Utah governor signs Net-porn bill

Tue Mar 22 18:17:18 UTC 2005

(Apparently I am more movd by the topic of saving porn than I ever
imagined... ;)  )

On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 09:39:39AM -0800, Kevin Oberman said something to the effect of:
> 
..snip snip..

> The law does not require that pr0n be blocked on customer request, only
> that access to a list of sites (addresses?) on a published list be
> blocked. A very different beast and a task that is not too onerous. No
> more so than SPAM RBLs and bogon address RBLs if handled properly.

In my opinion...

Actually, it still is pretty onerous, just not as bad as what was
suggested in the former interpretation.  Having come from the ISP pool
myself, I wouldn't want to have to manage this list.  Unlike bogons
and RBLs, this sort of thing isn't deployed globally, and would have to
be managed inconsistently across interfaces of those who request it.

Who will handle the requests?  Who will deploy the changes?  Should 
large ISPs' core networking teams be handling requests directly from
customers?  Will the same teams managing the requests be called in
during major infrastructure changes that might impact the deployment
of such a solution?  What liability will the ISP have if the block
list is mistakenly removed from a requester's inteface?  All very basic 
(and far from being a completel list) that suggest lost man hours to
deploy and maintain.

Perhaps if the government is interested in taking such a matter into
its own hands, an agency should be tasked with managing firewall
services for these customers, at its own (read: taxpayer :( ) cost.
If governing bodies are even going to *try* to legislate morality in
this realm, they are going to have to fund at least part of it, I 
would think...

--ra

> 
> Any chance that it will block access to pr0n? No. But, within the
> limited parameters of the law passed, it might be workable. This is not
> a claim that it is a reasonable law or that it will really serve to any
> end-user's benefit, only that it's not a huge issue for most ISPs. 
> 
> Of course, if it is upheld and lots of states jump on the bandwagon with
> similar legislation, the scalability of the system comes into question.
> There is going to be much hand wringing and gnashing of teeth when
> parents discover that it really doesn't work and the demand goes out for
> something "better". They will claim that the state promised, but they
> won't be taking legal action against the state. :-(
> -- 
> R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
> Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)
> Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab)
> E-mail: oberman at es.net			Phone: +1 510 486-8634

-- 
K. rachael treu, CISSP                            rara at navigo.com
               ..quis custodiet ipsos custodes?..
(this email has been brought to you by the letters 'v' and 'i'.)