Friendly Fire on the Open Internet Front

You know something, there are a lot of us working to try and educate and inform our family, friends and communities about the dangers and inadequacies of the proposed mandatory ISP filtering scheme. We're actually talking to people, explaining the issues as they stand and answering questions.

We're also trying to get the media to move away from the over-simplistic "It's all about the Child Porn" angle to look at the real problems with the scheme.

All that work however is being hampered by the kind of activities conducted today by a group of people calling themselves Anonymous. In their wisdom, they decided that they needed to take more direct action. So, in the spirit of attacking censorship on the internet they declared they would be attempting a Denial of Service attack on a number of Government web sites, and at the same time conducting a "blackfax" campaign and other activities of a similar type against various Government offices.

In essence they were going to declare to the Australian government that any attempt to bring regulation  to the internet would be met with attacks on government infrastructure. 

This sort of short sighted ill thought out protest annoys me on a couple of levels. Firstly it cuts the ground out from under those of us who have been working for a long time to try and change this policy. By acting in such an irresponsible manner, Anonymous has given the media a sensational angle which has and will be used to counter the more cogent and reasoned arguments against the filter. Now, along side the infamous "If you're against the filter you must be for Child Porn" we'll have "Opponents against the filter are evil hackers only concerned with getting access to porn".

Secondly, speaking as a system-administrator and IT worker, these sort of attacks annoy the living hell out of me. The create work, not for the people responsible for the policy you are protesting against, but for the IT staff instead. Not only do they have to deal with the immediate effects of the protest (infrastructure issues and so on), but they also have to spend many hours after any such attack ensuring that nothing more sinister than a DoS was conducted against their infrastructure.

So in the end, Anonymous will have brought attention to themselves, created a link between the Open Internet movement and illegal protests and generally caused problems for everyone concerned.

If only they could get involved in the discussion rather than standing outside yelling obscenities.

Comments

Sadly true

I have to agree.  I work for the contractor who provides secure internet to a large government department, but I speak for myself in saying that this has not made any point at all.  It's inconvenienced us for an hour or two, but it's not going to make anyone in the minister's office change their mind - in fact it's probably proven to them that this attack would have been blocked if they'd only had the filter in place.  No-one's going to change any policies as a result of this childish tantrum.

There are two things that can possibly be seen as being useful out of this whole debacle.  Firstly, the use of faxes will have crudely made the point that an internet filter doesn't stop other forms of attack.  I don't think anyone in government would seriously suggest that we need to filter all faxes through a big filter at each phone company just in case someone sends naughty pictures via fax.  Sadly, it's actually a bit more possible to do this than to make an internet filter work the way the government says it should.

Secondly, once again it will have raised a bit more awareness, and hopefully a few more people will find out the actual realities of the proposed filtering.  Unfortunately, though, as you say it will most likely have polarised opinion away from a sensible, rational debate on the merits of the filter and toward blind belief that unless we get some kind of filtering in place we'll be plagued by crackers.

Have fun,

Paul