Web blocking in the United Kingdom

src: webjobposting.com

The exact number of websites that are blocked in the United Kingdom is unknown. Blocking techniques vary from one Internet service provider (ISP) to another with certain sites or URLs that are blocked by multiple ISPs and not others. Websites and services are blocked using a combination of data feeds from private content control technology companies, government agencies, NGOs, court orders along with service administrators who may or may not have the power to unblock, block, request or redo blocking of content.

Video Web blocking in the United Kingdom

Ikhtisar

There are a number of different web blocking programs in the UK. High standard ISP filters and IWF filters have been referred to as "pornwall", "porn filters", "Hadrian's Firewall", "Great Firewall of Britain" and "Great Firewall of Cameron". But such programs are usually called interchangeable or individually rather than collectively.

Inciting racial hatred has been removed from the grant of IWF on the establishment of the police website for the purpose of April 2011.

The technical steps used to block sites including DNS hijacking, DNS blocking, IP address blocking, and Deep packet inspection, make verification consistently problematic. One known method is the ISP scans DNS from domains that are subject to blocking commands to generate IP lists to be blocked.

The Open Rights group has proposed the addition of a new '451' HTTP status code to help streamline and add transparency to the determination process when a site is blocked.

Maps Web blocking in the United Kingdom

Active program

Copyright

Court-ordered block

This is a procedure established in the UK for rights holders to use the 'Section 97' court order to ask the ISP to block sites that infringe copyrights. For example, a court order obtained by BPI in October 2013 resulted in the blocking of 21 file-sharing sites including FilesTube and Torrentz. In principle, there is a private agreement between a reputable ISP and rights holder, made with government encouragement, to restrict access to websites quickly when presented by court order. Court orders are not published and "overblocking" is sometimes reported, such as the accidental blocking of Radio Times, Crystal Palace F.C., Taylor Swift, and over 100 other websites in August 2013.

This practice stems from a court order applied to a copyright infringement incident issued by the Film Image Association in December 2010 at the request of Hollywood studios. The Association submitted an order to block access to NewzBin2, a site that provides search services for UseNet content, indexes downloaded copyrighted content including movies and other shared materials without permission. The application is filed against BT, the largest Internet service provider in the UK with around six million subscribers. It takes BT to use Cleanfeed to block its customers access to the site. In July 2011, the High Court gave the order and in October 2011 BT was ordered to block access to the website within fourteen days, the first decision of its kind under English copyright law. Set precedents are described by the Open Rights Group as "dangerous". BT did not appeal against the verdict and placed the necessary block on November 2, 2011. The next attempt to access the site from the BT IP address was met with the message "Error - blocked sites". Newzbin released client software to avoid blocking BT, using encryption and Tor network. Newzbin claims that more than 90% of its active users in the UK have downloaded the software to make the BT block ineffective. However, further court orders resulted in Sky blocking access to Newzbin in December 2011 and Virgin Media blocked access to the site in August 2012. On November 28, 2012, Newzbin announced the closing of the indexing service.

Meanwhile, in May 2012, the High Court ordered the blocking of The Pirate Bay by the British ISP to prevent further copyright infringement on movies and music downloads from websites. The bloc is said to be quickly passed and a Pirate Party spokesman said public interest in the service after the ban had increased traffic to the party's website. In December 2012, the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) threatened legal action against The Pirate Party after the party refused a request sent in late November to remove their proxy to The Pirate Bay.

In September 2013, an Ofcom survey revealed that 2% of Internet users are responsible for 74% of all downloads that infringe copyright in the UK, and that 29% of all downloads are content that infringes copyright.

In October 2014, the first blocking order against trademark infringing consumer goods was violated against major UK ISPs by Richemont, Cartier International, and Montblanc to block multiple domains.

ISP Default network blockage

Internet customers in the UK are prohibited from accessing websites by default, as they have Internet access filtered by their ISPs. The filtering program has been applied to new ISP customers since late 2013, and has been expanded to existing users on a rolling basis. Voluntary practice codes approved by the four major ISPs mean that customers must 'opt out' from ISP filtering to gain access to blocked content. However, the complex nature of an active monitoring system means that users typically can not opt â€‹â€‹out of monitoring and re-routing from their data traffic, something that can create their data security vulnerabilities. The range of content blocked by an ISP may vary from time to time.

History

The idea of â€‹â€‹default screening comes from a manifesto commitment to "childhood commercialization and sexualization" provided by the parties that formed the Cameron-Clegg coalition government in 2010. This was followed by a review (Review of Bailey) and consultations by the Council of England for Child Internet Security (UKCCIS). The campaign by Claire Perry MP and the Daily Mail newspaper generated significant public support for the idea of â€‹â€‹Internet filtering for child protection purposes. By 2013 there has been considerable application of home screening, with 43% of homes with children aged 5-15 having filters installed on their family computers. However, Prime Minister David Cameron explained in July 2013 that the goal is to ensure that by the end of 2013 all ISPs will have an on-site filtering system. As a result, three of the major ISPs (TalkTalk, Sky, and BT) began applying default filtering to new customers in 2013 with the fourth major ISP, Virgin, doing it in February 2014. Customers default filtering is implemented by all four major ISPs during 2014 with the aim of ensuring that systems are applied to 95% of all households by the end of the year.

TalkTalk already has content control software available to meet government requirements. Their InternetSafe filtering system was introduced in May 2011 as an opt-in product and used for filtering new customer standards starting March 2012. HomeSafe is praised by Cameron and is controlled and operated by a Chinese company Huawei. After initial rejection, other ISPs should assign a new filtration system to meet Government demand. Some smaller ISPs expressed their reluctance to take part in screening, citing concerns over civilian costs and freedoms but the government stated: "We expect smaller ISPs to follow the guidelines set by larger providers". Cameron said ISPs should choose their own preferred technical solution, but will be monitored to ensure proper screening. However, ISP Andrews and Arnold do not censor their Internet connections, all of their broadband packages guarantee 12 months notice should start censoring traffic.

In July 2014 Ofcom released a report into the implementation and effectiveness of filters across the ISP's fixed-line. At that time Big 4 The major fixed-line ISPs made up 93% of the broadband market. All of them require that filters be enabled as default for new customers, but overall retrieval numbers are low, with BT (5%), Sky (8%) and Virgin (4%). That number is higher for TalkTalk (36%) because there has been a significant uptake of the system over the previous three years. The industry average is 13%. In January 2015 Sky went a step further, blocking all material deemed unsuitable for children under the age of 13 for one of its five million customers who have not opted out. In the same month, Talk Talk announced that customers who did not choose whether to activate the company's filtering system had to opt out if they wanted to turn it off. In January 2016 Sky started sending all new and existing email customers asking if they would like to enable filters. Customers who ignore emails have filters turned on automatically.

Legal status

The initial legal status of ISP web blocking is voluntary, although there are a number of attempts to introduce legislation to move it to a mandatory step. David Cameron first announced the law in July 2013 but the default filtering was rejected at the September 2013 conference of the Liberal Democrats (small partner of the Coalition Government) and no Government law for this effect occurred during the 2010-15 Parliament.

Prior to the 2015 United Kingdom election, both the opposition Labor Party and the ruling Conservative Party said that, if elected, they would draft legislation on this issue. Labor says it will introduce mandatory filters based on BBFC ratings if it believes that voluntary screening by ISPs has failed. Conservatives say they will provide independent regulators such as ATVOD force law to force internet service providers to block sites that fail to enter effective age verification. The Digital Economy Act 2017 places requirements for ISP screening into law and introduces requirements for ISPs to block pornographic sites with inadequate age verification.

Proposals for creating a single digital market for EU member states (EU) include rules for net neutrality. These rules require that all internet traffic should be treated equally, without blocking or slowing certain data. The net neutrality guidelines were announced in August 2016 by the European Electronic Communications Regulatory Agency. It is estimated that the rule could limit the legality of ISP screening after 2016. In May 2014, the government advised to veto European net neutrality legislation because of its conflict with web blocking programs. In May 2015, a leaked EU Council document on the topic of net neutrality suggested users should select a block, rather than opt-out according to the current UK government plan. John Carr of the British Council for Children's Internet Security said about the proposal: "The main board of the UK approach to child protection online will be destroyed by stroke". However, the requirement that the UK government adhere to EU rules on net neutrality may disappear at some point in the future when Britain leaves the EU.

Overblocking

"Extensive over-masses" have been inadvertently observed since ISP standard filtering was introduced in late 2013. Legitimate sites are regularly blocked by filters from some UK ISPs and mobile operators. In December 2013, the British Council for Internet Children Security meets with ISPs, charities, government agencies, BBFC and mobile phone operators to find ways to reduce blocking of youth education advice. In January 2014 UKCCIS began to build a whitelist of educational sites managed for blocked children. The goal is to provide a list to the ISP to allow blocking.

Examples of categories that are blocked are reported including:

sex education and sexual health advice
helps addiction to sex and pornography
support services for rape and domestic violence
child protection services
suicide prevention
libraries
parliament, government and politicians
medical advice

Identifying overly blocked sites is extremely difficult by the fact that ISPs do not provide a check tool to allow website owners to determine if their sites are blocked. In July 2014, the Open Rights Group launched its independent blocked.org.uk checking tool, the change of their mobile blocking site to report blocking details on various fixed line ISPs and mobile providers. The tool reveals that 19% of the 100,000 popular websites visited are blocked (with significant variations between ISPs) although the percentage of sites hosting legal pornographic material is estimated at about 4%.

Significant jams have also been found, with ISPs failing to block up to 7% of adult sites tested. A study commissioned by the European Commission's Safe Internet Program that tests parental controls shows that underblocking for adult content ranges from 5-35%.

Criticism

Likes

Supporters of Internet filtering support it primarily to combat early childhood sexization. The government believes that "broadband providers should consider automatically blocking sex sites, with individuals being asked to accept to receive them, rather than opting out and using parental computer controls available." In 2010, communications minister Ed Vaizey was quoted as saying, "It's a very serious matter, I think it's important that ISPs provide solutions to protect children."

Against

The Washington Post describes ISP filtering systems in the UK as creating "some tight restrictions on pornography in the Western world". There is no public scrutiny of the filtering list. This creates the potential for them to be expanded to impede dissent for political purposes, as has happened in some other countries. Cameron insists that Internet users will have the option to turn off the filter, but there is no law available to ensure that the option remains available.

In March 2014, President Diane Duke of the US-Based Speech Coalition opposed censorship rules at the London-sponsored Virgin Media conference. The discussion was titled "Switched on Families: Does the Online World Make Good Things Happen?". The panel includes government representatives such as Member of Parliament Claire Perry, members of the press, and open Internet supporters such as representatives of the British Council for Children's Internet Safety, Family Safety Online Institute, and Big Brother Watch. A report on the meeting was printed on The Guardian on March 5, 2014. Duke was quoted as saying, "Prime Minister Cameron's filters support the sexual health websites block, they block domestic violence sites, they block gays and lesbian sites, they block information about eating disorders and a lot of information that crucial young people need, instead of protecting children from things like bullying and online predators, these filters leave children in the dark. "

The Open Rights Group has been very critical of blocking programs, especially mobile blocking and ISP standard blocking. The magazine's New Statesman observes that overblocking means "the most vulnerable people in society are the most likely to be cut off from the help they need."

Blocked category

In July 2013, the Open Rights Group found from the ISP that various content categories will be blocked. Blocking has subsequently been detected in all categories listed by ISPs other than 'anorexia and feeding disorder sites' and 'esoteric materials'. More information is obtained after the launch of blocked.org.uk by the Open Rights Group, when TalkTalk provides additional detail about their default category being blocked and BT identifies their default filtering level (light).

Internet Mobile Blocking

British mobile phone operators began filtering internet content in 2004 when Ofcom published "English practice codes for setting up new content forms on mobile phones". It provides a way of classifying mobile Internet content to allow consistency in filtering. All major UK operators are now voluntarily filtering content by default. However, in October 2014 it was reported that the Minister was drafting legislation to force mobile operators to block access to adult sites unless the user proved they were 18 or older.

When users try to access blocked content, they are redirected to a warning page. It tells them that they can not access the 'more than 18 status' Internet sites and the filtering mechanism has restricted their access. Categories listed as blocked include: adult/sexually explicit, chat, criminal skills, drugs, alcohol and tobacco, gambling, hacking, hate, personal and dating, violence, and weapons. Adult users may have blocks deprived on request.

Guidelines issued by Independent Mobile Classification Bodies are used by mobile operators to classify sites until the UK Classification Film Board takes over responsibility by 2013. Classification determines whether content is appropriate for customers under 18 years old. The default assumption is that users are under 18 years of age.

The following content types must be blocked from 18 years down:

Suicide, self-harm, Pro-Anorexia and eating disorders
Discriminatory language
Encouragement for Drug Use
Repeated use/aggressive 'cunt'
Pornographic Restrictions
Violence and Gore Violations

Significant depletion of Internet sites by mobile operators is reported, including blocking political satire, feminism, and gay content. Research by Open Rights Group highlights the broad nature of unwarranted site blocking. In 2011, the group formed Blocked.org.uk, a website that allows reporting of 'blocked' sites and services on their mobile networks. Websites receive hundreds of blocking reports of sites that include blogs, business, internet privacy, and internet forums across multiple networks. The Open Rights Group also points out that correcting the wrong blocking of an innocent site can be difficult. There are no mobile operators in the UK that provide online tools to identify blocked websites. The O2 Site status checker is available until the end of 2013 but is suspended in December after widespread use to determine O2 blocking levels. Not only civil liberties and blocked computing sites, but also Childline, NSPCC, Police. Additional opt-in list services intended for users under 12 years old are provided by O2. The service only allows access to websites in the list of categories that are considered appropriate for that age group.

Internet Internet Watch Foundation

Introduction

Between 2004 and 2006, BT Group introduced Cleanfeed content blocking technology to implement 'section 97A' orders. BT spokeswoman Jon Carter described the Cleanfeed function as "to block access to illegal websites listed by the Internet Watch Foundation", and described it as essentially a server hosting a filter that checks the requested URL for a website on the IWF list, and returns a " Website not found "for a positive match. Cleanfeed is a silent content filtering system, which means that Internet users can not be sure whether they are set by Cleanfeed, have a connection failure, or if the page really does not exist. The proportion of Internet service providers using Cleanfeed in early 2006 was 80% and this increased to 95% by mid 2008. In February 2009, the Government said they were looking for a way to close the final 5%.

According to a small sample survey conducted in 2008 by Nikolaos Koumartzis, an MA researcher at the London College of Communication, the majority of UK-based Internet users (90.21%) are unaware of the existence of the Cleanfeed software. In addition, nearly two-thirds of the participants did not trust British Telecommunications or IWF to be responsible for the silent sensor system in the UK. Most prefer to see a message stating that a particular site is blocked and has access to a form to unblock certain sites.

Initially, Cleanfeed only targeted child sexual abuse content allegedly identified by the Internet Watch Foundation. However, there is no security to stop the secret list of expanded blocked sites to include sites unrelated to child pornography. This has led to criticisms of the lack of cleanfeed transparency that provides great potential for widespread censorship. Furthermore, Cleanfeed has been used to block access to websites that infringe copyright after a court order in 2011 requires BT to block access to NewzBin2. This has led some to describe Cleanfeed as the least visible sensor mechanism ever created and equate the power of its sensors to those currently used by China. There is a risk that increasing Internet regulation will cause the Internet to become more limited in the future.

Non-BT ISPs now implement a list of child abuse image content with their in-house technology to implement IWF blocking.

IWF/Wikipedia controversy

On December 5, 2008, the IWF system listed the Wikipedia article into the Scorpions album, Virgin Killer. A statement by the organization's spokesman alleged that the album cover, featured in the article, contained "illegal, potentially illegal images of a child under the age of 18". Major ISP users, including Virgin Media, Be/O2/TelefÃƒÆ'Ã‚Â³nica, EasyNet/UK Online, Satan and Opal, can not access content, even though album covers are available unfiltered on other major sites including Amazon.co.uk, and are available for sold in the UK. The system also starts to create user proxies, which access any Wikipedia article, through a limited number of servers, resulting in site administrators having to block them from editing Wikipedia or creating accounts. On December 9, IWF removed an article from its blacklist, stating: "The main purpose of IWF is to minimize the availability of indecent images of children on the Internet, but on this occasion our efforts have the opposite effect."

Public Wi-Fi

Most Internet access provided by Wi-Fi systems in public places in the UK is filtered out with many sites being blocked. Screening is done voluntarily by the six largest providers of public Wi-Fi: Arqiva, BT, Sky, Nomad Digital, Virgin and O2, which are jointly responsible for 90% of public Wi-Fi. Filtering was introduced as a result of an agreement enacted in November 2013 between the Government and Wi-Fi providers. Pressure from the Government and the British Council for Children's Internet Security has pushed Virgin and O2 to install filters on Wi-Fi systems in London Underground and McDonald's restaurants, but half of all public Wi-Fi networks remain unlisted by September 2013.

"Overblocking" is a reported issue with a public Wi-Fi filter. Research in September 2013 shows that poorly programmed filters block sites when banned tags appear by chance in unrelated words. Religious sites are blocked by nearly half of public Wi-Fi filters and sex education sites that are blocked by a third. As of November 2013, there were complaints about Gay site blocking unrelated to sex or nudity on public Wi-Fi provided by the railway carrier company. Filtering is done by third party organizations and this is criticized for being unidentified and unaccountable. The blocking may violate the Equalization Act 2010. The government is organizing the British Children's Internet Security Council to investigate whether filters block suggestions for young people in areas such as sex education.

Libraries and educational institutions

Many libraries in the UK such as the British Library and local public library authorities apply filters to Internet access. According to research conducted by Radical Librarians Collective, at least 98% of public libraries apply filters; including categories such as "LGBT interest", "abortion" and "questionable". Some public libraries block Payday loan websites and Lambeth Council has requested other public Wi-Fi providers to block these sites as well.

The majority of schools and colleges use filters to block access to sites containing adult content, gambling, and sites containing malware. YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter are often screened by schools. Some universities also block access to sites containing various materials. Many students often use a proxy server to skip this. Schools often censor students' Internet access to offer protection against perceived threats such as cyber-bullying and perceived risks of care by pedophiles; as well as keeping students' attention during IT lessons. Examples of overblocking exist within the school context. For example, in February 2014 the Yes Scotland pro-independence campaign website was blocked at the Glasgow school while the competing Better Together pro-partnership website was not blocked.

ISPs Win UK Case on Website Blocking Costs

src: trademarksandbrands.corsearch.com

Programs planned

Extremism

The Internet Anti-Terrorism Referral Unit (CTIRU), established in 2010 by the Chief Police Officers Association and run by the Metropolitan Police Service, maintains a list of sites and content that in their opinion incite or extoll the terrorist acts under Part 3 of the Terrorism Act 2006. This list is forwarded to public housing agencies so that access to these sites can be blocked. BT, Sky, TalkTalk, and Virgin Media ISPs combine the CTIRU block list into their filters. CTIRU also issues a removal request if internet content is hosted in the UK. England is the only country in the world with such units.

The 2006 Home Office proposal in 2006 required ISPs to block access to "glamorizing terrorism" articles denied and the government chose the removal approach at that time. However, in December 2013, the Prime Minister's Extremism task force proposed that where the material is hosting overseas, the ISP must block these sites, and David Cameron orders that the CTIRU list be extended to the British ISP. The British government has defined extremism as: "Vocal or active opposition to UK fundamental values, including democracy, rule of law, individual freedom and mutual respect and tolerance to different beliefs and beliefs."

This approach to web blocking has been criticized for being extra-parliamentary and extrajudicial and a proactive process in which the authorities are actively seeking material forbidden. In addition, concerns have been expressed by ISPs and supporters of freedom of speech that these measures could lead to censorship of "extremist" but not illegal content. Indeed, British security minister James Brokenshire said in March 2014 that the government should also deal with "that may not be illegal but of course inappropriate and perhaps not the kind of material people want to see or accept".

Cloud web hosting services in UK | JPStream Internet

src: jpstream.net

Proposals not implemented

Social media and communications

On August 11, 2011, after widespread unrest in Britain, British Prime Minister David Cameron said Theresa May, home secretary, would meet with executives of Facebook and Twitter Web companies, and Research In Motion, the maker of BlackBerry smartphones, to discuss the steps possible to prevent troublemakers from using social media and other digital communication tools. During a special debate on the riots, Cameron told Parliament:

All those who watch these horrific acts will be surprised by how they are organized through social media. Free flow of information can be used for good. But it can also be used for pain. And when people use social media for violence, we need to stop them. So we are working with police, intelligence agencies and industry to see if it will be right to stop people communicating through these websites and services when we know they are planning violence, harassment and crime.

Critics say the British government is considering a policy similar to those criticized in totalitarian and one-party countries. And immediately after the unrest, Iran, often criticized by the West for limiting the Internet and restricting free speech, offered to "send human rights delegates to Britain to study human rights abuses in the country".

On August 25, 2011 UK officials and representatives from Twitter, Facebook and BlackBerry meet personally to discuss voluntary ways to limit or limit the use of social media to combat crime and periods of civil unrest. The government is looking for ways to crack down on networks used for criminal behavior, but does not seek additional strength and has no intention of restricting Internet services. It is not clear what new actions, if any, will be taken as a result of the meeting.

Private member billing

A private member bill that requires ISPs, mobile phone operators and equipment manufacturers to filter adult content introduced to House of Lords in May 2012 by Baroness Howe of Idlicote. The Online Security Bill is criticized for its potential to block any services that appear to provide mature content except on the Ofcom-approved list. The original bill was unsuccessful due to lack of Government support. It was reintroduced in May 2015 and failed for the second time.

In September 2014 as a proposed addition to UK legislation against porn vengeance, Geraint Davies MP introduced a personalized member bill that required devices that could access the Internet filtered by default at the threat of fine non-compliant manufacturers.

whereas if mobile phones, computers and other devices that have access to the internet are not sold in the default position without that access - that is, if the user has to activate it or contact the supplier - we can provide to the manufacturer

After the first reading of the bill there was no debate and the bill did not make any further progress.

Although this legislative approach does not work as a private member's bill, their actions may appear in the future Government Communication Bill.

src: i.ytimg.com

Technology

By ISP

The service provider will integrate some or all of its feed into a single device or stack of filtering, sometimes along with upstream providers that do additional filtering. The following content control technologies have been confirmed to be used to apply any type of web blocking (including virtual operators):

Rulespace and O2 are the only services known for categorizing and checking public checks.

With the type of feed

Is This the UK's 'Charlotte's Web' Moment? | Leafly

src: d3atagt0rnqk7k.cloudfront.net

Evasion

Site blocks can be avoided using trivial to complex methods such as Tor use, VPN, site-specific and general web proxies, and other avoiding techniques.

List of child abuse image contents

Because of the proxy server implementation of the IWF child image content content list (formally Cleanfeed), websites that filter users based on IP addresses, such as wikis and file lockers, will be significantly damaged, even if only a small fraction of its content. be marked.