable, and that most people don't find the least bit erotic or sexy. A lot of it is pretty grotesque.

Its like learning about food and the pleasures of eating by watching eating contests, food related clips from fear factor and jackass, followed by someone getting their stomach pumped, then someone popping mentos and rootbeer, then 2 girls 1 cup.

I don't object to the stuff that's online existing, or that its legal, or that some people choose to produce and consume it, or that some people get off on it.

But when an 8 or 12 or however old kid starts to be curious about sex and porn... I'd prefer they not have to be subjected straight to that on the first day out.

Re:You can switch it off.

[davester666]

If only there were some way of monitoring or teaching a child as they grow up. I know, we could appoint one or two adults who would be responsible for looking after the child, teaching them right from wrong, preventing them from doing some things, encouraging them to do other things.

And I suggest this be named "parenting".

I'm pretty sure this would work out much better for everyone instead of having a secret list of web sites you can't access without gov't permission.

I wonder what the percentage of blocked sites is that don't actually have most people would consider "porn" on them is up to on this secret list? 10%? 20%?

Re:You can switch it off.

[Xest]

Yep, switched mobile provider lately and got opted in. Went to a news story about some new Lego product, clicked the link to view pics of it

YOUR ADULT CONTENT FILTER PROHIBITS YOU FROM VIEWING THIS MATERIAL

Lego. Fucking Lego for god damn sake. I cannot fucking view pictures of a Lego set, because of a fucking opt out porn filter I never wanted.

All opt-out filters must fucking die.