> -----Original Message----- > From: Guillaume Rousse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] [...] > I know they use such kind of filtering based on your domain > name. It also > means just using a private indirection, as you did, or public > redirect > service as anonymiser.com bypass it easily. > So we can say that Sun attempts to fulfill this clause, but > not that they > actually comply to. We could also have a banner saying "if > you're a evil guy > (as defined by US state department), please do not click > here" with the same > efficiency.
That did not prevent a French tribunal to stupidely force Yahoo to do such filtering on french ips so that people could not see Nazi related items in auctions even though this is absolutely impossible to comply with this (what about aol users ? and others from company with a host located out of france ?, etc...) Yahoo was supposed to be fine $91,000 per day of violation. Not sure what is the status of this crap though but even if this is on, it would be piece of cake to bypass it. There was even an audition of Vinton Cerf which states the following in the report: "It has been proposed that users identify where they are at the request of the web server, such as the one(s) serving yahoo.fr - or yahoo.com. There are several potential problems with this approach. For one thing, users can choose to lie about their locations. For another, every user of the web site would have to be asked to identify his or her location since the web server would have no way to determine a priori whether the user is French or is using the Internet from a French location. Some users consider such questions to be an invasion of privacy. While I am not completely acquainted with privacy provisions in the Europe Union, it might be considered a violation of the rights of privacy of European users, including French users to request this in formation. Of course if this information is required solely because of the French Court Order, one might wonder on what grounds all other users all over the world are required to comply. Another complaint about the idea of asking user for their location in that this might have to be done repeatedly by each web site that the user accesses - yahoo cannot force every web site to make this request. When a user first contacts the server(s) at yahoo.fr - or yahoo.com, one might imagine that the question of geographic location might be asked and then a piece of data called a cookie might be stored one the user's computer disk. Repeated visits to Yahoo sites might then refer to this cookie for user location information. The problem with this idea is that cookies are considered by many to be an invasion of privacy also, as a result many users either configure browsers to reject storage of cookies on their disk drives or they clear them away after each session on the Internet - thus forcing the query about geographical location each time the user encounters a Yahoo-controlled web site. Again, Yahoo would have no way to force a web site net under its control to either ask the location question or to request a copy of the cookie containing the location. Indeed, it would open up a vulnerability for each user if arbitrary web sites were told how to retrieve the cookie placed there by the Yahoo sites. It has been suggested that the filtering need only apply to users accessing the Internet from French Territories or by users who are French citizens. It is not clear whether the jurisdiction of the French Court extends to actions taken by French citizens who are not in French territory at the time of their access to Internet. For these and many other reasons, it does not appear to be very feasible to rely on discovering the geographic location of users for purposes of imposing filtering of the kind described in the Court Order". [...] report here: http://www.lapres.net/html/ya2011.html Stephane -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
