Only new ISP clients have these filters enabled. Old clients have them disabled by default, for now.

I doubt that you'll find someone who can confirm so easy.

Thanks. Blocking EFF/Linux/Amnesty is very disturbing.

Would it then be possible for someone with a new Internet hookup in the UK to confirm/disconfirm this?

Can confirm this article as correct: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25430582

Am able (on Sky) to access all the sites mentioned on this article.

I do however, strongly disagree with the sentiment that this filter is "Just another attempt by the Tories to prevent people finding out information." It's not, it's just a very poorly implemented filter by the ISP's that can be 'hacked' with a simple proxy.

We had to deal with this kind of filtering many years ago back at school, where even the word 'mobile' was filtered.

I have access to several machines on UK ISPs. Quick SSH and poke with links on each machine.

1. Easynet - all work fine.

2. Andrews & Arnold - all work fine (this is expected)

3. O2/Sky - all work fine

4. BT - all work fine

All of these lines were provisioned before the porn filter was announced so...

Edit: tested Amnesty, OpenBSD (which these machines are all running and would be a PITA for me) and linux.com

What do you mean by "(this is expected)" with A&A?

A&A refuse customers who opt in to filtering.

http://www.aa.net.uk/kb-broadband-realinternet.html

This is the correct solution to the problem.

Gotcha. Thanks!

This is not the new uk gov porn filter. It is an optional fter, like any other net nanny filter or any enterprise style filter. It's restrictive because that's what those kinds of filters do. It is purely optional, and supposedly granular so the user could just block search engines but nothing else.

This is different to the proposed uk gov porn filter.