Recommendation in Australia for ISPs to force user security?

Franck Martin franck at
Tue Jun 22 19:55:37 UTC 2010

You forgot to talk about a tax on all of that too... ;)

Note the Great Firewall of Australia is slowly going down in flames...

Now, there are two options, fight these type of proposals (resources spent to avoid something and make political enemies) or encourage the proposal by Netherlands and France to put Internet Freedom as a basic right for democracies:

</end of politics>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Deepak Jain" <deepak at>
To: "Joel Jaeggli" <joelja at>, "Gadi Evron" <ge at>
Cc: nanog at
Sent: Wednesday, 23 June, 2010 7:17:16 AM
Subject: RE: Recommendation in Australia for ISPs to force user security?

Come on, you aren't thinking gov't-enough.

"BASIC" broadband access will be a SSH/web-only proxy with firewalling/antivirus/etc capability. That whole pesky HTTP/1.0 problem was solved a long time ago. Maybe you don't even get your own IP anymore -- and you have to access your email through their web portal too. This also qualifies you as net-neutral in that everyone gets the same poor service. Only content providers that sign an agreement to be free of virii and malware (with an appropriate "inspection/sanitization" charge will be let through... e.g. Netflix or whomever) -- this way, you aren't being made to differentiate between bits, you are being made to ensure national security.

"BUSINESS" broadband access might give you a real IP, allow you to torrent, but you sign a piece of paper that authorizes them to charge you if you get infected, or better yet, a maintenance plan of a $24.95/month on top of your service to make sure you don't get infected with a remotely managed firewall/router or whatever will meet the definition of the regulation.

This can be solved so fast it'll make your head spin. Build a big proxy "cloud", send everyone 60 days notice once the regulation comes in effect, on day 61 throw the switch. Day 62, collect orders for the upgraded service. *PROFIT*

My only shock is that Washington isn't leading Canberra on this, with an even faster timeline than the one above.


More information about the NANOG mailing list