Italy orders ISPs to block sites

Mailman List Mirror (Read Only)
1

It appears that Italy has ordered Italian ISPs to block access to a number of Internet Gambling sites. It would be interesting to see how the Italian ISPs are handling this, what with dynamic DNS and all that...

From Monsters and Critics.com

Tech News
Italy bans unauthorised online gambling sites
By DPA
Mar 3, 2006, 19:00 GMT

Rome - Italy has become the first European nation to outlaw scores of unauthorised gambling sites that are available on the Internet.

Italy\'s Economy Ministry has published a list of more than 600 offshore gaming sites that are in the process of being made unavailable to Italian internet users.

The list includes popular gambling sites such as 888.com, which is based in the Caribbean island of Antigua and which describes itself as \'the world\'s No. 1 online casino & poker room.\'

A spokesperson for Italy\'s State Monopolies told Deutsche Presse- Agentur dpa on Friday that Italian police were currently moving to prevent Italian internet providers from allowing connections to the banned sites. Internet providers that fail to comply face fines of up to 180,000 euros (216,000 dollars). ...

More available at http://tech.monstersandcritics.com/news/article_1134456.php

2

Rodney Joffe wrote:

It appears that Italy has ordered Italian ISPs to block access to a
number of Internet Gambling sites. It would be interesting to see how
the Italian ISPs are handling this, what with dynamic DNS and all that...

where is the world going to ? what's next: banning of foreign automobile
makers websites ?

3

This just means that there will be an offshore proxy market in the near
future.

Owen

4

It appears that Italy has ordered Italian ISPs to block access to a
number of Internet Gambling sites. It would be interesting to see how
the Italian ISPs are handling this, what with dynamic DNS and all
that...

So far, the method officially recommended by the government entity
involved with collecting the gambling fees has been to create fake
zones on the caching resolvers of the large consumer ISPs.

Operationally, I wonder how many ISPs will bother removing these zones
when the law will be repealed (because there is no chance that it will
stand before the european courts).

From a more practical POV, it can be noted that the obvious methods

useful to bypass the "block" (using a random open proxy or just a random
open resolver) have been widely advertised on gambling forums even
before it was implemented.
Personally I do not believe that the government ever believed that this
would work, it's just a trick to add some extra future earnings to the
2006 budget law.

5

good thing people use dns servers other than those put up by their ISP :slight_smile:
when last faced with this situation, State-of-PA ChildPorn Law... Null
routing the affected ip-addresses was the only 'good' solution :frowning:

-Chris

6

Singapore seems to force all of their ISPs to send all HTTP requests
through a proxy that has a set of rules defining sites you are not allowed
to visit.

Owen

7

As does (for example) the UAE, and China. But not Italy.

So this is quite moot, I expect.

Also - having all local cable / broadband / dialup providers do
something like this would cover the vast majority of internet users in
the country .. not too many people or companies are going to be
running their own resolvers, at least in a small country like Italy.

The numbers are likely to be trivially small as compared to the number
of people just using their ISP resolvers. So a fake zone loaded into
the resolvers redirecting these banned sites elsewhere should do just
fine, I guess.

8

Hi Folks across the ocean..

I understand, that from an American point of view this kind of restriction
looks strange and is against your act of freedom, however here in Europe
gambling is a state controlled business that supports the state economy and
in most European countries gambling outside state controlled casinos is
simply illegal and forbidden by law.
So I doubt, that the European Court would really rule agaist this....
Each country has specific laws, that othewr nations do not not understand
and we all should accept that.
Imagine, if kids in the US would be able to order Cannabis from Online-shops
in the Netherlands (as it is leaglized there)through mail order? Would you
or your legislation agree to that?

See..

I hope you don't mind this commentary from a European...

Tom

-----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht-----

9

actually, they -can- order it... its the delivery thats
  the hard part. :slight_smile: on-line gaming is handled pretty much
  the same way - the tax authorities really want to know
  where that loot came from ... or went to !!! :slight_smile:

--bill

10

Hi Folks across the ocean..

I understand, that from an American point of view this kind of restriction
looks strange and is against your act of freedom, however here in Europe
gambling is a state controlled business

It looks strange from the right side of the ocean too, at least to me.

What I don't get is why they think it's ok to limit our freedom of information. If they want to make sure we don't gamble in undesired ways, they should cut off the stuff that matters: the money. There is much more precedent for that.

Imagine, if kids in the US would be able to order Cannabis from Online-shops
in the Netherlands (as it is leaglized there)through mail order? Would you
or your legislation agree to that?

Actually, buying this stuff for personal use isn't really "legal" but there is a policy of not doing anything against it, which obviously boils down to the same thing. Dealing in larger quantities and sending it across the border is a different matter, though. (One of the arguments in favor of this policy is that in countries like France or the US even more people smoke cannabis. I find it hard to believe that this would be physically possible, it seems like half the population uses the stuff over here.)

11

Nah the US has strict rules on gambling it is the chosen method of
enforcement.

If I were the gambling sites, I'd stick up a loads of political commentary on
the corruption of the Italian Prime minister, and claim political censorship,
suddenly all the edges blur.

12

Singapore seems to force all of their ISPs to send all HTTP requests
through a proxy that has a set of rules defining sites you are not
allowed to visit.

As does (for example) the UAE, and China. But not Italy.

So this is quite moot, I expect.

Also - having all local cable / broadband / dialup providers do
something like this would cover the vast majority of internet users in
the country .. not too many people or companies are going to be
running their own resolvers, at least in a small country like Italy.

I guess that depends. Afterall, all you need to run your own resolver
is a copy of bind and linux, macos, or windows to run it on. A caching
recursive resolver is pretty easy to set up. If that becomes what it
takes to get around government regulations, I suspect gamblers who
really want to gamble will learn fairly quickly.

The numbers are likely to be trivially small as compared to the number
of people just using their ISP resolvers. So a fake zone loaded into
the resolvers redirecting these banned sites elsewhere should do just
fine, I guess.

Today, true. Tomorrow, depends on the motivation level of the affected
audience and the publication level of the trivial solution to the currently
prescribed method of control.

Owen

13

Hi Folks across the ocean..

I understand, that from an American point of view this kind of restriction
looks strange and is against your act of freedom, however here in Europe
gambling is a state controlled business that supports the state economy
and in most European countries gambling outside state controlled casinos
is simply illegal and forbidden by law.

Even in the US, this is true. Gambling in California is illegal (except
indian casions, long story), because Nevada has a powerful lobby in California.

So I doubt, that the European Court would really rule agaist this....
Each country has specific laws, that othewr nations do not not understand
and we all should accept that.

I wouldn't expect the court to rule against it, but, I do suspect that
motivated Italians will trivially work around it.

Imagine, if kids in the US would be able to order Cannabis from
Online-shops in the Netherlands (as it is leaglized there)through mail
order? Would you or your legislation agree to that?

Nope, but, the hard part there is the importation of the Cannabis. Frankly,
kids here CAN order it from the online shops. The hard part is getting the
delivery to arrive without getting prosecuted.

However, for gambling, it's a bit more complicated. Generally, the movement
of money in and out of most countries is not restricted, and, what the money
does while it is in the other countries is even harder to control unless
the two countries in question have treaties about such things. As such, since
gambling involves no physical product other than money, and, technically, the
Italians are moving the money out of Italy, gambling on foreign soil, then
moving their winnings back into Italy (much like they flew, for example, to
Monaco, gambled in the Casinos there, then flew home with their winnings),
it's quite a bit harder to enforce.

I don't question the validity of the law. That's between the Italians and
their government. I question the practicality of enforcing the law because
the way the internet and the international economies work, it is virtually
impossible to enforce this short of something like the great firewall
of China (which still allows SSH through for the most part, so...).

Owen

14

Marco d'Itri wrote:

It appears that Italy has ordered Italian ISPs to block access to a number of Internet Gambling sites. It would be interesting to see how the Italian ISPs are handling this, what with dynamic DNS and all that...

So far, the method officially recommended by the government entity
involved with collecting the gambling fees has been to create fake
zones on the caching resolvers of the large consumer ISPs.

I always think of italy as a more liberal country than the rest
of europe. I hope this will change the dns world once and forever.
It is not so hard to build your own dns server. The rest of us
can buy routers with builtin antizensoring dns resolvers.

It makes sense running your own dns. It is faster than the gift
(poison) dns from your ISP.

Nasty: english "gift", means poison in germany :slight_smile:

It does not matter wether u youse bind or djbdns. Do use it!

Operationally, I wonder how many ISPs will bother removing these zones
when the law will be repealed (because there is no chance that it will
stand before the european courts).

Italy has a name to loose for unzensored internet. I hope they dont ruin it.

From a more practical POV, it can be noted that the obvious methods

useful to bypass the "block" (using a random open proxy or just a random
open resolver) have been widely advertised on gambling forums even
before it was implemented.
Personally I do not believe that the government ever believed that this
would work, it's just a trick to add some extra future earnings to the
2006 budget law.

Kind regards
Peter and Karin Dambier

15

I certainly don't mind commentary from a European. I just wouldn't want to hear the same European complaining about the Chinese...

:slight_smile:

16

Hi folks

just one addition..as it was already mentioned where the money is from and
where it goes
thats "money-washing"
and again, this is a criminal act in lots of countries..

do not missunderstand me..
I do not mind gambling and if people wanna do it, let them..
but if their goverment wants to control it in some way, they should be
allowed to do so..(even if this is nearly impossible)
at the end of the street, a bancrupt gambler will fall into the social
network and the public has to pay for him having had fun...and surley, I do
not wanna support that either..

Tom

17

I understand, that from an American point of view this kind of restriction
looks strange and is against your act of freedom, however here in Europe
gambling is a state controlled business that supports the state economy
and in most European countries gambling outside state controlled casinos
is simply illegal and forbidden by law.

Even in the US, this is true. Gambling in California is illegal (except
indian casions, long story), because Nevada has a powerful lobby in California.

That's an interesting comment.

The largest cardroom in the world is in California (Commerce Casino). And there are plenty of places to play poker.

The difference is that California has decided (properly, IMHO) that poker is a game of _skill_, not chance. And there are other games you can play at these cardrooms, but you play them against other players, not the house. And most online gambling sites either allow poker or sports betting. I guess you could call sports begging "gambling", but there is skill involved there too.

Not that things like "facts" matter to politicians, or even lawyers.... :slight_smile:

I don't question the validity of the law. That's between the Italians and
their government. I question the practicality of enforcing the law because
the way the internet and the international economies work, it is virtually
impossible to enforce this short of something like the great firewall
of China (which still allows SSH through for the most part, so...).

Bringing this back to Operational Content <gasp>, this is the big point. I honestly do no believe you can stop people from getting to sites they want to see without stopping Internet access as a whole. Even the Great Firewall Of China is essentially swiss cheese to anyone who wants to get around it. Fear of "meat-space" punishment is probably more important than the technology used.

Yes, most people use their ISP's recursive NS, but that's 'cause they're lazy. When it stops working, they'll use something else. Block $DEFAULT_PORT for filesharing, they'll find another. So unless you proxy 100% of the traffic (possible, but difficult), and watch for proxies outside your proxy (nearly impossible), people will get through.

Seeing governments try to legislate around technology they do not understand is ... amusing. If they want to stop this activity, making a law regarding routers or servers is not the way to do it.

IMHO, of course.

18

I understand, that from an American point of view this kind of
restriction
looks strange and is against your act of freedom, however here in
Europe
gambling is a state controlled business that supports the state
economy
and in most European countries gambling outside state controlled
casinos
is simply illegal and forbidden by law.

Even in the US, this is true. Gambling in California is illegal
(except
indian casions, long story), because Nevada has a powerful lobby in
California.

That's an interesting comment.

The largest cardroom in the world is in California (Commerce Casino).
And there are plenty of places to play poker.

The difference is that California has decided (properly, IMHO) that
poker is a game of _skill_, not chance. And there are other games you
can play at these cardrooms, but you play them against other players,
not the house. And most online gambling sites either allow poker or
sports betting. I guess you could call sports begging "gambling", but
there is skill involved there too.

Not that things like "facts" matter to politicians, or even lawyers....
:slight_smile:

Actually, it's not so much skill vs. luck, but, the fact that CA has
certain exceptions for "mutual benefits" betting which is a fancy
term for the house gets a fixed percentage no matter who wins. This
allows for card rooms and horse tracks.

I don't question the validity of the law. That's between the
Italians and
their government. I question the practicality of enforcing the law
because
the way the internet and the international economies work, it is
virtually
impossible to enforce this short of something like the great firewall
of China (which still allows SSH through for the most part, so...).

Bringing this back to Operational Content <gasp>, this is the big point.
I honestly do no believe you can stop people from getting to sites they
want to see without stopping Internet access as a whole. Even the Great
Firewall Of China is essentially swiss cheese to anyone who wants to get
around it. Fear of "meat-space" punishment is probably more important
than the technology used.

You'd be surprised how effective the GFOC can be. The Chinese government
doesn't hesitate to walk in and literally cut the power to a datacenter
if they so desire.

Yes, most people use their ISP's recursive NS, but that's 'cause they're
lazy. When it stops working, they'll use something else. Block
$DEFAULT_PORT for filesharing, they'll find another. So unless you
proxy 100% of the traffic (possible, but difficult), and watch for
proxies outside your proxy (nearly impossible), people will get through.

Not even possible to proxy 100% of traffic unless you block all SSL and
prevent SSH.

Seeing governments try to legislate around technology they do not
understand is ... amusing. If they want to stop this activity, making a
law regarding routers or servers is not the way to do it.

Certainly not the effective way to do it.

Owen

19

or comply in the other manner which is to null route the top 100 sites...
but yes.

20

Hi Folks across the ocean..

I understand, that from an American point of view this kind of restriction
looks strange and is against your act of freedom, however here in Europe
gambling is a state controlled business that supports the state economy and
in most European countries gambling outside state controlled casinos is
simply illegal and forbidden by law.

Much like in the USA.

So I doubt, that the European Court would really rule agaist this....

Who knows what a court will do?

Each country has specific laws, that othewr nations do not not understand
and we all should accept that.
Imagine, if kids in the US would be able to order Cannabis from Online-shops
in the Netherlands (as it is leaglized there)through mail order? Would you
or your legislation agree to that?

Many would. You may have heard of an organisation named NORML? The
state of Californa [or perhaps the alternate world of ...] has several
times almost made it actually legal in some cases.