Child Porn Blacklist Group Claims Its Approach Is Working, But There Are Lots Of Questions

from the fun-with-self-reported-statistics dept

The Internet Watch Foundation, keeper of the UK's child-porn blacklist that's used to block access to offending sites (as well as other innocuous ones), has released some new stats saying that it's seen a reduction in the number of child porn sites in the last year. However, sort of like the group's methodology, the figure has quite a few holes. The figure is apparently based on "domains known to the IWF", which is a fairly subjective, and hardly comprehensive, criteria. Also, given the way that the IWF has blocked the likes of Wikipedia and the Internet Archive, how many sites that aren't actually child-porn sites are included in that number? But perhaps more damning is the rest of the report, which highlights just how ineffective the IWF's blacklist really is at tackling the root of the problem. It's well-established that these sorts of filters don't work, despite the IWF implying it can take credit for reducing the number of child porn sites. The IWF says that less than one percent of the sites can be traced to hosts in the UK, and that a huge portion of the commercial sites it's found can be traced back to just ten domain registrars. This illustrates how non-filter solutions, such as working through these registrars to track down child-porn hosts and producers, promise a more effective solution to the real problem -- the production and sharing of the images. Trying to stop consumption via filters really just masks the issue, despite claims that by cutting off demand, the market will shrink. That might work, if the filters actually worked. The IWF does offer some suggestions for more comprehensive solutions to tackle the problem, but as long as it keeps "Public/private partnership involving service providers working through a system of self-regulation" -- basically its current model of getting ISPs to use its blacklist -- at the top of the list, it seems doomed to ineffectiveness.

Filed Under: blacklist, uk
Companies: internet watch foundation

Inside The UK's Web Blacklist Keeper

from the sounds-like-a-fun-job dept

The BBC's Rory Clellan-Jones (the same guy whose YouTube vid of a soccer match he filmed got yanked) has taken an interesting look inside the Internet Watch Foundation, the organization that runs the UK's child-porn blacklist. The piece does little to counter the negative press the IWF has received in light of its misguided blocks on Wikipedia and the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine, with the group's CEO appearing to gloss over the failures because he doesn't "want to dwell" on them, instead trying to hide behind the moral cover of stopping child porn. But the group's efforts on that front don't appear to be particularly fruitful, either: one of its "analysts" who looks into complaints the group receives about images online says that few of the images it finds are in the UK, so it just reports them to sister groups in the countries where they are hosted, if such groups exist. The aim of the IWF -- to stop child porn -- is laudable, but its techniques, and their collateral damage, leave much to be desired.

Filed Under: blacklist, censor, internet watch, uk
Companies: internet watch foundation

British Charities Discover Web Filters Don't Work

from the figuring-it-out dept

A number of British children's charities are complaining that some ISPs in the country aren't using the Internet Watch Foundation's blacklist to "block" access to child porn. Firms providing some 5% of the country's broadband connections haven't implemented the blacklist, either because they recognize that it doesn't work, or because of the expense. Keep in mind this is the same blacklist that blocked Wikipedia and screwed up UK edits of the site, and also blocked the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine. The charities say that households connected by the non-conforming ISPs have "easy access" to child porn, but given the long history of filters and blacklists of not actually working, it's hard to imagine that the filters have a significant effect beyond breaking access to noninfringing content. There's no doubt that child porn is reprehensible, but by presenting the blacklist as the be-all, end-all solution, these charities risk pulling attention and resources away from better solutions. After all, blocking consumption of child porn seems a less satisfying solution than working to stop its production.

Filed Under: charities, filters, uk
Companies: internet watch foundation

British Net Filter Now Says No To The Wayback Machine

from the if-you-can-read-this... dept

Last month, the Internet Watch Foundation, which maintains a child porn blacklist used by British ISPs, gained some attention after it blocked a Wikipedia page, making it impossible for UK web surfers to make any edits to the online encyclopedia. While they later relented, the episode highlighted the folly of trying to use blacklists and filters to limit access to certain online content. The IWF is back in the news this week, and it's being blamed for blocking access to the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine, an online store of old web pages. But unlike the Wikipedia episode, only users on some IWF blacklist-using ISPs are having the problem. Perhaps that's a bit better than a blanket ban, but once again, it provides a perfect illustration of why blacklists and filters often do much more harm than good. Are British child-porn surfers really being stopped by the blacklist? That's very doubtful. Meanwhile, plenty of people trying to access harmless content are being effected.

Filed Under: filters, uk, wayback machine
Companies: internet watch foundation

Online Watchdog Admits It Goofed On Wikipedia Ban; Reverses Decision

from the a-bit-late-for-that dept

After being subject to widespread ridicule for forcing Wikipedia in the UK to block a page for an album cover graphic from 32 years ago, the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) has withdrawn its block on the page and said it's fine. Apparently "given the age and availability of the image," the group no longer thinks it's appropriate to be on the list. Of course, the age and availability of the image was true before. Though, if anything, this attempt at blocking the image only made the image more available.

Filed Under: ban, wikipedia
Companies: internet watch foundation