From: dsc@swcp.com (Dar Scott)
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 95 21:07:44 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Web Exon A-rate
Message-ID: <v01510103ac76b61be743@[198.59.115.132]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Somebody passed this along:
>WS Journal, Sept. 8, 1995.
>
>Cleaning the Web: Companies to Seek Pornography Blocker
>
>Array of Technology Firms Will Join in Effort to Let
>Parents Screen the Internet
>
>By Jared Sandberg
[snip]

This is a good idea.  And maybe cryptography can get involved--see below.

As a parent it is my responsibility to control what comes into the house
and to determine what limited view of the net my kids see.  The screening
software to do this could be in my home or part of a service of my service
provider.

A few companies have some simple products for doing this.  Most are
discouraged by threats from congress to reduce the market need.  Most
products use a simple red list to block access according to literature sent
me.  Some look for key words.

Normally, I would say that it is very premature for standards work.  It
would be good to see more ideas tried.  The Exon threats probably do not
allow this, so I see this news as a good thing.

One place to start is the web.

Depending on the kid's age and other factors I would want to have different
limitations on what the kid sees.  Older kids might just get warnings.  I
would like--for the little ones--to limit the view to some combination of
sites listed on green lists.  The view for slightly older kids might use
red lists to exclude sites instead.  (I really would want to create some
logical combination of lists for each kid.)  Organizations can compete for
the list market.  I might use these in what ever combination I like and
also add my own.  It is important to note that the kinds of things I would
like to screen out or in might be different from what the next person would
like to screen out or in.  (I put little faith in content screening.)

The problem might be in getting huge lists every week.  And pages that
seemed fine once could have changed.  Current red list subscriptions are
expensive--it is easier to keep kids off the computer.

>>>>>> the part that mentions cryptography >>>>>
As an alternative to green lists consumer organizations and do-gooder
organizations might certify pages.  These might be virtual green lists.
Each web page would have the cert built in--perhaps in comments to allow
most viewers to work.  Instead of checking a list in this case, the
screening software would ask the page to verify itself.

If the cert was PGP based, then every home doing this would have to have
PGP.  The screening product could use PGP.  Perhaps PGP would be slow.
There might be some way to check signatures that is faster and does not
have patent limitations.  It would be nice if it was possible for the
browser to see the first screenful without waiting for the screener to see
the entire page.

Only those that especially want to make their sites available to kids of
picky parents would get the pages certified.  Maybe just sending in e$3
would do it.  Or e$50 to get to the head of the list.

In whatever standards that come about, it is important that only those
involved in the screening process pay the price ($, delays).  Everybody
else should be able to carry on.

I do worry that some quick standards would be put into place and that
innovation in this area would then become arrested.

Dar


===========================================================
Dar Scott               Home phone: +1 505 299 9497

Dar Scott Consulting         Voice: +1 505 299 5790
8637 Horacio Place NE        Email: darscott@aol.com
Albuquerque, NM  87111              dsc@swcp.com
                               Fax: +1 505 898 6525
http://www.swcp.com/~correspo/DSC/DarScott.html
===========================================================