FC: Politech debate on filtering between EFF, NLC, X-Stop, N2H2

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Fri Jun 08 2001 - 06:26:28 PDT

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: Operation Swordfish review: A half-baked geek flick"

    ---
    In response to:
    http://www.politechbot.com/p-02091.html
    Background:
    http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=filtering
    ---
    
    Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 09:22:28 -0700
    To: declanat_private, politechat_private
    From: Will Doherty <wildat_private>
    Subject: Re: FC: Anti-porn activist Bruce Taylor on EEOC ruling,
       filtering
    Cc: BruceTaylorat_private, will Doherty <wildat_private>
    In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010601093722.02092770at_private>
    
    Interesting that Bruce Taylor is still writing that Internet blocking
    technology somehow doesn't make use of word-filter methods when he
    admits himself in the same paragraph that the most products still do.
    
    Interesting that he fails to mention that many of the products
    come with the most restrictive blocking by both site and keyword
    as the default setting.
    
    Once all the blocking products remove the keyword-blocking mechanims,
    I think Mr. Taylor may find that critics of the technology stop
    mentioning the fact that the keyword-blocking facility exists
    in those products.
    
    So much for "5-6 year old uncorroborated rumors".
    
    Sincerely,
    
    Will Doherty
    Online Activist / Media Relations
    Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
    Web http://www.eff.org
    
    *********
    
    From: "David Burt" <dburtat_private>
    To: <BruceTaylorat_private>, "Will Doherty" <wildat_private>
    Cc: "XStop George Shih" <gshihat_private>,
             "Declan McCullagh" <declanat_private>
    Subject: RE: FC: Anti-porn activist Bruce Taylor on EEOC ruling,  filtering
    Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 16:05:04 -0700
    
    I can add first hand experience to what Bruce is talking about.  Last month
    I was on a panel with Mr. Doherty, and he presented screen shots of pages
    blocked by N2H2.  These included pages that were blocked under our "news"
    and "chat" categories, categories that an employer might select but that no
    library would likely select.
    
    When I pointed this out Will responded by saying, "What difference does it
    make what category it's blocked under."
    
    The proper way to criticize filter use in a library is to point out what is
    being blocked in an actual library, not what someone might hypothetically be
    blocked from in some imaginary library.
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    -----
    David Burt, Market Research Manager
    N2H2, Inc.
    dburtat_private  http://www.n2h2.com/
    900 4th Avenue, Suite 3600
    Seattle, WA 98164
    Phone 206 892-1130  Fax: 509 271-4226
    
    *********
    
    Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 17:04:57 -0700
    To: "David Burt" <dburtat_private>, <BruceTaylorat_private>,
             "Will Doherty" <wildat_private>
    From: Will Doherty <wildat_private>
    Subject: RE: FC: Anti-porn activist Bruce Taylor on EEOC ruling,
       filtering
    Cc: "XStop George Shih" <gshihat_private>,
             "Declan McCullagh" <declanat_private>
    
    Dear David Burt,
    
    How are you doing? I trust you have been well since the
    presentation at the San Francisco Public Library when
    I last saw you.
    
    At that time, you asked me about which categories caused
    one particular site to be blocked by Bess, which was gay.com.
    (I don't think you were concerned about which categories
    failed to block those porn sites under that same configuration.)
    
    I told you I did not know which categories
    it was blocked under at the time I was presenting, and
    that I would have to check to let you know. I also mentioned
    in my presentation that the testing I was doing was on
    an actual public school installation of Bess (not at a
    library or corporate facility).
    
    Since you apparently would like to know what the category
    settings were, I checked my records and Bess was configured to block
    the front page of gay.com while set to the categories listed
    below, including CHAT but not including NEWS. If you examine
    the front page of the gay.com site, you can see that it has
    a link to a chat facility, but does not offer chat on that
    page. Blocking the entire site simply because one may access
    chat through a link on part of it is not appropriate.
    
    Bess was not blocking that site in a library but in an
    actual entire school district, which shall remain nameless,
    with those categories set in that way. I suspect they are
    not the only school district to leave the settings set
    up to block inappropriately.
    
    It is not at all difficult to come up with multiple examples
    of underblocking, overblocking, and inappropriate blocking
    using any of the Internet blocking products, except for the
    most restrictive greenspace or whitelist products which are
    limited by the small number of sites to which they permit
    access. That is why so many of us oppose requiring their use
    in schools and libraries who wish to receive federal grants
    or discounts.
    
    Sincerely,
    
    Will Doherty
    Online Activist / Media Relations
    Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
    Web http://www.eff.org
    
    *********
    
    From: "David Burt" <dburtat_private>
    To: "Will Doherty" <wildat_private>, <BruceTaylorat_private>
    Cc: "XStop George Shih" <gshihat_private>,
             "Declan McCullagh" <declanat_private>
    Subject: RE: FC: Anti-porn activist Bruce Taylor on EEOC ruling,   filtering
    Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 20:38:51 -0700
    
    We do block gay chat sites along with straight chat sites, bisexual chat
    sites, transgender chat sites, and asexual chat sites, under the "Chat"
    category.
    
    Many (most) schools go far beyond pornography and sexual materials in their
    blocking.  These additional categories have been added at the request of our
    customers (mostly schools).  This is also consistent with the print
    collections in schools, as school libraries exclude all sorts of material
    that is legal, but unsuitable to educational purposes.
    
    But my point is that your examples should stick with sites that have been
    MIS-categorized.
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    -----
    David Burt, Market Research Manager
    N2H2, Inc.
    dburtat_private  http://www.n2h2.com/
    900 4th Avenue, Suite 3600
    Seattle, WA 98164
    Phone 206 892-1130  Fax: 509 271-4226
    
    *********
    
    Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 22:30:17 -0700
    To: "David Burt" <dburtat_private>, "Will Doherty" <wildat_private>,
             <BruceTaylorat_private>
    From: Will Doherty <wildat_private>
    Subject: RE: FC: Anti-porn activist Bruce Taylor on EEOC ruling,
       filtering
    Cc: "XStop George Shih" <gshihat_private>,
             "Declan McCullagh" <declanat_private>
    
    As I already explained in my last email on the topic,
    the entire site should not be blocked simply because
    part of the site provides access to chat rooms.
    That IS inappropriate blocking.
    
    Will Doherty
    Online Activist / Media Relations
    Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
    Web http://www.eff.org
    
    *********
    
    Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 23:00:27 -0700
    To: Will Doherty <wildat_private>, "David Burt" <dburtat_private>,
             <BruceTaylorat_private>
    From: George Shih <gshihat_private>
    Subject: RE: FC: Anti-porn activist Bruce Taylor on EEOC ruling,
       filtering
    Cc: "Declan McCullagh" <declanat_private>
    X-UIDL: e4d49265fbc0af64b6f3ee2e972ecce1
    
    Mr. Doherty,
    
    As you probably aware, most of the "institutional filtering solution" 
    provide multiple categories for customers to select from. For example, part 
    of gay.com is categorized in Chat category which can be blocked by 
    administrator if he wishs to, we don't block the site entirely. By default 
    setting, gay.com won't be part of the block categories. Most filter 
    solutions provide tools and categories for customers to choose from and 
    configure to meet their internal need. I hope this answers your doubt.
    
    George Shih
    8e6 Technologies/X-Stop
    
    *********
    
    Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 23:05:14 -0700
    To: George Shih <gshihat_private>, Will Doherty <wildat_private>,
             "David Burt" <dburtat_private>, <BruceTaylorat_private>
    From: Will Doherty <wildat_private>
    Subject: RE: FC: Anti-porn activist Bruce Taylor on EEOC ruling,
       filtering
    Cc: "Declan McCullagh" <declanat_private>
    
    Dear George Shih,
    
    Welcome to the conversation... our circle seems to be
    growing. :-)
    
    However, Bess, as operated at a real school, was blocking
    the front page of gay.com which offers only a link to
    chat, not the actual chat facility.
    
    I'm starting to feel like I am repeating myself here...
    is anyone listening?
    
    Interesting question though... what are the default settings
    for your products when installed in an "institutional setting"?
    Care to provide specifics on each of the products?
    
    Sincerely,
    
    Will Doherty
    Online Activist / Media Relations
    Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
    Web http://www.eff.org
    
    *********
    
    Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 00:40:22 -0700
    To: Will Doherty <wildat_private>, Will Doherty <wildat_private>,
             "David Burt" <dburtat_private>, <BruceTaylorat_private>
    From: George Shih <gshihat_private>
    Subject: RE: FC: Anti-porn activist Bruce Taylor on EEOC ruling,
       filtering
    Cc: "Declan McCullagh" <declanat_private>
    
    Will,
    
    The circle was there and I was listening. :-)
    I know the default setting is an interesting question, however, the default
    setting is to pass everything. The customer will need tell the product what
    they want to block. Unfortunately, I can't speak for other product
    manufacturers. This is the categorizaton issue, different mfgs have
    different definition for the categories they provide and it's up to the
    customer to choose what they feel is appropriete. And I do understand your
    argument.
    
    George Shih
    8e6 Technologies/X-Stop
    
    *********
    
    From: "Bruce A. Taylor" <BruceTaylorat_private>
    To: "Will Doherty" <wildat_private>
    Cc: "David Burt N2H2" <dburtat_private>,
             "XStop George Shih" <gshihat_private>,
             "Declan McCullagh" <declanat_private>
    Subject: RE: FC: Anti-porn activist Bruce Taylor on EEOC ruling,  filtering
    Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 04:43:40 -0400
    
    Hi, Will. I think you misread my message or didn't read it carefully,
    because I think you'd have noticed that I said that most filters can still
    do word-filtering, if you want to use that feature, but none of the good
    ones use it as their primary method.  Also, institutional filters don't run
    by default; the user/customer has to set it at certain levels for certain
    categories of the user/customer's choice.  CIPA doesn't ask a library or
    school to pick the oldest filter and set it at the max-10 setting for all
    available categories and hope for the best (like a parent of a
    grade-schooler might choose to do at home).  CIPA only requires subsidized
    libraries/schools to try to filter what they think is within the scope of
    the child pornography and obscenity tests for adults and what they think is
    obscene for minors on the children's terminals.  I don't appreciate
    intentional exaggerations; neither the law nor responsible advocates benefit
    from that.  At least that's what I think.  Bruce Taylor
    
    *********
    
    
    
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jun 08 2001 - 06:41:09 PDT