<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Denmark&#8217;s net censorship blacklist published on WikiLeaks</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/denmark-net-censorship-blacklist/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/denmark-net-censorship-blacklist/</link>
	<description>Australian Censorship Discussion Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 20:37:20 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tom</title>
		<link>http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/denmark-net-censorship-blacklist/comment-page-1/#comment-6780</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:32:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/?p=2068#comment-6780</guid>
		<description>Bob&#039;s ping tests are meaningless.  Just because you can ping a hostname doesn&#039;t mean that they are running a web server, just that there is a machine out there somewhere that is responding to pings.  In addition, it is common security practice to not respond to pings, since crackers can use pings to perform denial of service attacks.  If I were running a site to which people might object, I would definitely not give attackers a potential weapon again me by responding to pings.

A more meaningful test would have to tested for a running web server by attempting to connect to port 80 on those hosts, but even this method isn&#039;t foolproof.  This wouldn&#039;t have to mean viewing the content of the pages, as there are tools that can be employed to verify a service listening on a port without viewing the page.  At least if you had employed this type of test, the numbers might have been more meaningful.  As they stand, they are not even worth considering.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bob&#8217;s ping tests are meaningless.  Just because you can ping a hostname doesn&#8217;t mean that they are running a web server, just that there is a machine out there somewhere that is responding to pings.  In addition, it is common security practice to not respond to pings, since crackers can use pings to perform denial of service attacks.  If I were running a site to which people might object, I would definitely not give attackers a potential weapon again me by responding to pings.</p>
<p>A more meaningful test would have to tested for a running web server by attempting to connect to port 80 on those hosts, but even this method isn&#8217;t foolproof.  This wouldn&#8217;t have to mean viewing the content of the pages, as there are tools that can be employed to verify a service listening on a port without viewing the page.  At least if you had employed this type of test, the numbers might have been more meaningful.  As they stand, they are not even worth considering.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ACMA blacklists Wikileaks page - Somebody Think Of The Children</title>
		<link>http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/denmark-net-censorship-blacklist/comment-page-1/#comment-4115</link>
		<dc:creator>ACMA blacklists Wikileaks page - Somebody Think Of The Children</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 12:34:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/?p=2068#comment-4115</guid>
		<description>[...] It has been revealed that ACMA has blacklisted a page on Wikileaks.org that contains a leaked copy of the Danish blacklist of banned websites. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] It has been revealed that ACMA has blacklisted a page on Wikileaks.org that contains a leaked copy of the Danish blacklist of banned websites. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Bain</title>
		<link>http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/denmark-net-censorship-blacklist/comment-page-1/#comment-3399</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Bain</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 04:43:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/?p=2068#comment-3399</guid>
		<description>And on further analysis 

367 AU = 363 to one IP Address registered in San Diego California

 + 1 AU registered in Melbourne
 + 3 AU registered in Melbourne

 363 + 1 + 3 = 367 - ip addresses that is 

 ( recap 363 registered in San Diego California and 2 in Australia )

  Bob</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And on further analysis </p>
<p>367 AU = 363 to one IP Address registered in San Diego California</p>
<p> + 1 AU registered in Melbourne<br />
 + 3 AU registered in Melbourne</p>
<p> 363 + 1 + 3 = 367 &#8211; ip addresses that is </p>
<p> ( recap 363 registered in San Diego California and 2 in Australia )</p>
<p>  Bob</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Bain</title>
		<link>http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/denmark-net-censorship-blacklist/comment-page-1/#comment-3398</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Bain</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 03:38:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/?p=2068#comment-3398</guid>
		<description>&quot;367 of the censored domains are hosted in Australia.&quot;

...but only 3 if you use unique IP Addresses

Here&#039;s a country by country by unique IP address from the list provided (404 unique IP addresses on that geographic region list)

US 	252
NL 	 27
DE 	 18
CA 	 17
KR 	 12
RU 	 11
GB 	 10
CN 	  8
CZ 	  5
FR 	  4
SE 	  4
AU 	  3
DK 	  3
ES 	  3
JP 	  3
RO 	  3
BS 	  2
BZ 	  2
HK 	  2
PT 	  2
A2 	  1
AF 	  1
AT 	  1
BV 	  1
CY 	  1
IL 	  1
IT 	  1
MX 	  1
NO 	  1
SA 	  1
SK 	  1
TW 	  1
UA 	  1

Total   404

 I estimated 587 unique IP addresses in the &quot;host name resolves to IP address&quot; category.  There&#039;s 404 of them listed by geographic location.  

Of the 1463 marked ?? 1298 are on my &quot;cannot resolve to host name list&quot;

Only 3 in Australia.  The majority are seemingly located in the US (252).

  Bob</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;367 of the censored domains are hosted in Australia.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8230;but only 3 if you use unique IP Addresses</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s a country by country by unique IP address from the list provided (404 unique IP addresses on that geographic region list)</p>
<p>US 	252<br />
NL 	 27<br />
DE 	 18<br />
CA 	 17<br />
KR 	 12<br />
RU 	 11<br />
GB 	 10<br />
CN 	  8<br />
CZ 	  5<br />
FR 	  4<br />
SE 	  4<br />
AU 	  3<br />
DK 	  3<br />
ES 	  3<br />
JP 	  3<br />
RO 	  3<br />
BS 	  2<br />
BZ 	  2<br />
HK 	  2<br />
PT 	  2<br />
A2 	  1<br />
AF 	  1<br />
AT 	  1<br />
BV 	  1<br />
CY 	  1<br />
IL 	  1<br />
IT 	  1<br />
MX 	  1<br />
NO 	  1<br />
SA 	  1<br />
SK 	  1<br />
TW 	  1<br />
UA 	  1</p>
<p>Total   404</p>
<p> I estimated 587 unique IP addresses in the &#8220;host name resolves to IP address&#8221; category.  There&#8217;s 404 of them listed by geographic location.  </p>
<p>Of the 1463 marked ?? 1298 are on my &#8220;cannot resolve to host name list&#8221;</p>
<p>Only 3 in Australia.  The majority are seemingly located in the US (252).</p>
<p>  Bob</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ole Husgaard</title>
		<link>http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/denmark-net-censorship-blacklist/comment-page-1/#comment-3396</link>
		<dc:creator>Ole Husgaard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2008 20:47:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/?p=2068#comment-3396</guid>
		<description>I just checked how many of the domains in the leaked list are still censored by querying a censoring danish DNS server.

Today 3859 of the 3863 domains are still censored. The four domains no longer censored are: loplz.com, rahman.fw.nu, realymodels.net and www.lolaa.nm.ru.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just checked how many of the domains in the leaked list are still censored by querying a censoring danish DNS server.</p>
<p>Today 3859 of the 3863 domains are still censored. The four domains no longer censored are: loplz.com, rahman.fw.nu, realymodels.net and <a href="http://www.lolaa.nm.ru" rel="nofollow">http://www.lolaa.nm.ru</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ole Husgaard</title>
		<link>http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/denmark-net-censorship-blacklist/comment-page-1/#comment-3394</link>
		<dc:creator>Ole Husgaard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2008 18:11:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/?p=2068#comment-3394</guid>
		<description>Somebody has now used geolocation software to find out in which countries the censored domains are hosted: https://secure.wikileaks.org/wiki/User:Chlor/dklist

367 of the censored domains are hosted in Australia.

While the Danish police is refusing to talk about the procedures involved with their censorship, I suspect that they never notify the authorities in the country where a censored domain is hosted.

Perhaps you could get confirmation of this by asking australian police if they know about these 367 domains?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Somebody has now used geolocation software to find out in which countries the censored domains are hosted: <a href="https://secure.wikileaks.org/wiki/User:Chlor/dklist" rel="nofollow">https://secure.wikileaks.org/wiki/User:Chlor/dklist</a></p>
<p>367 of the censored domains are hosted in Australia.</p>
<p>While the Danish police is refusing to talk about the procedures involved with their censorship, I suspect that they never notify the authorities in the country where a censored domain is hosted.</p>
<p>Perhaps you could get confirmation of this by asking australian police if they know about these 367 domains?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Syd Walker</title>
		<link>http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/denmark-net-censorship-blacklist/comment-page-1/#comment-3382</link>
		<dc:creator>Syd Walker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Dec 2008 22:15:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/?p=2068#comment-3382</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the clarification Ole. I did have some initial doubts, but my second post on this thread indicated that I think it is probably genuine.

I&#039;ll use this opposrtunity to clear up another error in my earlier post. For some reason I misread the total number of URLs on the list and cited a total of 1,300 instead of 3863. Apologies. 

Bob Bain&#039;s ping tests are useful info, but of course say nothing about the actual content of those sites that return a +ve result. My guess is that the great majority are not live sites with real content. Even a year ago, many of them were probably dead, given the Wayback results I got on a small sample.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the clarification Ole. I did have some initial doubts, but my second post on this thread indicated that I think it is probably genuine.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll use this opposrtunity to clear up another error in my earlier post. For some reason I misread the total number of URLs on the list and cited a total of 1,300 instead of 3863. Apologies. </p>
<p>Bob Bain&#8217;s ping tests are useful info, but of course say nothing about the actual content of those sites that return a +ve result. My guess is that the great majority are not live sites with real content. Even a year ago, many of them were probably dead, given the Wayback results I got on a small sample.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ole Husgaard</title>
		<link>http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/denmark-net-censorship-blacklist/comment-page-1/#comment-3378</link>
		<dc:creator>Ole Husgaard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Dec 2008 13:43:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/?p=2068#comment-3378</guid>
		<description>Syd Walker has expressed some doubt if the list is genuine. I can tell that danish police has confirmed to danish press that this indeed is the censor list though an old one (from february this year). If you understand danish, the confirmation can be seen here: http://www.computerworld.dk/art/49524/

Most of the entries in the published list still exist in the current list, even when there is no website behind the domain name.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Syd Walker has expressed some doubt if the list is genuine. I can tell that danish police has confirmed to danish press that this indeed is the censor list though an old one (from february this year). If you understand danish, the confirmation can be seen here: <a href="http://www.computerworld.dk/art/49524/" rel="nofollow">http://www.computerworld.dk/art/49524/</a></p>
<p>Most of the entries in the published list still exist in the current list, even when there is no website behind the domain name.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Bain</title>
		<link>http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/denmark-net-censorship-blacklist/comment-page-1/#comment-3356</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Bain</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Dec 2008 02:53:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/?p=2068#comment-3356</guid>
		<description>ok a bit more work on this...

483 + 369 = 852 (arithmetical error yesterday)

On testing the 369 for duplicates I find there are only 110 unique IP addresses so the possible number is reduced to 483 + 110 = 593 IP Addresses.

However combining all the IP addressed which resolved to a host and eliminating duplicates indicates that there are 587 IP Addresses returned as &quot;resolved&quot; from the list of URLs.

In summary URLs that do not resolve to a host name = 1320

Of those that resolve to a host name there are just 587 unique IP addresses within the list of URLs and presumably the majority of these could be contacted.  

At least one is said to be legal content.  I can&#039;t comment on the remaining 586 as I&#039;m not addressing content - only the ability to resolve a given URL to an IP Address and testing the uniqueness of that IP Address in the list.

 In Summary:

According to my results there are 587 contactible domains in the list (of which 1 is said to be legal) and 1320 non-contactible domains in the list (including a .com.au domain which isn&#039;t currently registered)

 Bob</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ok a bit more work on this&#8230;</p>
<p>483 + 369 = 852 (arithmetical error yesterday)</p>
<p>On testing the 369 for duplicates I find there are only 110 unique IP addresses so the possible number is reduced to 483 + 110 = 593 IP Addresses.</p>
<p>However combining all the IP addressed which resolved to a host and eliminating duplicates indicates that there are 587 IP Addresses returned as &#8220;resolved&#8221; from the list of URLs.</p>
<p>In summary URLs that do not resolve to a host name = 1320</p>
<p>Of those that resolve to a host name there are just 587 unique IP addresses within the list of URLs and presumably the majority of these could be contacted.  </p>
<p>At least one is said to be legal content.  I can&#8217;t comment on the remaining 586 as I&#8217;m not addressing content &#8211; only the ability to resolve a given URL to an IP Address and testing the uniqueness of that IP Address in the list.</p>
<p> In Summary:</p>
<p>According to my results there are 587 contactible domains in the list (of which 1 is said to be legal) and 1320 non-contactible domains in the list (including a .com.au domain which isn&#8217;t currently registered)</p>
<p> Bob</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Bain</title>
		<link>http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/denmark-net-censorship-blacklist/comment-page-1/#comment-3344</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Bain</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Dec 2008 08:31:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/?p=2068#comment-3344</guid>
		<description>I would like to clarify the count above:-

 1320 URL&#039;s return &quot;Ping request could not find host&quot;

 2174 URL&#039;s return &quot;Reply from IP Address&quot; (immediate response to the ping&quot;)

  369 URL&#039;s return &quot;Request timed out&quot; after identifying an IP Address.  As the test was limited to a single ping it may be that the response was slow or being blocked.

 Interestingly the 2174 URL&#039;s resolve to just 483 unique IP Addresses.  I&#039;m not sure what that means other than that it&#039;s possible the list is actually much smaller than it appears on the surface.

 So we have 1320 that don&#039;t resolve to an IP address and presumably can&#039;t be contacted, 483 unique IP addresses representing 2174 URLs, and 369 URLs that were &quot;timed out&quot;.

 So after this the list represents possibly 483 + 369 =   842 [could be] unique IP Addresses.  If there are also duplicates in the 369 the number of active IP addresses on the list could be smaller than 842.

 That&#039;s somewhat smaller than 3863.

  Bob</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would like to clarify the count above:-</p>
<p> 1320 URL&#8217;s return &#8220;Ping request could not find host&#8221;</p>
<p> 2174 URL&#8217;s return &#8220;Reply from IP Address&#8221; (immediate response to the ping&#8221;)</p>
<p>  369 URL&#8217;s return &#8220;Request timed out&#8221; after identifying an IP Address.  As the test was limited to a single ping it may be that the response was slow or being blocked.</p>
<p> Interestingly the 2174 URL&#8217;s resolve to just 483 unique IP Addresses.  I&#8217;m not sure what that means other than that it&#8217;s possible the list is actually much smaller than it appears on the surface.</p>
<p> So we have 1320 that don&#8217;t resolve to an IP address and presumably can&#8217;t be contacted, 483 unique IP addresses representing 2174 URLs, and 369 URLs that were &#8220;timed out&#8221;.</p>
<p> So after this the list represents possibly 483 + 369 =   842 [could be] unique IP Addresses.  If there are also duplicates in the 369 the number of active IP addresses on the list could be smaller than 842.</p>
<p> That&#8217;s somewhat smaller than 3863.</p>
<p>  Bob</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
