On 12/15/08, Abhishek Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > > 1. You have stated that anonymous proxy can help those users who > voluntarily want to support in filtering. But what if some users do not > want > to let others take decision for them, and they want the control in their > own > hands. There was a fuss about Cloud Computing around this very issue. > Though > this approach eases many technological operations for the end user.
Dear Abhishek, Thankyou for your response. We can continue to talk more in this topic. Those users who dont want to be monitored will find a way out anyways using a live CD, or using ssl proxy or posting online about how do you get around a X restriction or simply use an unfiltered internet connectivity. Nomatter what the solution you use dont assume you are going to check the 100%. Kids will post online about how to get around "net nanny" or "cyber petrol" like software. So the user who dont want to be monitored will find a way out/compromise anyways and look for websites that isnt yet monitored. > 2. Is any guideline or regulation available that will categorize content > as "INACCESSIBLE" to the minors? If not your approach hands over the > overall > authority of tagging contents to the ISP operators. What if there are > content X and content Y that are tagged inaccessible, and parent group A > want their children to access content X and parent group B want their > children to access content Y? So there is no one single measure to > justify > content as inaccessible (remember content are not just porn). Using ACLs > (Access Control Lists), this can be achieved, but again this requires the > ACLs to be shared among the ISPs. Lets focus to keep it simple. Complicated solution will be rejected on the door when it reaches a real world trial. Isp's with partnership with NGO's can work on a standard/standard-blacklists of website and settle upon a standard and the least intrusive rule sets. ISP level approach is also the only prolong fix that will stay. According to your explanation if the end user requirement is that complicated he/she better be old enough to make the granular choice or be old enough to not require any monitoring or be interested enough to invest for the granular control. > 3. Your perception that there will be abuse if the control is passed away > to the end users seem irrational to me. You seem to be quite paranoid > about > the security at end users and confident about the security at the ISP > side. > Difficulty/Ease in accessing others data at both the side, in > technological > metrics, are the same. How can you ensure that ISPs do not have access or > do > not peek at your data. Business concern is not only the justifiable > reason. Ok another question, How can you ensure that ISPs do not have access or do not peek at your data NOW? They already have access to almost everything you see or do. Giving the control to ISP wont make a difference. Check the threat modal... 1). Before any filtering isp have had detailed access to your online activity since years anyways (but have strict rules on who can view the data if needed) end user/admin dont have access to your data, for the lack of tech capability. 2). If filtering is done by isp (1) still holds valid. 3). If the filtering is done by "end use" isp have detailed access to your online activity anyways and now the end admin will also have the knowhow of your online activity. With thousands of end admins the possibility of abuse also multiplies. > Moreover, for a minor, we have to assume what their parents decide is for > their good. This points gets pretty complicated when it comes to Cyber > Cafes. > Do you love to see your parent turn on your diary/email while you are in school or read your love letters from your GF even if you are a 14 year old? :) I suggest you guys to pilot your project and get some user feedback for real. I know my statistics from experience. I'd love to see your data/user response before and after the filtering. Over the years i've meet people who are desperate about know what does his elder sister do online. I've met people who has setup VNC server in their home computer to monitor it in real time. The number of such people will just increase. If the control was left to the ISP it would really continue to protect people from each other. Also, how is access of adult content any different if you would access it from magazines, cd/dvd/TV or the internet. Internet pron became popular because of its availability/easy to access. You tight the internet and kids will choose to look more into magazines and cd's. You will not succeed in fixing this problem as long as you see this as technological problem only and just seek for a solution out of technology. > > But what above have I discussed is just the problems, and they are, in no > way, going to help Bibhushan Jee, but to annoy him at technological > stupidity. A proper course of action can be implemented by incorporating > Bipin's and Gaurab's perspective. Content filtering at the ISP level can > ease the whole process if there is a consensus on tagging the content. Else > there is a need of per user basis rule, in which, shifting the control to > the end users seem viable. If both approach can be integrated, it will form > a base of a universal solution. Integrating both means that the ISP must > share the filtering rules, categorising the rules into groups, and > providing the end users a means (through some tool, plugin etc) Well if government is to announce its a moral duty of ISP to do content filtering for child protection, ISP/NGO can work together for a acceptable baseline to start with and gradually improve/maintain it according to the feedback. to select or > override the rules/ruleset available to them. But believe me this will take > development, human resource and time cost. Any one ready to volunteer for > development? > > The next approach is to use already available Parental Controls which are > under open source/unrestrictive licensing. I'm listing some of them which I > found as a search result: > > 1. Parental Control > 2.1<http://linux.softpedia.com/get/Security/Parental-control-24501.shtml> > 2. Glubble 1.0 <http://www.glubble.com/> -- the parental control suite > for the Firefox web browser. > 3. Crawler Parental Control > 1.1.0<http://www.download.com/Crawler-Parental-Control/3000-2162_4-10549693.html> > 4. Safe Families We-Blocker Parental Control 2.0.1 build > 88<http://www.download.com/Safe-Families-We-Blocker-Parental-Control/3000-2162_4-10537204.html> > > I would like to request you all to add to this list and suggest which one of > them is better. That will certainly help Bibhushan Jee. If you have a quick > and smart way out then please suggest. > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ FOSS Nepal mailing list: [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/foss-nepal To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] Community website: http://www.fossnepal.org/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
