It's now 13 years later - and it seems contractors for the Chinese
Government have stolen the database - the actual keys referred to in
the above article.
Brian Milburn, mentioned in both of the above articles, is now
claiming that the Chinese product contains "actual proprietary code
from CyberSitter ... that is only available in an encrypted format".
A spokesman for the contractors said "That's impossible. We didn't
steal their programming code", which would of course be true if they
stole the database.
Time for a quick review of the contents of said database, thanks to
CWD:
"A close look at the actual range of sites blocked by these apps
shows they go far beyond just restricting "pornography." Indeed, some
programs ban access to newsgroups discussing gay and lesbian issues
or topics such as feminism. Entire *domains* are restricted, such as
HotWired. Even a web site dedicated to the safe use of fireworks is
blocked.
[...]
CyberSitter doesn't hide the fact that they're trying to enforce a
moral code. "We don't simply block pornography. That's not the
intention of the product," said Milburn. "The majority of our
customers are strong family-oriented people with traditional family
values."
Again courtesy CWD, actual keywords from the Cybersitter database:
From CWD: "CyberSitter's Milburn added: "I wouldn't even care to
debate the issues if gay and lesbian issues are suitable for
teenagers. If they [parents] want it they can buy SurfWatch... We
filter anything that has to do with sex. Sexual orientation [is about
sex] by virtue of the fact that it has sex in the name."
That's the rub. It's a bait and switch maneuver. The smut-censors say
they're going after porn, but they quietly restrict political
speech."
Today's BBC article quotes Professor Jonathan Zittrain of Harvard's
Berkman Centre:
"While the justification may be pitched as protecting children and
mostly concerning pornography, once the architecture is set up it can
be used for broader purposes, such as the filtering of political
ideas".
search: