backtop


Print 35 comment(s) - last by Reclaimer77.. on Feb 3 at 11:13 AM

Sites that don't have inappropriate content are being filtered now

Back in December, we mentioned that some overzealous pornography filters in the UK that were meant to keep kids from seeing pornographic materials were flagging some legitimate and non-porn related sites. Specifically, the filters were blocking a number of sites for charities and sex education in the filter.
 
The UK government is trying to unblock these legitimate sites with the creation of a website whitelist. Many of the sites on the list are run by charities that want to educate kids about health, sex, and drug addiction.
 
The government wants to set up a system that will let any website that thinks it is being blocked wrongly to tell the ISP their story and perhaps be added to the whitelist.

 
"Research suggests the amount of inadvertent blocking is low," said David Miles, who chairs the working group on over-blocking for the government's UK Council for Child Internet Safety.
 
Miles has been working with research on accidental blocking by the filters and visiting the charities to determine how to get the filters to block pornographic material without blocking the legitimate sites.
 
The list will be shared with ISPs that run the network level filters to ensure these sites are viewable. 

Source: BBC



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Outrageous
By ally003 on 2/1/2014 9:23:08 AM , Rating: 2
As a British citizen I am disgusted (and frankly embarrassed) that such a thing could be applied in a modern democracy. This is yet another cretinous policy from Cameron and his Tory government which will likely further stoke the fires of Scottish independence. Nobody in Scotland voted for this clown, but yet we have to be subjected to these ill thought out schoolboy ideas. First it was sites vaguely associated with content piracy that were removed from the British internet (look at the fate of NewzBin2, a site convicted of no crime and not given its day in court). Then it was child pornography. Apparently removing child porn search results from Google means there are no more paedophiles to worry about, hooray! The latest is any pornographic website is blocked by default.....and what’s next after that? Who decides? Not the British public, that is patently obvious, although I’m sure all of our internet subscriptions will go up to pay for the technology required for our own censorship.




RE: Outrageous
By probedb on 2/1/2014 4:12:15 PM , Rating: 2
As a British citizen, the problem is the British public. They're more interested in watching "Strictly Come Dancing" and "Britain's Got Talent" that what their government is up to. That's why Edward Snowden's revelations were met with a shrugging of the shoulders by most over there. They're muppets.

The filter is supposed to "protect the children". There's already a filter on all mobile networks. I'm in my 30s and have had my phone for 15 years so obviously I'm old enough but if I want to view porn on my phone over the mobile network I have to pay £1 for them to validate my credit card.....which they already know about.

What I'm really saying is that the general UK population are as much to blame as the government for not realising what is going on.


"Well, we didn't have anyone in line that got shot waiting for our system." -- Nintendo of America Vice President Perrin Kaplan

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki