Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Collaborates On Child Porn Buster
pmike_bauer writes "Microsoft and Canadian authorities on Thursday launched a software program designed to help police worldwide hunt down child porn traffickers. Police departments can use it free of charge." From the article: "The program was developed by Microsoft Canada, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and Toronto police, with the help of the Department of Homeland Security, Scotland Yard and Interpol." Update: 04/08 18:09 GMT by Z : Modified to reflect the fact that it's not Open Source.
This is a somewhat strange choice by Microsoft, in my opinion.
They cry and whinge about how inherently evil OSS is, and then when its used for a purpose that they know nothing other than OSS would be accepted, they go ahead and release software in this way.
It would be interesting to see what license this has been released under.
This could serve good use in showing they FUD around open source as the sham that it is.
Whilst im glad that they are doing this, I wonder if it may come back and haunt their OSS fighting efforts later down the line. Lets hope so, im all for Win-Win situations.
-Shepy
About bloody time, too. Microsoft releasing an open-source tool-- good. Killing child porn-- even damn better!
Details of how the system works are being kept secret, Hemler (Microsoft Canada president) said. "We're intentionally coy about the technology that is used in this because we think it gives the good guys an advantage over the bad guys," he said. "Think of it as an assembly of commonly available Microsoft software, using techniques from Microsoft Research and best practices that the law enforcement community shared with us."
Look! Open Source, good! Protect the children against those bad child pornographers, good! Now, how about looking at what they're actually doing besides their cover story, bad.
This is the second time in about a week that we're seeing Microsoft doing something that puts it up against a greater evil. And to make it even more boggling, they're doing it open-source.
Did Microsoft hire someone new? Or did they take a look at their image and try to make amends? As much as I know my view of them is biased both by my history as a mac fan and the rants I've seen of others complaining and complaining about problems with microsoft (note I'm not trying to start an argument here, just pointing out that my view is biased); I know that Gates has funded new CompSci departments for universities like Cambridge (UK) - it's just a surprise to see what has seemed such a stereotypical corporation taking these steps against something in this way. Gates' view that open source is evil has been overtaken by the view that child porn is worse. I completely agree, and as strange as it is to say it - good work, Microsoft.
Browsing with +2 to insightful posts and a higher threshold makes the average post seen seem a lot more ingenious
I guess one good thing is that it was built by Microsoft, so it won't work correctly until v3.0.
You better hope that means it doesn't find anything, rather than it incorrectly finding you.
How open source can it be?
1. I can't find the license anywhere.
2. I can't find where to download the binaries.
3. I can't find where to download the source code.
4. It's available for free only to law enforcement.
Has anyone actually located 1, 2, or 3? Please post if you do...
perl -e 'foreach(values %SIG){$_="IGNORE";}while(){}'
...I obey the laws of physics....
Similar stats could probably be cited for any kind of image found on the Internet, including cars, sunsets, weddings, houses, and generic boob-n-beaver shots of consenting college students. News flash: the Internet (especially the Web) has grown a lot in the past decade!
I'm not saying that child sexual abuse isn't a problem (it is, and has been since long before ARPAnet, and the perps should be beaten with rubber hoses), but this statement in the article implies a kind of exponentially-exploding disaster that it doesn't actually demonstrate.
Feeling worried? Maybe you should delete ALL your pictures. Imagine, being arrested because some computer flagged your photos of your kittens as kiddie porn. I'm sure you'll feel better once the cops take the time to come out and seize your computers (which you will never see again, even after they figure out they fucked up).
Maybe you'll even feel relieved when one comes by your office and announces loudly "Mr. Coward, you're under arrest for possession of child pornography". I hope you didn't enjoy that job.
Perhaps you'll be at ease when you're sitting in your cell reading the paper and see how "investigators found a collection of photos of little boys and girls in various sexual acts on disks in the person's desk". Haven't you ever thought it odd how its always found on disks? When nobody uses floppies anymore?
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Common mistake - open source does not mean that 1, 2 or 3 have to be fulfilled to the general public, indeed I can opensource a project of mine and supply the binary and code to my one sole customer, it would still be open source.
That would make virtually every large scale engineering or realtime control system for the past three decades "open source". And that's just stupid... our product ships in source code form, but it's sure as heck not described as, thought of as, or considered "open source". It's a proprietary product that comes with a source distribution.
There is nothing in any of the GNU licenses or the OSI opproved licenses that says 'you must supply this to the general public for it to be an opensource project',
That's true, it's perfectly possible to violate the spirit of open source while complying with the letter of any license. That's not "open source", that's "gaming the system".
They can't help it, that's how the mind works. It doesn't track the source of information all that well, so when it comes to form a decision or opinion on something, all of the media you have seen in your life comes into play and you don't know it. If I were to ask you, e.g. what was the Vatican's stance on the Hollocaust? Most people would say "silence", because that's what it said in the movie Dogma. It's not true, but that doesn't matter. Likewise the old west. Instead of being the brutal ethnic cleansing of 20,000,000 native americans, cowboys are seen as heros and pioneers. He who controls the past controls the present.
This is old news. Hollywood has been deliberately used to promote the American Dream for many years. Advertising has been used to get brand recognition instilled into us. And religion has been around for several thousand years. People will believe anything you tell them, it's not natural to question everything. What most folk don't realise is that the producers of media are very much aware of these facts and techniques.
I missed the part of the 1st Amendment that gave people the right to violate and abuse children.
No keyboard detected. Press any key to continue.
The US Constitution was written a long time ago. In those days, if you wanted a private conversation, you could just go off into the woods somewhere, prod the undergrowth with a stick to make sure nobody was hiding in a bush, and have your private conversation. There were no such things as video cameras, tape recorders or computers, and no reason to suppose such things would ever be invented. The right to privacy was obvious, and that's why it was taken for granted.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
You better hope that means it doesn't find anything, rather than it incorrectly finding you.
Well, since the system can only identify potential connections that are flagged for detectives to look at, if it somehow matches your credit card number to kiddie porn, then there are one of two possibilities: (a) there really is a link, and if the system hadn't spotted it an astute detective might have or (b) there really is no such connection, in which case the detective will swear at the system for wasting his time and get on with his job.
Even if there is a link, it doesn't mean you're going to jail, it means that the nature of the link has to be analyzed, to determine if there's enough evidence to warrant further investigation and what kind of investigation. A match on the system won't put you in jail. A chain of evidence, collected according to the rules, that is strong enough to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that you're a child pornographer is what puts you in jail.
Yes, police investigations sometimes inconvenience people who did nothing wrong, but that's unavoidable. Actually, that's why the system bends over so far trying to give the alleged criminal every benefit of the doubt. You can't get 100% accuracy, so we try to err on the side of freeing criminals rather than jailing innocents. So, lots of criminals walk on "technicalities", and a few innocents go to prison.
Nothing about this system, as far as I can see, changes the nature of the criminal justice process and system at all. It just facilitates part of the detective work. If it often finds erroneous links, then the detectives will quickly learn to ignore it, or at least analyze everything it finds very skeptically. In any case, the system can't create evidence where none exists.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Now I in no way condone child pornography, but producing statistics w/o context for comparison is ridiculous:
"The FBI has seen a 2,000 percent increase in the number of child pornography images on the Internet since 1996"
What's the percentage increase in non-child porn on the internet since 1996? The percentage increase in pictures period? 2,000 percent seems like it could be a lower bound, but who really knows?
That quote makes it sound like the world is under a deluge of child porn, when in fact one could argue that the internet is just getting bigger.
Are you afraid that someone is going to track down your Super-Private online goings-on and share your secret with others? For example... is Safeway (grocery chain) going to track down all your online purchases of ass ailment treatments, and then, in their store, announce over the loud speaker, John Doe, We're currently featuring 10 cents off Assinol Plus with the purchase of Roidwipes2000? No. Could they? Perhaps. Would they? No. Their legal department would forbid it, for fear of frivolous lawsuits such as the one you'd hit them with 10 minutes later.
Nit #1. I wouldn't call that lawsuit frivilous. I think people have a pretty good expectation of not being made a spectacle of in the middle of a store due to medical conditions.
Nit #2. The Constitution does not define the rights we have. Just because it's not explicitly stated in the Constitution means absolutely nothing at all.
There are, however, reasonble limits to invasion and protection of privacy. I fear that unreasonable people are taking control of what those limits are, though.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
You are one confused guy.
First, privacy and anonymity "only within your own 4 walls" is stupid, pointless and something that nobody but a Bush-brain could come up with. For one, who would I be anonymous to in my home? It's not like there'd be many people there who don't know me. Besides, my name's right on the bell sign.
It's exactly when you leave your home that anonymity enters the picture.
Now, anonymity is not, though there are some of the same letters in both words, the same as invisibility. Seing someone (walking down the streets or committing a crime, doesn't matter, any kind of seing someone) does not in any way touch their anonymity. In fact, seing someone and not knowing who they are is exactly what anonymity is all about.
Then the old "what are you afraid of?" strawman, aka "honest people have nothing to hide".
Man, I do have a whole bunch of perfectly legal things to hide. In fact, I'd rather confess that I broke into that server thing some years ago than publishing some of the totally legal things I do.
Do I have something to hide? Well, if you want to call it that, yes. I prefer to call it it's none of your damn business.
And that's what privacy is about. Keeping the things private that I want to have kept private. It includes the right to not having to justify why I want to keep them private.
Now we've come a long way from anonymity (which is one way to secure privacy, pseudonimity is one other and there are more). I hope I haven't lost you somewhere on the road.
And then the "nobody cares, you're not important, relax" argument.
I have 20 pounds of legal papers to prove that some asshole in California cares what I post on my website in Germany. I have a hundred or so people in my social circle who care - many of whom don't need to know about the details of my love life or other private information.
Someone, somewhere, always cares about you. If that's not true for you then you should really ask yourself some very serious questions.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
There is no "show". In my opine, the problem is exactly the fact that so many are content to sit on their arse, and watch frigging television.
Want a superhero? Someone to fight for your rights? I actually know where to find one!
Go to your nearest mirror, and take a close look. (Cape is optional.) Hmmm, now who would expect that ugly mug to be the face of a freedom fighter?
The way it works is, you, and every other mothers son has to stand up, put down the budweiser or moosehead, turn off the damn glowing boxen, and march your self down to the local city hall, or other local government office and make a damn pest of yourself, by actually being involved with what goes on.
I will lay odds that 99.5% of slashdot readers, for all their bullshit political raving, don't actually _do_ anything. (A simple test, do your city councilmen know your face and name?)
My city council sure as hell does not like to see my face in any council meeting, and they all certainly know my name, because they know that I am ever ready to challenge any bullshit they routinely try to pull. I have caused overly restrictive ordinance changes to be sent back to committee, for extreme modification, because they knew that I would take it to the voters for referendum. To quote the city manager... "That's the last thing we want."
So, If the will of the voters is the last thing they want, and ONE PERSON can cause this to go back for a more resonable approach to the problem, then how many freedoms have been lost in this country because people would rather sit home watching the damn glowing box than watching their local government in action, and standing up to them to keep the freedom destroyers in check.... Same in the state and federal level.
Look, these guys are mostly cowards... Most of them will fold under public scrutiny and political pressure...
But, if it appears that there is little or no resistance, then many will do whatever is expediant, and the hell with your freedoms.
Freedoms are usually not won in small increments, but they are lost or kept that way.
So, to all the readers. Don't bitch about it on slash-dot only. Get your butt involved in local, state and federal politics.
I will yeild the soap box to the next person now...
NOW, what did I do with that beer?
Drop me a line at:
Key ID: 0x54D1D809
M$ seem to mean well; they're also working against phishing. Almost certainly this could be misused, but so can many useful things. I don't think they're as evil as they're protrayed to be.
:-)
But I still think Linux is better, and it's still fun to laugh at them