Here we go again - ISP DPI, but is it interception?

Paul Barnfather lists at
Wed Jul 28 17:02:36 BST 2010

> Peter Fairbrother wrote:
>> Also, if the system fails to block some nasty content, can a parent sue
>> Talk-talk? If it blocks content it shouldn't, can the website sue Talk-talk?
>> It has distinct negative implications for "pure-carrier" immunity.
>> Can a website say "I don't want to be examined by TalkTalk", something
>> comparable to the x-no-archive or NOARCHIVE tags? I'd think so, legally if
>> not always technically.

It seems extremely unlikely that the system would be especially
reliable at detecting "nasty content".

The probes from the Huwaei servers are from fixed IP addresses and
(presumably) use easily identifiable probes, These connections can be
easily recognised (and blocked) or served apparently "legitimate"
content; I believe malware sites already do this routinely when probed
by known security firms.

There are already perfectly good, well-maintained lists of malware
sites out there - the ones used by the popular browsers seem
reasonably effective. Why would TalkTalk go to all this effort and
expense to build their own list?
The benefits seem questionable and yet TalkTalk are risking another
Phorm-style phiasco.

Very strange.

More information about the ukcrypto mailing list