On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 at 08:09, Lotia, Pratik M <pratik.lo...@charter.com> wrote:
> Hello all, was curious to know the community’s opinion on whether an ISP > should block domains hosting CPE (child pornography exploitation) content? > Interpol has a ‘worst-of’ list which contains such domains and it wants ISPs > to block it. > > On one side we want the ISP to not do any kind of censorship or inspection of > customer traffic (customers are paying for pipes – not for filtered pipes), > on the other side morals/ethics come into play. Keep in mind that if an ISP > is blocking it would mean that it is also logging the information (source IP) > and law agencies might be wanting access to it. > > Wondering if any operator is actively doing it or has ever considered doing > it? Some jurisdictions legally must, some legally cannot. It's very sensitive subject, with some reductio ad absurdum ghost hiding behind the corner. My thought is, if we know this data exists, and we know where it exists, why are we not following the data to find the people? It seems we're very good at putting leverage in AML/KYC across jurisdictions of arbitrary length, how come same tools don't seem to work here? If ISPs do start to block, voluntarily or involuntarily, are we removing incentives to fix the problem by hiding some of the symptoms? In my opinion leave the infrastructure alone, where ever the road may lead, removing the road won't remove the destination. Does the content create the culprits? Is there research into this? Are people with evolutionarily normal sexual appetites turned pedophiles after exposed to the material? -- ++ytti
