Proc di Catania
Scritto da
Non Autenticato
il 2010-10-16 18:56:00.0 alle 2010-10-16 18:56:00.0
Germany's working group against censorship, AK Zensur, has analysed a few recent Scandinavian blacklists, allegedly meant to block sites containing child abuse material. Our less-than-surprising findings:
* From 167 listed sites, only 3 contained such material.
* Two of them were listed on different blacklists since 2008, obviously without the authorities trying to take the sites offline.
* All three were taken down by the hosting providers within hours or even minutes after receiving an AK takedown request by email.
So what were the reasons again that made access blocking an essential weapon in fighting child abuse?
http://www.boingboing.net/2010/09/30/only-17-of-si... 
* From 167 listed sites, only 3 contained such material.
* Two of them were listed on different blacklists since 2008, obviously without the authorities trying to take the sites offline.
* All three were taken down by the hosting providers within hours or even minutes after receiving an AK takedown request by email.
So what were the reasons again that made access blocking an essential weapon in fighting child abuse?
-
Filtri CP scandinavi: solo l'1,7% è CP @ 2010-10-16 18:56:00.0 di Non Autenticato