Yes - those use the same proxies as the kiddie porn filters.

Looking through the forums, it appears that there is a change to deep packet inspection to filter traffic heading to the court banned websites.

They resolve the IP addresses of the sites and put routes onto their network to ensure traffic heading to those IP addresses goes through proxies.

Avoidable via a VPN only as far as I'm aware.

I'm not trying to avoid the banned website list, just want websites to resolve quicker.

In reply to a post by Daemon66:

The IWF and other legislative blocking is different because it applies to all connections and hence is done at a lower level. This is not the same as the nanny blocking that you can actually opt-out of on an individual basis.

IWF blocking is not mandatory The big ISP's subscribe to the IWF on a voluntary basis , And often due to the way some ISP's implement this form of web blocking does frequently result in over blocking ,

The babysitting service doesn't depend on client DNS either.

In reply to a post by Sark:

The babysitting service doesn't depend on client DNS either.

If you have the time would you post a bit of information?

I am aware of how the IWF filter works but unsure on the babysitting.

All I know is that if you enable the babysitter it doesn't matter what DNS server you are using the blocker still works. Try it yourself, it only takes a second to enable on your Virgin account page and another second to disable it again.

In reply to a post by Sark:

All I know is that if you enable the babysitter it doesn't matter what DNS server you are using the blocker still works. Try it yourself, it only takes a second to enable on your Virgin account page and another second to disable it again.

Never mind you just reminded me - VM play games with customer DNS if babysitting is enabled so you go through their servers whatever you set on your routers / PCs

The issue of VM censorship would be a valid reason to change but I'm curious how the speed of anyone's DNS servers can matter. I'm not a VM customer but unless their servers are taking significant fractions of a second to respond I can't see the problem. Your computer(s) will probably be caching the results anyway - it's not like you'll be firing off hundreds of queries a second. It's more likely to be half a dozen an hour. If that.