Back to Philip's Home Page

        Many people don't like pornography. I can understand that. Many of those people don't want their children to see inappropriate material on the internet. I can understand that. If there were an effective means of filtering internet material so that children couldn't stumble across porn, hate advocacy, etc., then I would be in favour of schools, libraries and families using it. However, such a means would need thorough review and maintenance procedures. There are software packages on the market that purport to provide this service. See peacefire for details, they list most of the popular packages. However, all of these packages are closed - that is, their "block lists" are a closely-guarded secret, only updated and edited by the company that provides the software. Some of these products have recently been analysed by cryptography experts, and their block lists made known. The companies are annoyed, as their list of blocked sites represents a significant part of their time investment, and if another company could just pick up their list and use it, they would have a competitive advantage. However, what it also achieves is to show how badly implimented these block lists are. Many of the blocks are inappropriate. Nearly all censorware packages, for instance, block the aforementioned peacefire website, which is one of the leaders in the fight against censorship on the internet. CyberPatrol, the Mattel product, blocks peacefire under the following categories:

Violence / Profanity Partial Nudity Full Nudity Sexual Acts / Text Gross Depictions / Text Intolerance Satanic or Cult Drugs / Drug Culture Militant / Extremist Sex Education Questionable / Illegal & Gambling Alcohol & Tobacco

Now, I could understand it if CyberPatrol had a category for "Disabling CyberPatrol" websites, and peacefire does legitimately fall into that category. I would even understand if they made this category one of the ones that can't be disabled. But labelling them as satanic, militant extremists is libel. Censorware compnaies have even blocked the websites of newspapers that criticise their products! This really is outrageous abuse of power, and in stooping to these levels, they make their products unusable. I pity the Australians, who can't purchase internet access without also purchasing filtering software. If you have a child who is at school, or if you or your child have a local library with internet access, please find out more about this issue, and speak to those in charge about it. Filtering software is about to become mandatory in schools and libraries in at least one US state, and I wouldn't be surprised if it happens over here too. I don't like it, but if it's going to be done, then it should at least be done correctly. Filtering software that is in use in public places needs to be open to public review, and free of religious, political, or commercial motivations.

Find Out More:

        peacefire.org     a general anti-censorware web site
        Electronic Frontiers Foundation     a general internet freedom web site
        The Breaking of CyberPatrol     an article on how CyberPatrol was analysed, and some information about its techniques
        The cphack software     including the above essay
        openpgp.net     more information, and a list of mirrors of the cphack software

I realise that if Mattel pursue this case in the UK, then I may be forced to remove the above information, so I recommend that anybody interested take a copy of it. Whether you distribute it further is up to you. In my opinion, the cphack program is the result of the entirely legal reverse-engineering that took place in Sweden and Canada..