Cable giants bullied into new child porn censorship deal
The major national cable providers are all to sign a troubling yet major censorship deal with a private anti-child porn organization. The deal would give the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) carte blanche power to issue a takedown of any customer's content hosted on a cable provider's servers.
The group will provide each cable company with a list of Web site addresses that they believe contain child porn. The cable companies will then, per the agreement, scrub the content from their servers.
A press release describing the agreement states that:
The cable operators that have agreed to execute the (memo of understanding) within 30 days include: Comcast Corporation; Cox Communications; Charter Communications; Cablevision Systems Corporation...Time Warner Cable has already signed the MOU.
It is unclear what, if any, notification cable customers will receive before their Web sites are deleted, or what legal rights they will have to appeal the classification of their content as illegal child pornography.
The memo of understanding states that the private group will provide cable companies with a list of kiddie porn URLs, that "in NCMEC's good faith" appears to meet the federal definition of child pornography.
According to Cynthia Brumfield, the industry watcher who first broke the story:
"The identified URLs and content will be deleted (by the cable company) and the operator will provide NCMEC the customer's name and address in those instances where that information is available. NCMEC will then work with law enforcement authorities."
Thus, we have a private third-party group, who will be given the power to force the takedown of content, who will be given the names and addresses of the "violators." Is there anything else?
Oh yes--NCMEC wants its participation in the takedown to be kept secret. Brumfield cites the memo of understanding (which is not public)--which she said states that cable companies will:
"remove or limit the availability of apparent child pornography images or other content based on the List, and in taking such action replaces the offending page with a notice, such notice shall contain no reference to NCMEC."
I hope i am not the only one who is extremely troubled by this deal. Kiddie porn used to be one of the three major trump cards justifying censorship, invasion of privacy, and the general evisceration of civil liberties (the other two trump cards being illegal drugs and terrorism). However, with this deal and the recently successful child porn justified efforts of the NY AG to eradicate Usenet discussion groups, child porn seems to have outgrown its two fellow trump cards.
The threat of kiddie porn now seems to be capable of justifying any amount of censorship--something that no CEO accountable to his shareholders will dare stand up to.
This kind of takedown power should not be given to a private, unaccountable group. Both the FBI and DHS/US Customs already manage databases of enabling their agents to digitally fingerprint such content. As much as I dislike the FBI, they are at least (occasionally) held accountable. Journalists can submit Freedom Of Information Act requests, and the heads of the agency can be hauled in front of a congressional committee. NCMEC, on the other hand, is not subject to an FOIA request.
Public challenge
And so, I issue the following public challenge:
Comcast's anti-BitTorrent efforts were undone once the Associated Press was able to prove that the cable giant slowed down the file-sharing of a copy of the King James Bible.
Thus, I promise a bounty of 100 U.S. dollars to anyone who can somehow trick a cable company into taking down a copy of the King James Bible, under the mistaken belief that it's actually kiddie porn.
You may either work to trick the cable company directly, or instead go after the shadowy National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. It is highly unlikely that cable companies will verify the URLs given to them by NCMEC, and so this may actually prove to be easier.
I am not encouraging anyone to break the law. I am sure this can be done with social engineering, and a bit of smarts. Finally, if you opt to donate your $100 award to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, I will match it 100 percent.
Disclaimer: This challenge is made by a private individual, and does not reflect the policy of CNET.
Christopher Soghoian delves into the areas of security, privacy, technology policy and cyber-law. He is a student fellow at Harvard University's Berkman Center for Internet and Society , and is a PhD candidate at Indiana University's School of Informatics. His academic work and contact information can be found by visiting www.dubfire.net/chris/. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network, and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
- Tags:
-
child porn,
-
cable companies,
-
comcast
- Bookmark:
- Digg
- Del.icio.us
We all have to deal with the ideas and desires that inhabit our brains, but thinking about killing someone and actually doing it are two different activities. One is private, the other is public. But, I'm sure you already know this information. So why even bother to post such a remark?
However, it is ALSO an important duty of society to protect its members from false accusations and improper or unfair application of power. History shows that private groups that have no accountability or oversight will, when given power, eventually abuse that power. Even if they mean well.
It is ALREADY illegal to host child pornography. ISPs and Web hosting companies ALREADY take down child porn and turn the content owner's information over to the FBI. All this bill does is give a private group complete and absolute power over the ISP's content, without appeal or oversight.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely,
The fact is, there are some adults who have decided for us, that we should be exposed to this sort of thing. What happened to my right not to have this stuff thrust into my face every time I get on the internet or into the faces of my grandchildren?
There are things, mommy and daddy don't want their children to see, and for good reasons, not perverted ones. Why should stangers be allowed to dictate the world I have to live in, as long as I'm following the general, moral, social guidelines of society? Sometimes, when people can't control themselves or stop putting their smut into the faces of others, we have to control them ourselves. If the porn industry had our best interests at heart, and felt socially and morally inclined, we would be passing these laws.
Because this is a democratic country, I vote we pass the laws necessary to protect the children from this type of exploitation, even if it means I can't have pictures of nude teenage girls in my procession at any time, and I can't publicly express a desire to have sex with children or teenagers.
Believe it or not, it will not hurt my world in any degree and I'm not going to let simple minded people dissuade me from exercising my rights to determine the nature and environment of the world in which I live, as long as that world is contained within a framework of socially established morality. We have the responsibility to protect our constitutional rights and the responsibility of protecting our children and the social norm. We determine the priority by comparing the damage done to the individuals involved. In this case Children take the lead on the priority list. We can pound out the subtle differences at a later time when we have more data to work with.
If those people armed with the power to determine the amount of protection afforded to children try to exploit this power for their own agendas, we will replace them and prosecute them if necessary. If the effort becomes unworkable and we are not protecting any children, we will rework the whole idea. If one child is saved and our rights are not infringed in any noticeable degree, then the effort is worth the pain. No pain, no gain.
And what, exactly does NCMEC plan to do about those sites overseas?
As rexrino says: and i quote, "Why should stangers be allowed to dictate the world I have to live in, as long as I'm following the general, moral, social guidelines of society? Sometimes, when people can't control themselves or stop putting their smut into the faces of others, we have to control them ourselves....
...Believe it or not, it will not hurt my world in any degree and I'm not going to let simple minded people dissuade me from exercising my rights to determine the nature and environment of the world in which I live" This goes both ways, I like my freedom.
And finally as Pmocek says, teens already have sex. I guarantee 50% if not more have sex, do drugs, drink, etc. Hell, half the time it's the kid's making the kiddie porn. Much like all censorship issues, parent's can not be lazy, *****, and whine. They must stand up, and protect their children from these issues personally. (Cyber-Nanny, blackboxes, knowing where they are at, who they are with). The majority of responsibility rests on the Parents...passing on their wisdom to the kids hoping they become responsible enough not to stand in the middle of a highway.
As far as the selective websites being banned by a group with no legitimate legal enforcement rights, that's crazy. Is there a panel that decides this or just some Flanders's guy surfing for things he believes is inappropriate?
If that's the case you could say goodbye to any Japanese web sites of any product that has a model wearing a Sailor Moon Costume ( Japanese Schoolgirl). If she looks provocative wouldn't that be inappropriate considering she is wearing a schoolgirl outfit? This is going by the child porn law that says even if its not a child if it simulates a child. I don't know if the law states there has to be sex or just look like they want to have sex, but know photographer is going to tell the model to hold the product but look bored and uninterested!
As far as the whole child porn thing! I think its 90% hyped BS! When I was a kid I never heard about this or that happening to any kid or that child porn is a multi billion dollar industry. Did 10 years ago all of the pedophiles just say lets go take over the world! Other than the train shop guy trying to touch Arnold in the bathtub, it wasn't as prevalent. Before like 72 or 73, I think it child porn movies were legal.( I could be wrong about that). Either way it existed, so its not something new.
I seriously believe that the child pornography problem is no where near the proportions that they are claiming and they are using this as an excuse for further censorship in a decade that has seen more liberties and freedoms be squashed in the states then it's whole existence.
So no one thinks that I am a proponent of child pornography. ( this issue is about Censorship)
If someone harms a child in a sexual manor please just try them legally in the justice system and save the tax payers money and shoot them!
If some are against capital punishment, you could relocate all legitimately convicted pedophiles in walled community with an adult achondroplasia community within the wall as well. No children get hurt and everyone is happy!
If families just interacted with the children more we wouldn't need other groups to try to protect them. School shooting didn't exist when I was a kid and I know guns did!
There are often PDF files hidden within JPG files that are posted on "anonymous" image boards (the chans, 7chan.org etc). I've gotten the bible in PDF form this way.
These are sites that allow you to post anything though any illegal content such as "CP" is against the site rules and removed by moderators when it's found. However of course since there have been 56 million posts to these boards in the past year, the number of appearances of "CP" is probably much higher due to the overall activity level at these sites (though the overall ratio of "CP" to other content is extremely small, and not enough to justify calling them "CP" sites).
Frankly though if these sites are cut off by comcast or anyone else then it will spark SOMETHING THAT THE CABLE COMPANIES DO NOT WANT TO DEAL WITH.
Lets just say that. We WILL NOT tolerate our freedom of speech being *****'d with.
They censor themselves if they bored but leave out internet alone, you t***s
yeah - totally. I mean, dude I tried to take pictures of the 7 year old kid next door and exploit his pictures online in a sexual matter - definatly terrible. I mean, it's a free country right? Why can't I bait a minor to come over to my place for a few nude pictures and E-laced candy bar...
ARE YOU INSANE?! This is a "BAD" thing? It's eradicating Kidde Porn! They aren't going after the King James Bible! They aren't going after music or bittorrents, there is one solitary goal in mind here - the eradication of child pornography and, perhaps optimistically, the capture of those viewing, uploading, and hosting this vile garbage!
they aren't policing your PC, they aren't invading your privacy - unless you're a sick individual who actually thinks this stuff should be defended! What?! Are you serious??? this is... this is great news! More child pornographers and those who choose to enjoy the sick act behind bars? Why would you protest such a thing? Unless... well I'm just using my powers of observation, not accusing, but if this actually outrages you perhaps we should look into your browsing history...eh?
and as far as "Radicals wanting control" maybe it's concerned parents getting together (these board members might be parents you know) and making sure that these things don't happen. Some of these sites are created by willing children... okay maybe, but I'll guarantee there aren't enough 'Willing' children out there to make a living off of, what about kidnapped children? children in third-world nations sold to a child prostitution ring. you want to support that? You know what, if you have a problem, write your cable company or congressmen, but honestly this is a good thing, these aren't good Samaritans, they're the scum of the earth.
and lastly, to the person who said the kids are willing... any "Child" will be willing when someone threatens them. Children are easily scared. usually the children on these sites tell people that the person taking their picture threatened their mother's life. it's one thing if you're Marv from Sin City and you can break someone's arm in three places with a well placed grab, but when you're a five or twelve year old... there aren't alot of options.
The issue is the nexus between the federal law enforcement, major corporations and NCMEC. The mainstream media won't look, and the privacy media never gets beyond sophomoric, snarky blogging. Let's face it, Soghoian, child exploitation isn't your issue and privacy isn't mine. But if you really care as you say you do about child pornography being used as a Trojan horse to take away your rights, you ought to start digging deeper, starting with a copy of that MOU. How hard could that be? Maybe you'll end up also caring about children being used as commodities.
The issue is the nexus between the federal law enforcement, major corporations and NCMEC. The mainstream media won't look, and the privacy media never gets beyond sophomoric, snarky blogging. Let's face it, Soghoian, child exploitation isn't your issue and privacy isn't mine. But if you really care as you say you do about child pornography being used as a Trojan horse to take away your rights, you ought to start digging deeper, starting with a copy of that MOU. How hard could that be? Maybe you'll end up also caring about children being used as commodities.
I don't know, maybe I am the only one who trusts the government more than a private organization.
Here I thought the FBI was making progress with this issue; I sure haven't seen much news about child pornography spreading like a virus. So then, why were the ISPs so quick to bend over for some private organization???
I thought child pornography is only a small part of child exploitation. I thought a group like NCMEC would be more concerned with child labor or sex-slavery. Oh wait, they only focus on issues within the United States! Jesus, CP is being created from within the US? Not really? Okay, I get it...
They think that watching CP is causing normal people to become child molesters? Not really? They think that CP being watched by pedophiles is magically harming the children in the videos more than the initial event depicted in the videos? Not a chance? They think that children who somehow find CP will go get themselves molested? Huh? I didn't even know there was such a thing as CP until I was 17 and got bombarded by the crap on file-sharing networks as renamed files (along with plenty of 'snuff' files).
Why aren't they (at the NCMEC) getting some balls and going after the child molesters that make the videos? Oh right, because most of them aren't in the US!
This whole NCMEC thing stinks of conspiracy. The NCMEC is not going to end CP unless they can cross borders and get rid of the sources. The FBI has a much better chance of doing just that.
I am all in favor of eliminating child pornography from the Internet, but that will never happen if they (government or otherwise) can't eliminate the ones actually creating it. Still, I truly believe that nobody is born a child molester; instead, I feel that it is a result of something gone awry in our foul societies. So then, this is all a farce to turn our attention away from our segregated and degrading societies.
Or not, you decide for yourself.
-
by SVValk
July 21, 2008 5:04 AM PDT
- The comment that "Americans of age 16 ... are sexually mature, almost half of them have had sex, and any normal adult will find them attractive" is irrelevent. Just because they are doesn't give adults the right to prey on and exploit them. And we're not simply talking about 16 year olds here or is that the white elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about. I also think taking the attitude that this is the start of a huge censorship surge a la Fahrenheit 451 is a little like Chicken Little saying the sky is falling. The fact that we're giving a group who protects children from people who intend to do them harm info. on those very people doesn't make me worry. If they come after my copy of Harry Potter, then I might start to get a little concerned.
-
Reply to this comment
View
all 2 replies
-
-
See all 43 Comments >>