network cables

Your Guide to Surviving The Claire Perry Internet

The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.
-John Gilmore 1993

The Internet as we know it is experiencing some of the most damaging changes in its history.

The US National Security Agency and the UK’s GCHQ are undermining security and communications infrastructure at an unprecedented level, some of the ISPs we rely on are co-operating with Government plans to fundamentally interfere with packet routing, DNS resolution and end-to-end reachability in the name of “saving the Children” and “anti terrorism”.

With the launch of consumer Internet filtering people will experience the curtailment of access to information and levels of arbitrary censorship unseen in decades. With systems like CleanFeed and Deep Packet Inspection your ISPs will be able to silently limit what information you can reach if it has been deemed inappropriate, extreme, or even just esoteric.

Children and vulnerable adults will be prevented from accessing support networks, information websites and more. Overblocking will be the biggest barrier to information sharing in 2014.

The people to blame for this curtailment of rights, this assault on the freedom of information and the sleepwalk into censorship are David Cameron and Claire Perry. They are MPs, they are supposed to be accountable to us. Write to your MP and insist that these measures be reversed and prevented from happening again.

Until the blocks are repealed and outlawed this website will serve to help you evade ISP & Government blocks, avoid communications surveillance so you can utilise a free and open Internet as was envisaged.

Internet pornography petition

Smoking in Car Laws “Unenforceable” – Filtering the Internet? Easy.

Claire Perry tweeted today that she believes that laws about smoking with a Child in the car are unenforceable and “bad”.

By extension it follows that Ms Perry believes that laws about driving whilst drunk, driving whilst high, driving without a seatbelt and driving whilst using a mobile phone without hands free are also unenforceable “bad” laws.

This is the MP who thinks that the Internet can be filtered…

Internet pornography petition

Claire Perry Proves Once Again That She Has No Idea What She Is Talking About

Two days after internet porn-blocking campaigner MP Claire Perry announced ISP filters were not overblocking content, the government has announced it is.

On top of that Ms Perry consistently berates her constituents and steadfastly sticks to the story that filters aren’t overblocking;



Slippery Slope Part II – They make it law anyway

The ISPs tried pacifying opponents of UK Web Filtering by telling them they had to do it or David Cameron would legislate it anyway.

They backed down and co-operated. Only a few weeks after a Lord suggested it be mandatory an amendment has already been proposed to the Children and Families Bill;

Duty to provide an internet service that protects children

(1) Internet service providers must provide to subscribers an internet access service which excludes adult content unless all the conditions of subsection (3) have been fulfilled.

(2) Where mobile telephone operators provide a telephone service to subscribers which includes an internet access service, they must ensure this service excludes adult content unless all the conditions of subsection (3) have been fulfilled.

(3) The conditions are–
(a) the subscriber “opts-in” to subscribe to a service that includes adult content;
(b) the subscriber is aged 18 or over; and
(c) the provider of the service has an age verification policy which meets the standards set out by OFCOM in subsection (4) and which has been used to confirm that the subscriber is aged 18 or over before a user is able to access adult content.

(4) It shall be the duty of OFCOM to set, and from time to time to review and revise, standards for the–
(a) filtering of adult content in line with the standards set out in section 319 of the Communications Act 2003; and
(b) age verification policies to be used under subsection (3) before a user is able to access adult content.

(5) The standards set out by OFCOM under subsection (4) must be contained in one or more codes.

(6) It shall be the duty of OFCOM to establish procedures for the handling and resolution of complaints in a timely manner about the observance of standards set under subsection (4).

(7) In this section, internet service providers and mobile telephone operators shall at all times be held harmless of any claims or proceedings, whether civil or criminal, providing that at the relevant time, the internet access provider or the mobile telephone operator–
(a) was following the standards and code set out by OFCOM in subsection (4); and
(b) acting in good faith.

(8) In this section–

“adult content” means material which might seriously impair the physical, mental or moral development of persons under the age of eighteen;

“opts-in” means a subscriber notifies the service provider of his or her consent to subscribe to a service that includes adult content.”


You can read the full list of amendments here.


Sky Overblocks and takes out JQuery

ThinkBroadband (amongst others) has reported that Sky has yet again overblocked a website.

This time it was which a lot of other websites rely on to serve the well know Javascript frameworks core files from.

Things like this are bound to happen, were predicted to happen and will continue to happen, causing untold damage to businesses and people.

JQuery was temporary blocked this morning having been misclassified. Our review process kicked in shortly afterwards and the site was unblocked just over an hour later.Sky


From Mary Whitehouse to Book Burning in just one Year

A year ago today The Spectator ran an article in which Claire Perry said, in reference to online filters, that 

I’m in no way the Mary Whitehouse of thisClaire Perry

Well a year later and people are not only referring to her as that but putting her in the same category as the Stasi and book burners;


At one point the plan was for a filter that checks the age of the child browsing, rather than her original call for all users to opt-in to accessing adult content on their computer, which a government consultation rejected. Somehow, 12 months later, we have exactly that.

Despite criticism from the ISPs, celebrity advisors and the Internet at large Claire Perry is proud that the government is pushing ahead with these plans.

Regardless of what people tweet, history will look back at sources such as the BBC and Wikipedia where her name sits side by side with the words Internet Censorship.

Claire Perry, you’ve made the world slightly worse.


League of Legends patches intercepted by DPI / URL Filters has reported that patches being rolled out for League Of Legends has been blocked due to incidental filenames.

If your patcher logs show many lines like this:

RADS::Common::HTTPConnection::GetFile: File not found

And that happens with files with a name similar to this:



The cause is that your provider is blocking any URLs that contain any pornographic content. Apparently that includes cases like this. An other cause are Router protection settings, which may also block the word sex.

If you are experiencing this problem, you can try to get the whole LoL folder zipped from a friend every time you patch, or just call your ISP to lift the blockade.

Edit: This should only happen to people who switch or signup with new ISPs after a certain date (I’m assuming 1st Jan). The filter won’t be on by default to any existing customers, at least it won’t on BT, so most people will be unaffected. If the filter is on, all it takes is a call to your ISP and it’s off. (thanks to /u/mejti )

Edit2: Read this:

What is obviously quite scary about this revelation is that it means that this might not just be a simple URL or DNS based block but could be indicative of the far more intrusive Deep Packet Inspection technology rolled out by China and TalkTalk.

It’s not a long shot to fear that games will start breaking or gamers will get accused of cheating by software such as Steams VAC if ISPs start blocking data (e.g. chat messages or server instructions) that contain naughty words.


Lord asks “Shouldn’t Filters (that don’t work) be compulsory?”

On the same day that the BBC reports that “Children can turn off Net Filters” a LibDem Lord has asked whether the choice of filtering should be taken out of parents (read everyone’s) hands and be made compulsory

I also welcome the recognition by the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport of the need for adequate filtering to protect young people from online abuse. However, as was discussed in this House only recently with the Online Safety Bill of the noble Baroness, Lady Howe, should we not be making filtering compulsory? Is it enough simply to leave it up to parents to make the choice about appropriate safety features?Lord Clement-Jones

Within weeks of the filters that everyone predicted would herald a slippery slope to mandatory filtering with ever encroaching levels of censorship going online we’ve already started to slide.

Now more than ever you need to start teaching your friends and family how to survive the Claire Perry Internet.


Are BT & Sky Adopting Filters to Reboot Phorm?

Several years ago the UK Internet was tied up in an opt-in / opt-out battle about ISP proxies tracking your movements on-line to monetize advertising.

Now we have a new opt-in/opt-out battle but this time it is about ISP proxies tracking your movements on-line to prevent you seeing things you’re not allowed to see.

Could it be that the reasons the big ISPs rolled over so easily and implemented filters is that it provides them with a treasure trove of information about your browsing habits?

Notice how Phorm sit’s within the ISP network, masquerades as target domains and presents different content.

ISP filtering does similar things, they either spoof DNS responses to force you to goto their static block page or they manipulate routing within their network to route traffic destined for a remote host to a host within their network.

Technically there is nothing stopping them from doing other things with your traffic at this point. Are we to believe that having already silently tested Phorm on unsuspecting customers are they not capable of using this new found, Government instigated power to make some more money at the cost of your freedom and privacy?

Learning how to avoid Filters using tactics such as SSH Tunnels will render their filtering and monitoring moot.

Fight back.


More smackdowns for the UK Police / Government

TechDirt have reported that EasyDNS have been victorious in their pursuit of due process when it comes to seizure of Domains by the City of London Police.

As you may be aware, the City of London Police’s new intellectual property crime unit took it upon themselves to seize domains they believed were involved in copyright infringement and some registrars co-operated without even asking for a warrant or court order.

Thankfully EasyDNS had this to say;

Who decides what is illegal? What makes somebody a criminal?  Given that the subtext of the request contains a threat to refer the matter to ICANN if we don’t play along, this is a non-trivial question. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I always thought it was something that gets decided in a court of law, as opposed to “some guy on the internet” sending emails. While that’s plenty reason enough for some registrars to take down domain names, it doesn’t fly here.

We have an obligation to our customers and we are bound by our Registrar Accreditation Agreements not to make arbitrary changes to our customers settings without a valid FOA (Form of Authorization). To supersede that we need a legal basis. To get a legal basis something has to happen in court.

The request also suggests we look at the whois contact information for the domain (which looks perfectly valid) and go ahead and suspend the domain based on invalid whois data. Again, there’s a process for that, you have to go through the ICANN Whois Inaccuracy Complaint process and most of the time that doesn’t result in a takedown anyway.

What gets me about all of this is that the largest, most egregious perpetrators of online criminal activity right now are our own governments, spying on their own citizens, illegally wiretapping our own private communications and nobody cares, nobody will answer for it, it’s just an out-of-scope conversation that is expected to blend into the overall background malaise of our ever increasing serfdom.

If I can’t make various governments and law enforcement agencies get warrants or court orders before they crack my private communications then I can at least  require a court order before I takedown my own customer.EasyDNS

Sounds interestingly similar to Andrews & Arnold’s reasons as to why they don’t like blocks doesn’t it?

Backlash’s Moral Panic Film Club

Backlash’s Moral Panic Film Club

The guys and gals over at Backlash are holding a fundraiser to ensure they can continue to provide legal advice and specialist solicitors to the people that are turning to them for help.

Backlash is an umbrella organisation providing academic, legal and campaigning resources defending freedom of sexual expression. We support the rights of adults to participate in all consensual sexual activities and to watch, read and create any fictional interpretation of such in any mediaFrom the Backlash Website

The evening will consist of film, talks and round table discussions by specialists including our solicitors, external campaigners and academics, then music and drinks until closing time!

Click the link above or here to visit their website for more details.

Whilst not directly linked to the technical issues of ISP Filtering they are certainly caught up in the morale furore that MPs & the media keep inciting around sex, sexuality and the Internet.