Dear Mr. Oolun,
Thank you for your reply. It is much appreciated.
I should start by clarifying to you why I say *"...the ICT Authority
decides to 'spy' the Mauritius Internet Users"*. I am an Internet user in
Mauritius and I just happened to find that there is a mechanism through
which the ICT Authority filters all my Internet traffic to check if I visit
a particular list of IP addresses. Between 2011 and 2015, my ISP never
contacted me to inform me of any such filtering. It was a decision by the
ICT Authority and as a consumer not being notified of the situation, yes, I
do feel having been spied.
Your action of curtailing "some material" unfortunately gives you full
access to my Internet traffic history before a decision is taken whether
the destination I am visiting contains CSA content. For the past 4 years
this happened without my knowledge & consent.
You mention there has been a series of discussions with the Data Protection
Office, Internet Service Providers, the Police, the media and
representatives of consumer organizations.
I did not find any information pertaining to those *series of discussions*
on the website of the Data Protection Office, my ISP did not notify me of
Internet filtering, I did not find anything through online media (around
the dates of 2011) and I don't know where are the representatives of
consumer organizations so I may question them what was discussed.
Basically, you're mentioning something to me which is not helpful at all.
If the discussions can't be shown to me, how would I understand what was
discussed. I am only being told which group/organization participated.
Sadly, this is not an information.
You mention the "present" solution "can be solely" used for filtering CSA
material. There might be a "future" solution without the need of public
consultation? From a technical point of view any other IP address can be
blacklisted. Therefore, I can't agree that the solution can be solely used
for filtering CSA material.
Unfortunately, your letter hasn't replied my initial questions; which I
quote from my first email:
1. Was there a public consultation before the ICT Authority decides to
"spy" the Mauritian Internet users?
I assume there was no public consultation as a series of discussions with
selected groups/organizations do not correctly represent public. It is
biased.
2. What if as an Internet consumer in Mauritius I refuse to be spied over?
Does that mean I have to stop using the Internet?
I still maintain that between 2011 and 2015 my Internet traffic was spied.
I was not properly informed about any Internet filtering happening. For the
sake of analogy, when I drive a car the Police informs me if a Police
camera might take my picture ahead. Privacy matters.
3. Was there any research carried out in Mauritius showing that the
"National Internet Filtering System" will reduce Child Sexual Abuse?
I understood it was done in context of Safer Internet Day but not some
research carried out in Mauritius.
You ended your letter by inviting me to stop the campaign of gratuitous
false allegations against the Authority. Sorry, I did not invite anyone to
follow me in anything that I do. It's not a campaign. I discovered the
seriousness of Internet filtering without consent and I shared the same in
a public forum. I included the Data Protection Office in the loop to show
my concerns about my privacy.
Let me sum up with a simple question. Will the ICT Authority properly
inform all Internet users of Mauritius that their Internet traffic (through
any ISP) will be filtered to block CSA material and provide access to the
series of discussions happened in 2011?
Regards,
--
​Ish Sookun
- Geek by birth, Linux by choice.
- I blog at HACKLOG.in.
https://twitter.com/IshSookun ^^ Do you tweet?
Received on Thu May 14 2015 - 19:27:05 PST