Censorware |
Censorware is a term for content filtering Computer software, especially Web filters. Also known as an Internet filter or Internet nanny, it decides what a web browser will display, usually for the benefit of children. There may be many things which are filtered, including pornography, gambling, alternative lifestyles, sexuality, and some religions.
= History =
As the World Wide Web rose to prominence, parents, led by a series of sensational stories in the mass media, begun to worry about whether allowing their children to use the Web might expose them to indecent material. The US Congress responded by passing the Communications Decency Act, banning indecent material on the Internet. Civil liberties groups responded by challenging the law under the First Amendment (eventually succeeding). Part of the argument, especially from groups like the EFF, was that parents who wanted to block sites could use content filtering software, making government involvement unnecessary.
Critics argued that while content filtering software might help stop government censorship, but it would do so only by allowing unaccountable private companies to censor as they pleased. They further argued that it encouraged a trend toward government encouragement of content filtering or legal requirements for content labeling software, which would end up being equivalent to censorship.
Groups like The Censorware Project begun reverse-engineering the censorware software and decrypting the blacklists to figure out what kind of sites the software blocked. They discovered that such tools routinely block sites that are clearly outside what they claim to block, while also failing to block what they claim to.
A good example of this is the simple-minded approach where filtering of all sites containing the word breast , in the belief that this word can only be mentioned in a sexual context, has the consequence of blocking sites that discuss breast cancer, women s clothing, or chicken recipes. Similarly, over-zealous attempts to block the word sex would end up blocking Essex and Sussex .
Some censorware companies argue that their filtering criteria are backed by intensive manual checking. Opponents of these companies argue that doing the required filtering, even in principle, would require resources greater than these companies income, and that these claims cannot be true.
Censorware can also used to block Internet access entirely, usually as punishment.
Those who believe censorware is useful may still not agree with certain uses of it, or with mandatory general regulation of information. For example, many would likely disapprove of filtering content advocating or opposing certain viewpoints on moral or political issues, turning the filtering process itself into propaganda. It may also be unacceptable to many for such software to be mandatorily deployed by internet service providers, either by law or by decision of the ISP, without allowing the user to disable the filtering for their connection.
Filters can be implemented in many different ways (by a software program on a personal computer, by servers providing internet access, etc.). Choosing an internet service provider (ISP) that blocks objectionable material before it enters the home over software run on their own computer can help parents who worry about their children bypassing the software.
= Use in Public Libraries =
Censorware such as SonicWALL is used in many public libraries in the United States to block content classed as objectionable because of pornography or advocacy of violence. Some libraries that employ censorware allow the software to be deactivated on a case-by-case basis on application to a librarian.
Many legal scholars believe that a number of legal cases [http://www.spectacle.org/cs/library.bak], in particular Reno v. ACLU [http://www2.epic.org/cda/cda_decision.html], establish that the use of censorware in libraries is a violation of the First Amendment. The American Library Association has taken a stance opposing internet filtering.
= Bypassing filters =
Some software may be bypassed successfully by using alternative protocols, such as ftp, searching for things in a different language, using a Proxy_server and others. More information can be found here for Microsoft Windows users [http://www.peacefire.org/bypass/].
Some of the more poorly-designed filters can be shut down by killing their processes through the Windows Task Manager.
=Content filtering software products=
=See also=
=External links=
==Content filtering software products==
==Antifiltering technologies==
==Opinions for and against censorware==
|
|