
Chaos Computer Club Website Blocked by UK ISPs - dubbel
https://www.ccc.de/en/updates/2014/ccc-censored-in-uk
======
dz0ny
I Am getting NET::ERR_CERT_AUTHORITY_INVALID also here
[https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=ccc.de](https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=ccc.de)

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
CCC don't like Certificate Authorities, I believe they deliberately self-sign.
You're not being MITM'd.

~~~
justincormack
Well, you might be as well of course.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
True, if you don't already know their certificate.

------
lectrick
Google Chrome strongly advises you not to continue.

If you click the "Advanced" link, you can, though.

Who decided that a centralized entity could be the authority for these things,
anyway, instead of a Web of Trust?

And also, should the books "1984" and "Fahrenheit 451" be required reading in
British schools?

~~~
api
"Who decided that a centralized entity could be the authority for these
things, anyway, instead of a Web of Trust?"

Usability.

Try explaining to a non-technical person how to bootstrap their trust system.

Things either "just work" or they are broken, at least for 99% of users. I'd
even count myself as part of that group. I'm a highly technical user, but I'm
usually too busy to futz around with stuff. I get something akin to road rage
when stuff doesn't work and get out of the way. I played a lot with stuff when
I was younger but I don't have time for that crap anymore.

~~~
vegardx
The problem is that we're mixing encryption and authentication in one bag.
Somehow we've managed to teach every non tech-savvy users to be more scared of
a self-signed certificate than browsing the very same page unencrypted.

~~~
hdevalence
Secure communications require encryption AND authentication. Full stop. You
can't unmix them.

------
Zenst
"Accessing the server directly via
[http://213.73.89.123/](http://213.73.89.123/) currently appears to work quite
well, thereby rendering the censorship efforts useless."

So would appear to be at a DNS level of blocking perhaps, tested the internet
access I have at hand currently (using ISP's DNS offered to punters and not
direct IP access):

Three (Mobile telco) works upon a data dongle. Also O2 (Another mobile
network) works just fine with this site. The last also covers a large user
base internet access wise and tends to be up there with regards of blocking
sites at governmental whims.

So beyond Vodaphone do we know which other UK ISP's also block this site?

~~~
DanBC
Did you turn on your optional ISP supplied filters before testing?

You probably turned them off some time ago - "Content Lock" is I think what O2
calls theirs.

~~~
Zenst
nope and upon the O2 connection I know that is turned on.

------
keithpeter
Both [https://www.ccc.de/](https://www.ccc.de/) and
[http://www.ccc.de/](http://www.ccc.de/) and all pages below those reachable
fine on EE consumer adsl over copper here in sunny Birmingham UK. I happen to
be using Epiphany web browser on an alpha install of gNewSense 4.

The Open Media gallery in Birmingham (just under part of New Street Station)
has a joint exhibition by a local artist and the CCC.

[http://www.bom.org.uk/2014/09/26/hello-
world/](http://www.bom.org.uk/2014/09/26/hello-world/)

------
petecooper
I am absolutely against this blanket form of ISP-level censorship, but I have
to wonder if the intended clientele of CCC (i.e., technically-minded, curious,
etc) would be very the near the top of the list of people who could bypass
this block with trivial effort. Sort of self-defeating, really.

~~~
marquis
If you were a young, inspired enthusiast and you never found out that CCC
existed, don't you think that's sad? It's unfair to deprive such knowledge,
from someone who hasn't had the chance to find it yet.

------
Joe8Bit
Seems to work fine for me in the three ways I tried, via Virgin Fibre (from
London), EE 4G and O2 4G.

~~~
DanBC
Works fine on GiffGaff 3G (which uses O2 network) but I have already turned
off content filtering.

------
TazeTSchnitzel
Worth noting that said filters are optional, you can turn them off.

Though the process to turn them off might resemble this[0].

[0] [http://www.departmentofdirty.co.uk/](http://www.departmentofdirty.co.uk/)

~~~
mszyndel
In most parts of the world optional means something you can opt-in to. Not
something you have to painfully opt-out and be permanently put on the list of
"those people".

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
"Painfully opt-out"?

You untick a box on the signup form. You're not put on the sex offenders
register.

~~~
harry8
Which register are you put on? Or are you willing to state that you are
completely sure that you are put on no register at all and this information
that you "unticked a box" will not be used against you?

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
> Which register are you put on?

None, to my knowledge. Your ISP obviously has a 'no filters' flag somewhere,
but they're not exactly telling the Government.

> Or are you willing to state that you are completely sure that you are put on
> no register at all and this information that you "unticked a box" will not
> be used against you?

We have pretty strict privacy laws, using it against you would probably be
illegal.

~~~
harry8
How's that illegal thing worked out for curbing GHCQ?

------
cirosantilli
What was the exact reason for banning them?

~~~
eskimobloood
Maybe this CCC:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_Climax_Corporation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_Climax_Corporation)

~~~
Zenst
WOW Having read the history of that company I'm somewhat flabbergasted at the
prospect that a company that made child porn would be protected intellectually
over the Chaos Computer Club, which we can safely say has nothing in common
with this Color Climax Corporation. More so for the UK at least, given such
practices in such times were not legal then. Though I suspect this would be
some EU ruling and the moral and ethics of this are moot in the black and
white production line of the legal world in some fields sadly. Processed
guilty by default and you have to prove innocents by exception, which seems to
be how anything copyrighted on the internet is handled.

------
jamesbrownuhh
No, not blocked at all, working just fine here from several different UK ISPs.
What is the source of this claim of blocking?

~~~
DanBC
Some ISPs include optional filters. Some of those filters have some
granularity - pornography; violent content; hacking / cracking / piracy; etc.

If your ISP has those filters you've probably already turned them off.

~~~
jamesbrownuhh
OK, but if you apply filters to your internet then any blocking is something
that you've done yourself, not "UK ISPs".

It's a bit like putting a bag over your head and then claiming that "UK
Authorities" have blocked out the sun.

------
Osaka
It appears to be only Three and Vodafone[1]at the moment.

[1]
[https://www.blocked.org.uk/results?url=http://www.ccc.de](https://www.blocked.org.uk/results?url=http://www.ccc.de)

~~~
robin_reala
Just checked on my Three connection and I got through without any problems.

------
teamhappy
Just for the record: You can still access the website via it's IP address.
[http://213.73.89.123/](http://213.73.89.123/)

------
egyptisblocked
Interestingly www.ccc.de is completely blocked in Egypt.

