Content filtering is always an interesting topic for discussion because it is so multifaceted. In my earlier post I listed the points below as part of the discussion arena. In my context, the framework is K-12 education.

• filter or not?
• if you do, how much?
• if you do, is it done centrally or at the school level?
• how do you align content filtering with educational resource selection processes for print, video etc.?
• block or allow social networking?
• keep students safe
• sufficient band width
• how do you define ‘educational content’ in a way that makes sense in a K-12 context?
• should content filtering be more age or grade appropriate?

There are no easy answers. It is easy to find valid reasons to sit on either side of the fence for each point. More importantly, there is a growing need to keep learning about what is right, what is doable and keeping the agenda moving forward in an appropriate fashion for K-12 education. Further reflection on this post has two aspects of content filtering churning around in my mind.

1. Copyright: Content filtering must respect copyright and your country/jurisdictions laws and regulations. This whole aspect of internet use is blurry in the global community. At face value, what you see in your browser is relatively consistent from your vantage point on the globe. The internet seems like ‘one place’. The reality is the servers, and therefore content are in different countries. What you are able to do with content (copy, download , redistribute, use in a school classroom setting etc.) will likely vary, depending on your regulations and these need to be respected.

2. Equitable access: A couple of weeks ago, I was having a meeting with @socmediatrust (Twitter) discussing Digital Citizenship and his work at schools presenting Internet safety sessions to students and parent groups. At some point in the conversation, we landed on content filtering. As mentioned above, there are many approaches to dealing with this. The focus of our discussion was bullet #3 – centralized or distributed to the school level systems. This led to an interesting talk framed around consistency and equity of access.

Providing content filtering from a centrally run system provides equitable access to resources deemed suitable for use by all students/staff/sites within a system. To me, this makes the most sense. Deem the content that is acceptable for use in a particular system through a fair mechanism to select and align content with educational needs. Then you can work away at fine tuning needs in a strategic way.  I can see value in having a ’sliding scale’ effect for content filtering so it is adjusted for age levels – maybe something along the lines of  tightly controlled (young students), medium access (maybe grades six to eight) and more open for high school. Validate readiness for each level with a strong Digital Citizenship program to teach ethical, responsible, safe use and digital literacies.

Now, imagine a system where access is controlled at the school level. This could potentially be a dogs breakfast so to speak. Two (or more) schools serving the same age group of students may be serving up completely different content and access to web tools. This leads me to many questions about equity of access, lack of consistent approach within a large system, lack of consistent expectations and use by staff and students and awkward to dialog with parents when the rules (access) varies from site to site. As curriculum leaders, do school administrators bring their own ‘rules of access’ with them as they move site to site over their careers?  Hmmm.

My View: It seems to me, at least at this point in my thinking, the distributed model leaves more questions than answers. I would cast my vote for a centrally run system that allows for the ’sliding scale’ fine tuning approach that is well aligned with curriculum needs and resource selection processes.

~ Mark

Yesterday I had the pleasure of attending the first Central Ontario Computer Association (COCA) for the 2009/2010 school year. COCA provides a forum for ICT educators representing approximately 25 school boards to dialogue and collaborate face to face 5 times each school year. I always look forward to these meetings as I know the dialogue will be rich and engaging – a tribute to the forward thinking, action oriented people in these roles. Hats off to you for making a difference!

The agenda for this particular session was organized to provide an opportunity to discuss current educational issues and topics including:

• Report: Ministry of Education licensed software for Ontario school Boards (OSAPAC committee)
• Brainstorming: What would a Ministry of Education integrated ICT document look like?
• Presentation: ICT Ethical Use
• Presentation: iPods in the classroom project with a research component
• Discussion: Twitter in the Classroom
• Discussion: Round Table

I will be interested to follow Mike Redfern’s work on his Ethical Use of ICT project which will provide an in depth look at technology and social networking issues in the K-12 educational setting.  I will provide some information about our (WRDSB) iPod projects and research initiative in a future post.

As I anticipated, I found the round table discussion particularly interesting. Many points were raised, but the one that really stuck with me was content filtering. Content filtering is always an interesting topic for discussion because it is so multifaceted.

• filter or not?
• if you do, how much?
• if you do, is it done centrally or at the school level?
• how do you align content filtering with educational resource selection processes for print, video etc.?
• block or allow social networking?
• keep students safe
• sufficient band width
• how do you define ‘educational content’ in a way that makes sense in a K-12 context?
• should content filtering be more age or grade appropriate?

There are no easy answers. It is easy to find valid reasons to sit on either side of the fence for each point. Oh yes, how do you apply content filtering to keep everyone (students, teachers, school administrators, technicians, parents, school board officials) happy?  That is a $64000 question!

Now, throw another huge component into the discussion: copyright, digital rights, document ownership. Yikes. A few people commented that their Board had recently opened up YouTube as part of the progressive move toward more openness in the content filtering in an effort to teach online safety and digital citizenship.

BUT – What about the YouTube end user Terms of Use policy? Section 5 (see below), in the terms of use policy contains some very specific language. I have emphasized some of the areas that I feel need careful consideration from school Boards when making a determination to allow or deny access to this site.

5. Your Use of Content on the Site

In addition to the general restrictions above, the following restrictions and conditions apply specifically to your use of content on the YouTube Website.

A. The content on the YouTube Website, except all User Submissions (as defined below), including without limitation, the text, software, scripts, graphics, photos, sounds, music, videos, interactive features and the like (“Content”) and the trademarks, service marks and logos contained therein (“Marks”), are owned by or licensed to YouTube, subject to copyright and other intellectual property rights under the law. Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only and may not be downloaded, copied, modified, produced, reproduced, distributed, transmitted, broadcast, displayed, sold, licensed, translated, published, performed or otherwise exploited for any other purposes whatsoever without the prior written consent of the respective owners. YouTube reserves all rights not expressly granted in and to the Website and the Content.

B. You may access User Submissions solely:

• for your information and personal use;
• as intended through the normal functionality of the YouTube Service; and
• for Streaming.

“Streaming” means a contemporaneous digital transmission of an audiovisual work via the Internet from the YouTube Service to a user’s device in such a manner that the data is intended for real-time viewing and not intended to be copied, stored, permanently downloaded, or redistributed by the user. Accessing User Videos for any purpose or in any manner other than Streaming is expressly prohibited. User Videos are made available “as is.”

C. User Comments are made available to you for your information and personal use solely as intended through the normal functionality of the YouTube Service. User Comments are made available “as is”, and may not be used, copied, modified, produced, reproduced, distributed, transmitted, broadcast, displayed, sold, licensed, downloaded, translated, published, performed or otherwise exploited in any manner not intended by the normal functionality of the YouTube Service or otherwise as prohibited under this Agreement.

D. You may access YouTube Content, User Submissions and other content only as permitted under this Agreement. YouTube reserves all rights not expressly granted in and to the YouTube Content and the YouTube Service.

E. You agree to not engage in the use, copying, or distribution of any of the Content other than expressly permitted herein, including any use, copying, or distribution of User Submissions of third parties obtained through the Website for any commercial purposes.

F. You agree not to circumvent, disable or otherwise interfere with security-related features of the YouTube Website or features that prevent or restrict use or copying of any Content or enforce limitations on use of the YouTube Website or the Content therein.

G. You understand that when using the YouTube Website, you will be exposed to User Submissions from a variety of sources, and that YouTube is not responsible for the accuracy, usefulness, safety, or intellectual property rights of or relating to such User Submissions. You further understand and acknowledge that you may be exposed to User Submissions that are inaccurate, offensive, indecent, or objectionable, and you agree to waive, and hereby do waive, any legal or equitable rights or remedies you have or may have against YouTube with respect thereto, and agree to indemnify and hold YouTube, its Owners/Operators, affiliates, and/or licensors, harmless to the fullest extent allowed by law regarding all matters related to your use of the site.

Independent of the nature of the content posted on YouTube, and whether or not there is a clean adherence to copyright and digital rights management, the terms of use document specifies that the site is for personal use. In Canada, classrooms are defined as public, not private.  As I understand this, personal use sites such as YouTube, do not have a legal place in Canadian classrooms much in the same way there are restrictions on the use of music and video. There is definitely more studying and thinking ahead in the complex arena. For now, I think we are positioned well with our current approach.

Related Reading

View the full YouTube end user Terms of Use

~ Mark

Tested spyware free

This utility for ferreting out objectionable content works quickly, but produces mixed results. Since Content Scanner offers no features or functionality beyond its main job, the interface is extremely easy to use, although we wish it could be resized so you could more easily view long lists. The program can scan your PC for files relating to violence, drugs, gambling, and pornography, but the trial version will only let you locate the latter. In our tests, this program took only seconds to scan our entire machine, though we wish you could select certain folders or drives to scour. Once Content Scanner has found potentially explicit data, it shows you filename, type, and questionable keyword. However, the program may be too thorough for its own good, as it brought up a number of inaccurate results. For example, it pulled up a temporary Internet file for our fantasy football league simply due to the inclusion of the word fantasy. Despite its problems, this program may appeal to parents who would rather err on the side of caution.

Publisher’s description

From ContentPurity :

Content Scanner is parental-control content watch software that allows you to scan, audit, filter, and detects porn files and pornography on your PC. You also can clean, delete, erase, and remove porn and objectionable content. Content Cleaner will cleanup the history, the address bar, cookies, and temporary Internet files, documents, pictures, and movies on your computer. Version 1.0.0.367 may include unspecified updates, enhancements, or bug fixes.

Tested spyware free

Publisher’s description

From Race River :

Integard is an advanced yet easy to use filter with a long list of features. It blocks adult Web sites, monitors chat, limits time on the internet and supports multiple user profiles. It provides state of the art blocking accuracy through dynamic page analysis and a continuously updated database of known Web Sites. Supports Windows 2003 Server Terminal Services.

Version 1.5 includes French and English support, System Event Reporting, Anti-Time-tampering mechanism, User level allowed and blocked lists, Customizable blocked pages, SMTP Authentication Supports, MySpace chat monitoring, External Whitelist support, and Remote time extensions.

Tested spyware free

Publisher’s description

From Disco XT :

Disco XT is a software for professional DJ mixing, automation and music playback. Works with iTunes and iPods. All music and playlists in iTunes are instantly available in Disco XT and keeps in sync with changes made to iTunes. Includes dual audio deck with user definable EQs and spectrum, looping, filters, effects, cueing, pitch-lock, waveform views and automatic BPM detection. Includes Hit Sampler for playing short audio clips taken from an audio file or recorded from microphone over the mix. Recording mixes to audio files with automatic track markers. Supports microphone input for talkovers. Playlist cue player with waveforms for setting starting times for multiple songs. Includes automatic content generation with selected genres and artists with separation rules. Automix allows to mix songs on playlist without any user intervention. Includes several different fade options and a fade editor for creating custom fades. Supports controlling with hardware DJ controllers. Includes artwork browser for navigating library by album artworks. Customizable interface that allows to hide features not needed and several different view options with different skins.

Tested spyware free

Publisher’s description

From Altova :

Altova StyleVision 2009 Enterprise Edition is a visual stylesheet designer for transforming XML, XBRL, and database data into HTML, RTF, PDF, and OOXML/Word 2007 output, and creating e-Forms. It is standards-compliant and supports XSLT 1.0, XSLT 2.0, XSL:FO, CSS, JavaScript, and all major databases. StyleVision is optimized for single source publishing. In one simple step you can access XML, XBRL, and/or database data, process it, and render it in five different output formats. It even has a built-in HTML importer that converts a Web page into an XML file, XSLT stylesheet, and XML Schema. StyleVision also includes an XBRL Table Wizard for dynamically designing stylesheets for rendering financial statements from XBRL. Numerous templates are provided for handling industry-standard XML vocabularies such as DITA and DocBook, and you can build your own templates for use with Authentic 2009, Altova’s free XML and database content editor. Authentic forms let users directly access and edit XML documents and/or databases without being exposed to the underlying technology. The StyleVision interface is so straightforward; you simply drag and drop XML and/or database contents, design elements, and presentation rules into your design, and are automatically prompted when additional options exist. You can even preview your output or XSL code at any time. Stylesheets can be based on XML Schemas, DTDs, XBRL taxonomies, and database structures, and support business logic validation, complex tables, tables of contents, conditional formatting, direct template filtering, date control, and much more. StyleVision integrates fully with Visual Studio and Eclipse, allowing you to access its graphical interface and design capabilities directly from within your favorite IDE. All these features combine to make Altova StyleVision the ultimate tool for single source, multi-channel publishing.

Version 2009 includes XBRL design for financial reporting; all-new design for tables; direct template filtering with XPath.

Tested spyware free

This snooping utility provides almost all the features essential for monitoring a PC, but we were especially impressed with its stealthiness. System Surveillance Pro logs keystrokes, IM chats, applications used, and Web sites visited, and can capture screenshots at user-defined periodic intervals.

The interface makes it easy to locate any log file you need to access. System Surveillance Pro can block Web sites via URLs or detected keywords, and includes a scheduler in case you don’t need to monitor PC usage at all times. Like most respectable spying applications, it will send you e-mail reports so you can keep an eye on your computer from a remote location. We doubt even the cleverest users will be able to detect the program while it’s running or uninstall it.

To open its control panel, you must use the Start menu’s Run command, and even if someone finds the application, they’ll still need your password to disable it. The utility can’t be stopped via the Task Manager, nor uninstalled through the Control Panel or the Program Files folder. Installation is very touchy, and all non-essential programs–even those running in the background–must be shut down for the installation to work. Also, the seven-day trial period is too short for our tastes, but since System Surveillance Pro provides effective protection against even savvy folks, we still think it’s a good find.

Publisher’s description

From Golden Plains Software :

Are you a concerned parent in need of parental control software to monitor your children online or an employer who needs to restrict employee computer usage? SSPro is the award winning all-in-one computer monitoring software product that has become an essential tool for concerned parents and network administrators. SSPro will log keystrokes typed – keylogger, monitor applications run, track websites visited, record instant message conversations and capture screenshots of the computer desktop. Logged data is neatly organized by machine name and date and is displayed with the current Windows login as well as the corresponding time of activity. SSPro’s mini-screenshot viewer keeps screen shots in-sync with the data log entries, providing an excellent method to visually verify the history log.

While users can take advantage of SSPro’s built-in pornographic keyword list to filter adult / sex related websites, users can also define their own keyword lists. Then, when a keyword is encountered, SSPro can take specific actions such as blocking the web site, chat program, etc., or sending an alert email with details of the event. Users can also configure SSPro to deliver entire password protected log files and screen shots to remote locations at specified intervals. Website blocking based on “Approved” and “Blocked” lists allow users to limit which URLs can be accessed. Using this powerful feature, users can easily block all websites except for the ones they approve. Users can even specify specific websites that should receive increased snapshot monitoring, perfect for various web-based social networking sites such as MySpace, Facebook and Meebo. More than just a simple key logger, keystroke logger or spy program, some of SSPro’s best features include Internet content filtering, central monitoring for multiple machines on a network or LAN, activity reports, image expiration, PC idle awareness, selective user monitoring, scheduling, optional warning messages and web / chat use time limits. SSPro supports most of the top chat and web browser programs including AIM, AOL, Yahoo IM, MSN Messenger, Windows live Messenger, ICQ, Google Talk, Internet Explorer – IE, Netscape, Firefox and Chrome. Both 32-bit and 64-bit systems are supported with one install. Whether you are a parent, business, library, school or government entity evaluating internet filters, keyloggers or security software, you’ll find SSPro’s free 7 day trial has much to offer.

No – I’m not dead yet!!

This is a final post at Tigerstail.wordpress.com because I am tired of seeking knowledge and bitching about that which is. It is time to use my skills to develope the solutions to all of the problems I have discovered.

Join Me at jimmicap.wordpress.com

by J. Kirk
Sr. Product Solutions Manager
Axway

In Davos, Switzerland, in 2004, Bill Gates predicted a spam-free world in two years. That, of course, didn’t even come close to fruition, and if you consider what happened from 2006 to 2009—Gates’ predicted utopian era of squeaky-clean inboxes—you have to confront the fact that spam outbreaks actually spiked consistently every twelve months.

Nothing beats human intuition in security matters, and a robust anti-spam product empowers its users with the information they need to make executive decisions on all inbound email.

You’ve heard all the scary numbers before. Up to 90 percent of all email is spam. One in 300 PCs has a virus. Three hundred thousand PCs get compromised every day. Only about six percent of inbound email is legitimate.

But what should you demand from your company’s anti-spam product to tackle these numbers head on and perhaps make Gates’ wild dream a reality (at least for your inbox)? And what analogy can you use in your organization’s anti-spam chats that pushes these features out of the abstract?

How about the airport?

What analogy could be better?

First, if your anti-spam product has IP reputation and content filtering, it’s performing like that first line of TSA guards who won’t even let you onto the concourse and up to the X-ray machines without a ticket and ID. Spam that can’t prove it has any business being near your inbox simply won’t be near your inbox.

Next, if your anti-spam product has artificial intelligence and image filtering, it’s performing like concourse security, checking IDs and luggage and waving the metal-detector wand. If something’s fishy at the airport checkpoint, the suspect probably isn’t going to make their flight, and likewise, even though the spam might’ve been able to get by the first line of defense, its contents betray it, and the spam is stopped dead in its tracks.

Finally, if your anti-spam product supports a human view, it’s allowing your IT department to perform like the hawk-eyed security guards in the unseen offices at the airport, standing before a large bank of monitors and taking action on the fly. Nothing beats human intuition in security matters, and a robust anti-spam product empowers its users with the information they need to make executive decisions on all inbound email.

Overlapping techniques like these combine to create a surefire method for protecting your organization against spam. Is Bill Gates’ vision of a spam-free world here today? No. But the more organizations insist on quality anti-spam products that boast these features, the less attractive spam will become to the unsavory characters who send it. And who knows? At some point, it might not even be worth their time.

For August, we’re featuring software to help keep you, your business and your family safer on line.

For a useful tip, see the end of the column where we give some resources on where and how to safely dispose

of unwanted electronics and other hazardous waste.

Tim recently started using Open DNS with his own computers and then with some of his clients. I blogged about this free web-based software several months ago and we thought it would be worthwhile to update so hopefully you can check it out for yourselves.

If you’re a business owner or a parent, this free software (nothing to download), is available to you.

Some uses:

• Filter out sites not suitable for your kids (see graphic below as there are 50 levels from which to choose)
• Block specific sites. If there are certain websites you never want to visit, block them specifically
• Phishing protection. If you’re about to visit a fraudulent website, you’ll get a notice from Open DNS
• Reports and statistics are available for your review—you can view websites visited, frequency of visits and if domains you blocked were typed in
• Open DNS automatically corrects your typos when entering in popular domains

If you are interested in having Open DNS at your office or home and need help, just give Tim a call at 831-0500 and he can get you set up.

Open DNS Article

Domain spoofing attacks were brought to our attention late last year by Dan Kaminsky. Putting it very simply, spoofing is where some bad guys redirect our computers from a trusted site to a site that looks a lot like what we were expecting, but isn’t. Then the bad guys are able to capture our passwords and other sensitive information.

While ISPs struggled to patch and fix things, the general public was made aware of OpenDNS by tech luminaries such as Leo Laporte, Steve Gibson and Kim Komando. OpenDNS is a free service that works with your current network to protect you from phishing and can be used at home, schools or businesses. Using this service protects you from domain spoofing and has added benefits. Simply visit the website and follow the step by step instructions on how to change your nameservers to the DNS nameservers. There is no software to download with OpenDNS, you simply choose to use their nameservers instead of the ones used by your ISP.

I visited the website and followed the router instructions and saw they didn’t have my exact model, but chose one similar to one pictured and got the nameservers changed. If you have a router, you will need to have your router IP address and password available.

I also signed up for a free account to take advantage of the other benefits of having OpenDNS which include:

• Extensive content filtering levels. Easily change the level of filtering that is right for your network. There are five levels plus a customization option
• Web-based dashboard where you manage your settings, networks, make network shortcuts and view your stats. The stats section is especially helpful as you can toggle settings to view any domains that were blocked as well as a list of domains being viewed by the network
• Ability to block specific websites. If your kids aren’t ready for youtube or social networking, you can block these sites. If you do block a specific site, you can type in a message to be displayed to the person trying to view the site, such as “dad says this is off-limits”.
• Typo correction. If you’re typing in the address bar, “yahoo.cm”, OpenDNS will automatically correct the spelling and take you to yahoo. I like this as it saves me having to look at some goofy page and retyping the address.
• Faster surfing. Reading other people’s blogs, I’ve seen people insist that their surfing is faster, while others have said it’s slower. For myself, I thought the first day was really slow, but now things seem fine, but don’t know about faster.

Recycling E-Waste & Other Hazardous Material

Probably most of us have used batteries, old electronics, computers, paint and chemicals in our garages that we want to get rid of responsibly. If you live in Oklahoma City, you can drop your unwanted items for free at their facility at SW 15th & Portland. Just bring your water bill as proof of residency. Check their website or call them before you go for a list of items they accept. If you have a computer, be sure to remove or wipe the hard drive to keep your information private.

Edmond residents can get one free curbside pick up per year of e-waste and hazardous waste OR you can take your items to the Oklahoma City recycling station mentioned above. Again, one free trip per year. Refer to the website for phone number or to email your request. Residents of other OKC suburbs can check their city’s recycling websites to see what services are offered.

I was cruising through my Twitter listings last night and found a reference to a Social Networking article by Marcia Connor at THE Journal (http://www.thejournal.com). Of course, curiosity won, and I had a look at the article. The ‘snip it’ below (as received when you select email me a copy) will give you the flavour of the article.

:::::

Beyond Social Networking: Building Toward Learning Communities

Much has been written recently about the impact of social networking tools in teaching and learning and how educators can build on the skills of their students in using these tools. But if educators only integrate the ability of students to connect and socialize, deeper points of learning will be missed. While good teaching and learning rests on effective relationships, in an active learning community, those relationships should evolve into actual idea exchange and knowledge construction.

Among those listed by Connor (quoting from MIT and other sources) are skills in:
• Simulation: the ability to interpret and construct dynamic models of real-world processes;
• Collective intelligence: the ability to pool knowledge and compare notes with others toward a common goal; and
• Negotiation: the ability to travel across diverse communities, discerning and respecting multiple perspectives and grasping and following alternative norms.
:::::

Once at the site, I was interested in the BiWeekly Poll in the sidebar which poses the question: Does your district ban social networking sites?

The currently listed stats show:

No ban – 17%
Yes, banned district-wide for students and teachers – 69%
Yes, banned only for students – 13%
Yes, banned only for certain students – 0%

There is an interesting message in these statistics, and it has got me thinking about the discussions around this very issue we had at our Technology Steering Committee meetings this year. Certainly, there are many aspects to this discussion of access. Some of our discussions included:

- digital citizenship
- embracing it as a way of ‘doing business’
- alignment of content filtering with resource selection policies
- grade appropriate content filtering
- alignment with Acceptable Use Policies
- what needs to be changed?
- what is the process for change in this area?
- how do we achieve a significant change in our systemic approach?
- risks and challenges
- educating not only the students, but teachers, administrators and parents too

I think many of us have a clear notion of where we need to get to, but the path is not necessarily an easy one at the system level, at least in the education field. I believe this is an area the needs to be changed more aggressively and that the positive educational results are with the risks.

At the moment I am thinking big on the change front and pondering strategies.

If interested, the complete article I referenced, is available online at:
The Journal

Happy pondering!

~ Mark

Today I realized I hadn’t been paying too much attention to marketing my YouTube channel of late. I had recently noticed that one of my anime music videos using the song “Hand of Sorrow” by the Dutch symphonic metal band Within Temptation had been getting a lot more views and comments lately. By far my most popular AMV on YouTube, it now has just over 80,000 views, which is pretty awesome. But it wasn’t until I looked at the view statistics using YouTube’s handy analytics tool, Insight, that I realized why it has experienced this sudden increase in traffic.

Here is a screenshot of a graph of the number of views my video has gotten over the last few months:

View Statistics for one of my anime music videos on YouTube using a song licensed by Warner Music Group

Within Temptation is licensed in the US under RoadRunner Records–a subsidiary of Warner Music Group. You’ll notice a huge jump in views of my video beginning around January 5th, where my video went from averaging around 100 views a day to around 400. This just happens to coincide with when Warner had a licensing fallout with YouTube and demanded that YouTube block all videos using songs it owned the rights to.

At the time, this caused a huge stink among YouTube users (though not as big as I wish), who beginning in late December and early January suddenly found their previously allowed content featuring WMG songs being blocked by YouTube’s copyright filters. This caused a huge problem with the same artist as my video above–Within Temptation, who in November had just held an innovative YouTube contest in which they provided users with behind the scenes concert footage and asked them to make a music video of the same song I used in my AMV. The winner, who had won a free trip to a concert in Amsterdam, now found his video yanked off YouTube, dispite it being done with the express approval of the band and being featured on the band’s website.

The result of all this was that everyone who uses YouTube is now mad at Warner, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation has been urging people whose videos are unjustly pulled from YouTube to fight it by disputing the automatic takedowns with fair use counterlclaims, and has even offered to defend those who do in court if necessary. The reason for my video’s sudden increase in popularity? I did precisely that.

Somtime between the last week of December and the first week of January, I received a notice from YouTube saying my video had been disabled because it had been identified as infringing on Warner’s copyright by YouTube’s automatic Content Identification System. Because this was one of my most popular videos, I wasn’t about to let them delete my video just because a computer had matched the song I used with one on Warner’s blocklist. And because I have spent the last four years acquiring a thorough knowledge of copyright law, I was pretty sure I could successfully defend my video as a fair use of Warner’s content.

So I immediatly disputed the copyright claim, citing the following reasons for why my video constituted fair use under US copyright law. It was (1) non-commerical and not for profit, (2) transformative in nature (combining music and video), (3) was of sufficiently low quality that it could not reasonably compete with the original work, and (4) could have no possible negative effect on the market for the original song, but would in fact promote the song and motivate people to buy it. My video was automatically restored after filing the dispute, and a couple months later a message appeared next to the video saying the dispute had been sucessful and the copyright claim had been removed.

However, as the statistics indicate, most other people apparantly didn’t do what I did. Before the Warner ban, there used to be numerous videos using that same song on YouTube, including several other Final Fantasy AMVs. Because I defended my rights under copyright law and other users didn’t, my video is now one of only a few videos using that song, and now appears at the top of the YouTube search list. The YouTube analytics also indicate that at the same time, the number of people who discovered my video through related videos fell dramatically, while the number who discovered it through YouTube searches rose dramatically. So I guess I have Warner to thank for removing all my competition so my video could increase in popularity. I guess draconian copyright enforcement has its place after all!

Deperimeterization requires a data-centric approach to security.  To support this requires standardization of data and document tagging, ensuring sensitive information is protected regardless of where it ends up.  But standardization has always been an elusive goal in technology, one only rarely achieved.

I was introduced to deperimeterization as a concept a few years ago while conducting research for a paper on network access controls.  As defined by the Jericho Forum, it is based on the premise that the deployment of perimeter defenses alone is not a reasonable and appropriate approach to safeguarding information assets.  Today, there are many ways to slither through an organization’s externally facing controls.  Further, much of an organization’s information is shared with businesses and individuals who operate outside the home organization’s security perimeter.  So perimeter defenses should be only one layer in a data-centric approach to protecting information assets.

The Jericho Forum is not part of the Open Group located in Reading, U.K.  According to Oltsik, it is currently working on key management interoperability protocol (KMIP), open authentication (OATH), and extensible access control markup language (XACML).  These are all great ideas which would make the secure exchange of information between islands of organizational security less complex.  In an April 1, 2009 CNET article, Jon Oltsik wrote about security’s role in deperimeterization, but what caught my attention was a comment Oltsik wrote near the end of his article.

We also need standard tags for data classification and confidential data security policy enforcement. If an Excel spreadsheet contains Social Security numbers, the file should have a standard meta data tag that tells operating systems, e-mail, and gateway filters to take special actions like encrypting the file or preventing a user from making a copy to a USB drive. This type of standard would make enterprise rights management far more mainstream. If Microsoft and Adobe Systems teamed up, they could really accelerate a standard in this area.

Source: On the security road to ‘de-perimeterization’, Jon Oltsik, CNET, 1 April 2009

I think the idea of somehow tagging documents containing information is a great idea.  It takes protection right to the data.  However, I don’t believe we can rely on users to do this.  So that leaves content filtering.  Since there are already numerous content filtering solutions on the market, the real problem is not function.  Rather it is standardization.

If I tag a document with Product A because it contains sensitive information, all document security products operating within the networks of business with whom I share that document should recognize the flag and behave appropriately.  And tag checking can’t rely solely on applications/appliances dedicated for that purpose.  Rather, all applications which handle that document, including Microsoft Office, Open Office, etc., must be able to identify the tag and dispose of the document according to, at a minimum, a set of security standards.

I know this is a lot to ask.  And there is the question of how document rights management products, Microsoft’s IRM in Office 2007, fit into the overall solution.

So the solution is simple.  Get everyone to agree on a tagging framework and how a document is to be handled based on its identity in the framework, and integrate this process into all document filtering and rights management products.  Let’s see, this should happen about the time I get my Pulitzer prize for blogging…

The markets are growing more open and competitive ever before. Businesses need a smart work-force to quickly assess the changes in the markets and the strategies of the competition. The counter-strategies have to be set into action within hours.

Businesses can no more survive with just – “trained work-force”. They need a “smart work-force”. Self-inspired quest to learn and self-teach, is the hall-mark of the smart work-force. The knowledge-quotient of our smart work-force alone can secure our competitive edge. Internet is an important tool, to increase the knowledge-quotient of the smart work-force.

The safeguards to our Internet and Information Resources are necessary to prevent crippling productivity, financial and collateral damages.

The smart work-force needs its computer systems to be highly available, as more and more of our operations and their processes are managed via computers on large networks. Any employee who loses the use of his computers, or misuses the available system resources, will affect the entire process-chain and cause serious productivity losses. System or network down-times can incur productivity losses upon every department.
Though assessing the productivity losses due to abuse or misuse of

Internet access, is so much more difficult to compute. But if we computed the cascading effect of all such productivity losses, on the entire process-chain, the figures would be more revealing and frightening.

Many organizations prefer to turn a blind-eye to this, since they believe, that this loss can-not be prevented. So they believe, that the exercise of identifying the same is simply futile, and continue to suffer in silence.

We have to harness the power of this Information Highway, but we have to safeguard against its inherent threats, of security and misuse.

Sitenin takipcileri bilirler TCP/IP iletisiminde tunelleme yontemleri ozel ilgi alanima girer. Bugune kadar cesitli ortamlarda onlarca yontem/arac kullanarak tunelleme yaptim. Ve rahatlikla soyleyebilirim ki en iyi Firewall, en iyi IPS vs sistemini de kullansaniz bir sekilde onarl bypass edilebilir.

Tunelleme yontemlerinden sık kullanilanlarini sayacak olursak;

ICMP Tunelleme -Artik disariya icmp paketleri kapali oldugu icin cok ise yaramiyor DNS Port tunelleme – Disariya dns portu aciksa UDP/TCP 53 uzerinden tunelleme. Ayni zamanda OpenVPN icin de kullanilabilir.

DNS Protokol Tunelleme – Klasik dns sorgulari kullanarak yerel agdaki dns sunucu uzerinden Firewall/IPS Atlatma

HTTP In Smtp tunelleme – HTTP isteklerini local mail sunucu uzerinden gondderme. Bu yontem de sadece local erisimi olanlar icin saglam bir bypass yontemi

Son olarak da

HTTP/HTTPS Tunelleme - Cesitli varyasyonlari olmakla birlikte IPS’ler tarafindan yakalanmamak icin HTTP Degil HTTPS kullanmak ve klasik http protokolune uygun istekler gondermek gerekir. Yani disarda biryerde 80. portu acik bekleyen bir sunucu ve uzerinde kendi yazilimimiz olmasina gerek olmadan calisan web sunucu uzerine bir dosya yerlestirerek bu dosya araciligi ile tunelleme yapmak.

Bu yontemle calisan araclar cogunlukla TCP baglantilarini tunelleme icin kullaniliyor. UDP icin henuz saglikli calisan uygulama sayisi oldukca az/yok.

Tunelleme konusu gelince seminerlerimden birinde katilimci bir arkadasin soyledigi su soz aklima geliyor “Bir port acikca tum portlar aciktir, bir protokol aciksa tum protokoller aciktir”.

Bu yazinin konusunu da yeni cikan bir tunelleme araci olusturuyor. WebTunnel, tamamen http/https istekleri uzerinden calisan ve herhangi TCP protokolunu ilgili sayfa uzerinden tunellemeye yarayan bir arac. Buna benzer bir araci yakinlarda yayinlanmisti ama jsp versiyonu haric saglikli calismiyordu(reDuh)

WEbTunnel Calisma mantigi

Istemci—-Proxy/Firewall/IPS—-Internet

Istemci’nin sadece Proxy uzerinden HTTP ve HTTPS isteklerine izni var. Fakat istemci SSH ya da RDP gibi protokoller kullanmak istiyor.

Istemci Webtunnel’in bilesenlerinden birini disarda bir sunucuya yerlestiriyor. Bu bilesen perl ile yazilmis bir CGI uygulamasi. (Calismasi icin hedef sunucuda .pl uzantili dosyalarin cgi olarak calistirma izni olmasi gerekir.)

Sonrasinda istemci tarafinda WebTunnel’in istemci yazilimi ile sunucudaki bu  URL’i cagiriyor ve tunnel kurulmus oluyor. Bundan sonrasi kullanilacak diger uygulamalarin portunun tunelin actigi porta yonlendirilmesine kaliyor.

Uygulama

http://www.islandjohn.com/islandjohn.com/Home/Entries/2009/2/1_Webtunnel.html

adresinden webtunnel uygulamasi indirilir. Uygulamanin wts.pl  —>Sunucuya aktarilacak kisim wtc.pl —->istemcide kullanilacak kisim

olmak uzere iki bileseni vardir.  “wts.pl” web sunucuda cgi-bin dizinine yerlestirilir. Sonrasinda tunel kurulumu icin wtc.pl scripti calistirilmali.

#perl wtc.pl 

Usage: wtc.pl [--daemon] [--pid file] [--cert file] [--key file] local remote tunnel [proxy]

local        Tunel kurulduktan sonra yerelde dinlemeye alinacak port(Tunelleme yapilacak diger uygulamalar bu portu kullanacak)

remote        Baglanilmak istenen asil sistem

tunnel        Tunel ucu olarak kullanilacak wts.pl scriptinin http/https yolu

proxy         Uygulamayi Proxy uzerinden kullanmak icin Proxy adresi

Tunel’i aktif etmek icin kullandigim komut:

$ perl wtc.pl tcp://localhost:8080 tcp://vpn.lifeoverip.net:22 http://WEB_SUNUCU/cgi-bin/wts.pl

2009-02-23 10:42:57 webtunnel[9512]: wtc_tunnel_start() code=200 message=OK status=1 reason=Tunnel started C

2009-02-23 10:43:38 webtunnel[9512]: wtc_tunnel_stop() code=200 message=OK status=1 reason=Tunnel stopped

Bu komutla localhost’un 8080 portunu uzaktaki wts.pl araciligi ile vpn.lifeoverip.net’in 22. portuna baglamis olduk. Kurulan tuneli kullanarak SSH baglantisi yapalim

huzeyfe@elmasekeri:~$ ssh localhost  -p 8080

The authenticity of host ‘[localhost]:8080 ([127.0.0.1]:8080)’ can’t be established. DSA key fingerprint is c2:c3:a8:6c:0b:ce:7c:59:7d:e3:38:6c:98:67:4a:46. Are you sure you want to continue connecting (yes/no)? yes Warning: Permanently added ‘[localhost]:8080′ (DSA) to the list of known hosts. Password: Last login: Sun Feb 22 19:23:16 2009 from XYZ Copyright (c) 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1990, 1991, 1993, 1994 The Regents of the University of California.  All rights reserved.

$ last|head -1 huzeyfe          ttyp0    WEB_SUNUCU          Mon Feb 23 10:33   still logged in $

Gorulecegi gibi vpn.lifeoverip.net’e istemcinin ip adresinden degil web sunucunun ip adresinden baglanilmis oluyor.

Tunel Guvenligi

Tunel kurulurken bir sniffer araciligi ile gidip gelen veriler incelenirse asagidaki gibi cikti alinacaktir

root@elmasekeri:~# urlsnarf

urlsnarf: listening on eth0 [tcp port 80 or port 8080 or port 3128]

123.alibaba. – - [23/Feb/2009:10:56:06 +0200] “GET http://WEB_SUNUCU/cgi-bin/wts.pl?cmd=start&arg=tcp%3A%2F%2Fvpn.lifeoverip.net%3A22 HTTP/1.1″ – - “-” “webtunnel/0.0.3″

123.alibaba. – - [23/Feb/2009:10:56:07 +0200] “GET http://WEB_SUNUCU/cgi-bin/wts.pl?cmd=read HTTP/1.1″ – - “-” “webtunnel/0.0.3″

123.alibaba. – - [23/Feb/2009:10:56:07 +0200] “POST http://WEB_SUNUCU/cgi-bin/wts.pl?cmd=write HTTP/1.1″ – - “-” “webtunnel/0.0.3″

123.alibaba. – - [23/Feb/2009:10:56:07 +0200] “GET http://WEB_SUNUCU/cgi-bin/wts.pl?cmd=read HTTP/1.1″ – - “-” “webtunnel/0.0.3″

123.alibaba. – - [23/Feb/2009:10:56:07 +0200] “GET http://WEB_SUNUCU/cgi-bin/wts.pl?cmd=read HTTP/1.1″ – - “-” “webtunnel/0.0.3″

123.alibaba. – - [23/Feb/2009:10:56:07 +0200] “POST http://WEB_SUNUCU/cgi-bin/wts.pl?cmd=write HTTP/1.1″ – - “-” “webtunnel/0.0.3″

123.alibaba. – - [23/Feb/2009:10:56:08 +0200] “GET http://WEB_SUNUCU/cgi-bin/wts.pl?cmd=read HTTP/1.1″ – - “-” “webtunnel/0.0.3″

… POST detaylarina bakilirsa arada gidip gelen veriler(sifreler vs)okunabilir. Dolayisi ile tuneli guvenli kurabilmek icin https baglantisi kullanilmalidir.

$ perl wtc.pl tcp://localhost:8080 tcp://vpn.lifeoverip.net:22 https://WEB_SUNUCU/cgi-bin/wts.pl

gibi

ya da istemci tarafi sertifikalari kullanilarak daha guvenli bir baglanti kurulabilir.

http://blog.lifeoverip.net/2009/02/23/alternatif-tcp-tunelleme-araci-webtunnel/

OpenDNS tarafindan uzun suredir ucretsiz  olarak verilen bir hizmet var: Domain tabanli icerik filtreleme. Kisaca yapi soyle calisiyor;

OpenDNS’e uye oluyorsunuz -> Uyelik sayfasindan ip araliginizi belirtiyorsunuz->Hangi kategorilerdeki iceriklerin bloklanacagini seciyorsunuz(Klasik icerik filtreleme sistemlerindeki gibi)->Sonra aginizda DNS sunucu olarak OpenDNS’în adreslerini veriyorsunuz ve boylece ek bir islem, yatirim yapmadan hizli bir icerik filtreleyiciye sahip oluyorsunuz.

OpenDNS’i kullanan istemci sayisinin 5 milyon oldugu ve bu sayinin hergecen gun arttigi dusunulurse yakin gelecekte piyasada dolasan icerik filtreleme sistemlerine ciddi bir rakip geliyor demektir.

Icerik filtreleme sistemlerde en onemli iki husus performans ve bloklanacak site veritabanidir.(Buna bir de loglama ve raporlama ekleyebiliriz). Performans konusunda OpenDNS’i gececek bir uygulama olmayacaktir zira daha dns sorgulama esnasinda istekler filtrelenecektir. Bu sistemi Spam engelleme icin kullandigimiz RBL Listelerine benzetebiliriz.

OpenDNS’în site veritabani henuz cok gelismis degil ama gonullu kullanicilar tarafindan her gecen gun siteler kategorilendiriliyor ve veritabani buyuyor.

Genel olarak dusunuldugunde hem ucretsiz olmasi hem de kurulum, bakim gibi kaynak gerektirecek islemleri olmamasi benim gozumde OpenDNS’i gelecegin icerik filtreleme sistemi olarakust siralara yerlestiriyor. Buyuk sirketler icin degil fakat orta olcekli ve kucuk olcekli sirketler icin denenesi bir cozum.

Tabi burada gozden kacirilmamasi gereken durum OpenDNS’in sizin tum DNS trafiginize hakim olmasi ki bu da sizin trafiginiz uzerinde istenilen islemin OpenDNS tarafindan yapilabilecegi manasina geliyor.

Huzeyfe ONAL

Permalink

Author: Daniël Verhoeven, 22 feb 2009

Avant-propos: finding information on the web NOT using Google or any other search engine

A fortnight ago I planned to write an article about Google and contextual information search, the opposite of full text search (Google, Altavista, Yahoo search…). I started to collect information NOT using Google. I found out that one of my best friends in Belgium, Wim VDB – saw him on the birthday party of Francis – had made a small critical posting about Google privacy: ‘Zoekmachines en uw Privacy‘. When browsing his blog I stumbled on an article of Geert Lovink, I knew Geert a long time ago as a writer in Hactic… I wanted to reconnect. Using the tag http://wordpress.com/tag/geert-lovink, I found an article of him on Weizenbaum and Google search. Weizenbaum is a shared reference, one of the first well grounded critics of the information age. Since Weizenbauw was himself one of the architects of computer technology, he knows what he is talking about. Geert’s  article was a tribute to Weizenbaum and also a kind of Google bashing. This article linked to another article in Eurozine this one from Daniel Leisegan, Das Google-Imperium and to Siva Vaidhyanathan’s huge project:

The Googlization of Everything: http://www.googlizationofeverything.com/. 379 postings until now.

Using the tag Google on the German WordPress domain, http://de.wordpress.com/tag/google/,  I found more articles and again a complete blog dedicated to Google watching: ‘Google is watching you! “Don’t be evil” ? – Pah..‘. Because I want to assist to HAR2009 I landed on Karin Spaink’s Blog, who had also written a few articles about Google and privacy.  I like Tony Curson Price writings, I follow his articles on OpenDemocracy (I get them in my mail). He has written ‘Google’s Attention Deficit Disorder‘ and in his series the Liberty of the networked’, Google is analysed and discredited in a broader context. I also discovered there is a site of Google Watchers: http://www.google-watch.org/. Somebody linked, I think it was Wim, to an article on Cnet: Debunking Google’s log anonymization propaganda… And of course it didn’t stop there, I didn’t mention yet Pit Schultz, Nicolas Carr, several articles I found on Libertés Internets,  Slash Dot  nor tag search using Technorati.

I found all this critical articles  about Google NOT using Google at all, but using a contextual search for information about my subject, defining contextual search as looking in places, reading and  consulting people that I had figgered out to be critical about Google.

Of course I also dived in the resources used, weaving a coherent network of related and associated retrieval. For the writers I mentioned , referencing is self-evident, thus finding resources was a peace of cake. The path to all these resources is transparent and meaningful. It’s not about bits and bytes, but about well formed statements  and anlysis, mostly based on a lot of research.   I  landed where I wanted to land, without having to throw away the typical search engine garbage that’s returned. It’s like asking a librarian: “I’m looking for… but do not find the exact division… to look for in the catalogue. The librarian in the dull library revives, is happy somebody is requiring his expertise, he loves books, he likes to help and to chatter a little, he shows me: ‘You had to look here..’ and there it is.”. Of course I also know something about my subject and I have a circle of friends and acquaintances that have the same interests and know more… this helps.

There is also another important surplus for these findings, since I know most of the people who have written these articles, I know their background and a lot of their past, I also know I can rely on the information they offer and I know how I must interpret things. I know Geert is exaggerating sometimes… wanting to shock people, but his bottom-line is OK, and so on. I can contextualise almost completely the information I found. This is reliable info, there is no hidden agenda and nobody owes Google something. This is no bullshit.

I also consulted the opposition. In an email discussion with another friend Gert, who is/was a Google fan, but switched 180 degrees when I reported  him that the MOS of his Mobile, Google’s Android has a security flaw, I could collect a lot of information too.  After he realised that he was defending a system he didn’t want to defend – he is very scrupulous  about digital security, doesn’t want to work on MS Windows for instance, because it’s not safe and it’s clumsy and ugly – he started to collect prove and information against Google for me… Expert information. All information I can use to write my article.

But now I have another problem. I have so much information, enough to write a book about the flaws and hegemony of Google, but I have no time to write a book though I would like to, but Google is not my main subject, contextual search is, Google is only related to it. But meanwhile also most of my friends know I’m preparing an article about Google, I have to write something and I have to keep my standards high.  They will not accept chewed old stuff neither a messy sketch. So, I’ve changed my plan, I’m going to make it a series, now and then a short episode, with some original material but of course relying on all the good stuff they delivered. This way my time management isn’t put upside down. It’s always a hack. So I discharged myself of a structured approach but not from being coherent. But what can I do better than take over the approach of Siva Vaidhyanathan in preparing his book:

“The book will answer three key questions: What does the world look like through the lens of Google?; How is Google’s ubiquity affecting the production and dissemination of knowledge?; and how has the corporation altered the rules and practices that govern other companies, institutions, and states?”

I will try to find answers on these questions in my series, of course more diffracted, and also with a small angle shift.  Since my relation to Google critics is research on ‘contextual search’, and the first peer group of my research is aged between 15 and 25 yrs old, and I am a computer pedagogue having kids myself, the pedagogic view will have more stress. My stand is clear. Google is a disease, an addiction, a money machine that could implement contextual search, combine it with full text search, but refuses to do so because this would throw sand in its own money machinery. In real life, people search always contextual. If you want to buy a bread, you do not go to the pharmacy, but to the bakery. When looking for a text using full text search, you  go nowhere and everywhere at the same time.  That’s how full text search works when you can not define the domain you are searching in.

All blog postings are XHTML.  XHTML, is now the standard for web pages. These webpages contain meta-information about the content domain, topic etc. A lot of older pages also contain keywords discribing the domain, topic of a page. This meta information could be extracted and added to the text-database allowing users of a search engine do define beforehand in which contextual domain they are looking, thus reducing the irrelevant results significantly.

Blogplatforms propagate  this meta-information. That way you can do a  contextual search  using tags within the blogplatform, but also outside the platform using Technorati. I do not say it’s simple, but it is feasible, and of course a lot of  texts containing no, or false meta-information should become second rang, superflouos garbage. This would aslo be a radical but efficient way to counter the pagerank manipulating idiots, something Google claims it is doing all the time. But I doubt about their perseverence. If they are doing  it, the result is never stable and it is almost invisible.

For a blogger Google has become completely superfluous. When looking to the referrer statistics of 2bloggen only 10,86% of the hits arrive on the blog through Google Search, all the rest is contextual. Google is almost completely useless. So Google bashing will be the generic tendency of all episodes.  The first article  is undermining the so called ‘net neutrality’ of Google, a public demand Google once supported, but isn’t practicing any longer itself.

Google the lapdog of authoritarian regimes?

Source Watch discribes ‘net neutrality‘ this way:

“…the guiding principle that preserves the free and open Internet. Net neutrality ensures that all users can access the content or run the applications and devices of their choice. With net neutrality, the network’s only job is to move data – not choose which data to privilege with higher quality service.”

Net neutrality is an important issue in the US. In 2008 a coalition of organisations and individuals started a campaign to saveguard the free and open Internet. Put simply, Net Neutrality means no discrimination. Net Neutrality prevents Internet providers from blocking, speeding up or slowing down Web content based on its source, ownership or destination. Some very important organisations support the campaing, like:

Consumers Union
American Library Association
National Coalition of Women’s Organizations
Parents Television Council
Consumer Federation of America
Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ, Inc.
Public Knowledge
Common Cause
Christian Coalition of America
Democracy for America
Electronic Retailing Association
American Civil Liberties Union
and many others.

Also Obama and a lot of politicians worry about ‘net neutrality’. Let us quote from the ‘Net Neutrality Blog‘:

“President Barack Obama signed an economic stimulus bill with $7.2 billion to get fast, affordable, neutral Internet to the nearly half of American homes that don’t have it.

Net Neutrality was written into the DNA of the broadband stimulus. The plan requires that those who build Internet networks (using the nearly $4.7 billion in NTIA grants provided by the bill) adhere to the nondiscrimination and openness principles at the core of Net Neutrality.

Obama himself pledged to “take a back seat to no one” in his commitment to Net Neutrality. And the administration’s technology policies now posted on the White House Web site list Net Neutrality as the top priority.

Obama’s all-but-certain pick to head the FCC, Julius Genachowski, was one of the principal architects of the president’s pro-Net Neutrality platform.”

See for more detailed information also a text of FreePress.

Who wants to get rid of ‘Net Neutrality’? As to the faq of the campaign site:

“The nation’s largest telephone and cable companies — including AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and Time Warner — want to be Internet gatekeepers, deciding which Web sites go fast or slow and which won’t load at all.”

This is also an European threat as you can read in: Who wants Net Discrimination in Europe?

But it’s not Google’s matter apparently, or it isn’t any longer. Google supported ‘Net Neutrality’ thus far. They had too. A search engine that wants to favour certain content, looses his impartiality. Who would still want to use a biased search engine? But America wouldn’t be America  and Google is meanwhile one of the biggest American corporations, if they were not hypocritical about this[1]. We all know that Google blocks a lot of sites in China since 2006, especially sites about Tibet, the Dalai Lama and the Falun Gong. See Sites Google Agreed to Censor in China. In 2001 Human Rights Watch still congatulated Google for not wanting to give free sensitive Informationn to the Chinese Government, while Yahoo and MSN didn’t have a moral problem helping to put Chinese dissidents in jail. Source watch gives more examples of Google’s censorship and the following case is also very clear.

Everybody knows Google Earth where you can see Sharp pictures of any spot on the Globe. The two pictures beneath have both been taken by the Google satellite. The first picture has disappeared meanwhile for reasons we will explain.

Photo of secret CIA base in Baluchistan, Pakistan 2006

Photo of secret CIA base in in Baluchistan, Pakistan 2009

On the First picture you can see ‘Drones’, used by the CIA to bomb the frontier area of Pakistan with Afghanistan. The Information Clearing House knows exactly what kind of planes you see:

“The MQ1 Predator carries two laser-guided Hellfire missiles, and can fly for up to 454 miles, at speed of up to 135mph, and at altitudes of up to 25,000ft, according to the US Air Force website www.af.mil“

The Information Clearing House also mentions that several governments have asked to remove such pictures. They have accused Google also of giving free military secrets. The argument often used is that Iraqui insurgents possessed detailed pictures of UK military bases when arrested.

We do not know and will probably never know why Google has removed the picture but we know the reason is not military security, but pure political considerations.

As to the  Washingon Post some 30 attacks from the air were deployed on Pakistani territory using unmanned aeroplanes ascending from a secret CIA base in Pakistan, Baluchistan. The Taliban does not have aeroplanes to revenge these attacks, so knowing where these planes lift-off is not useful information for them. But there is another problem. The Pakistani do not like the US military. Pervez Musharraf is a servile ally of the US, because in exchange his government receives a billion dollar support.

But now and then there are elections in Pakistan, it is some kind of democracy. Pervez Musharraf is one of the candidates of the elections to be held this year in Pakistan. The Washington Post expected Musharraf to stop his support for the raids on Pakistani territory using a Pakistani airbase. If  the Pakistani newspapers would print pictures of these secret airbase, it would excite many Pakistani and Musharraf would be considered as a traitor of his own people and  therefore not being reelected. So. I think this is a clear cut case of political influence resulting in Google censorship. Google’s Net Neutrality is circumstantial. You can not rely on it.

More on  Net Neutrlity

How the net-neutrality debate crossed the pond (UK)

More articles about Net Neutrlity

More articles about Google Watch

More articles about Context Awareness

Links to Wikipedia: Context Awareness, Net Neutrality, Content Filtering, Google Watch

TIB tarafindan onayli icerik yazilimlarinin listesi yayinlandi. Listeye ilk bakista sadece bir adet kurumsal icerik filtreleyicinin oldugunu goruyoruz. Icerik filtreleme urunu satanlarin urunlerini kaydettirmelerinde fayda var. (Yurt disindan urun getirip satan firmalarin urunlerinin onay alabilmesi icin yapmalari gereken birkac madde var)

Liste icin:

http://www.tib.gov.tr/onayli_filtreleme_yazilimlari.html

TIB’in icerik filtreleme yazilimini onaylamasi icin olmasi gereken kriterler:

www.tib.gov.tr/%5Cdokuman%5CFiltre%20Program%20Kriterleri.doc

Huzeyfe ONAL