Slashdot Mirror
"451" Error Will Tell Users When Governments Are Blocking Websites
Daniel_Stuckey writes "To fend off the chilling effects of heavy-handed internet restriction, the UK consumer rights organization Open Rights Group wants to create a new version of the '404 Page Not Found' error message, called '451 unavailable,' to specify that a webpage wasn't simply not there, it was ordered to be blocked for legal reasons."
Until they block the 451 page and redirect it to a 404.
Restore the madness of youth's lechery
According to the Wikipedia article on HTTP status codes 451 already exists for exactly this reason. This doesn't seem new.
They don't get it. The people who block your content in-line can send you back any page they choose, including a 404.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
... shouldn't it be a 3xx or 5xx error code? 4xx means the client screwed up.
For those who missed the reference and didn't click the links, this is a reference to Fahrenheit 451.
Technoli
The idea has been floating around for a while. It's still brilliant in the simplicity and anti-censorship attitude of it. What the article doesn't mention is that its an IETF draft now. Wish the error could be something like "451 Bad Government".
If I visit www.thepiratebay.org on a browser that doesn't have an anti-censorship plugin installed, I get
"The page you're looking for has been blocked.
"We're complying with a court order that means access to this website has
"to be blocked to protect against copyright infringement."
Can we make "200" mean that the gov't is watching your traffic? The nice part is that we don't have to change any of the installed base of webservers...
Not a page, you moron.
This has been on slashdot before:
June 9th, 2012 An HTTP Status Code For Censorship?
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=451%20error%20code%20slashdot&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fyro.slashdot.org%2Fstory%2F12%2F06%2F09%2F1927246%2Fan-http-status-code-for-censorship&ei=By8NUoTOMqeH2AWY6YDwBg&usg=AFQjCNFZN6sSLNmmIWvJGLOMT1FevZ8Jmg&bvm=bv.50768961,d.aWc
451... Nice... Ray Bradbury would be proud :)
morcego
I would be strongly in favor of not having censored pages look like nonexistent or technically glitched pages, as there's nothing more insidious than silent censorship; but I have to wonder if an HTTP response code is the right tool for the job.
The various existing codes are not particularly granular, and an anti-censorship pressure scheme that has any hope of succeeding needs to be granular.
It doesn't help me if all I now is "Example.org is unavailable for legal reasons". I need to know what jurisidiction, what law, what court order(if any), what private actor (in the case of something like the DMCA), and ideally the asserted reason. Ideally, all that information would be properly marked up (not just a text blob) so that a browser could pretty-print it for the end user, a spider gathering statistics or scraping could gather statistics, and so forth.
You need to, as directly as possible, tie the entities responsible for the fact that you can't see the page to the message that you can't see the page. If you don't do that, people might generate some diffuse displeasure; but will have little way of knowing who is behind the problem.
So 451 will be the code the government will issue when they feel they want a revolution?
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/06/09/1927246/an-http-status-code-for-censorship
I knew it sounded familar
"Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
What's the Curie temperature of an HDD platter's magnetic coating?
Actually, not so much. While most people assume 'Fahrenheit 451' is about censorship, Bradbury claimed it was really about TV replacing books. He even fought (unsuccessfully) to keep Michael Moore from using the title 'Fahrenheit 9/11' for his film.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
of course we know that server errors are 500s codes, not 400s.. and that is essentially what this is.. the server (or client's upstream) is taking the action... not the client.
so i propose that the number instead be...
HTTP/1.1 507 SOL
Cool. Now can we also have an HTTP code for websites that are being spied by NSA like 201 or something ?
No when an ISP, hosting provider, or search engine gets a order telling them to block access to a website they would use this error code when people request the page.
reply is exactly what you hate.
That's why embedding intelligence in your codes is a bad idea. Sometimes the world changes in ways that your original intelligence scheme did not anticipate. For example, what happens if you run out of codes that begin with 3? You're suddenly left with an intelligence system that is is either no longer able to meet your needs or no longer accurate.
Draft has expired.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-02
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
quite many countries have implemented the blocking so that you'll served some page, just not what you were looking for.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Censored site are often hijacked by scary-looking redirect to state propaganda. If this is accepted in the future specification, that propaganda page will require to return this status code. eg: "HTTP/1.0 451 Corrupted Government"
Non compliant censorship can, additionally, be protested on the basis that they are not compliant.
According to Section 10.4.4 of RFC 2616, 403 means:
The server understood the request, but is refusing to fulfill it. Authorization will not help and the request SHOULD NOT be repeated. If the request method was not HEAD and the server wishes to make public why the request has not been fulfilled, it SHOULD describe the reason for the refusal in the entity. If the server does not wish to make this information available to the client, the status code 404 (Not Found) can be used instead.
requests to not-resolved-in-DNS get rerouted by the ISP already, in many cases; easy enough to reroute these too.
The site you are visiting has been blocked for one or more reasons, please select what you are looking for and we will redirect you to an alternate site. Your IP Address will be logged.
[] Unauthorized copies of Copyrighted materials
[] Jihadist tips and chat rooms
[] Politically Incorrect information
[] Child Pornography
[SUBMIT]
We are sorry, but for legal reasons, the [CANCEL] button has been removed from this page.
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
I couldn't find your webpage, but dude, I totally found my stash!
(See also: hash error)
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
I have a huge peeve with people calling 404 error "File not found" because url's are not files! "Page" is closer, but then it's not always a page requested via http.
C'mon people, get this straight! It's not hard, now write this 100 times on the chalkboard:
"404 Not Found"
We should use that.
Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
666: Blocked by your evil government. Move to a free country or fight for your right. Use it or lose it.
Most laws and judicial orders don't have an experation date. So they should be prusumed to be permanent.
for thepiratebay.org
HTTP/1.1 302 Found Location: http://assets.virginmedia.com/site-blocked.html Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Then on the page you redirect too:
HTTP/1.1 304 Not Modified Server: Apache/2.2.15 (Red Hat) Last-Modified: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 11:35:14 GMT Cache-Control: max-age=4600, public Expires: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 14:36:23 GMT Vary: Accept-Encoding Content-Encoding: gzip Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Accept-Ranges: bytes Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 20:39:31 GMT X-Varnish: 2120962236 2120363846 Age: 25388 Via: 1.1 varnish Connection: keep-alive X-Varnish-Cache: HIT
"Dude. What?"
Have gnu, will travel.
one of these threads.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
The example error message the Open Rights Group gives in TFA does exactly what you're asking for.
When I was in Thailand and tried to access a wikipedia page about King Rama IX I actually got a friendly page telling me that that page is banned in Thailand. At least they were upfront about it. Much nicer than a 404 or 451.
Of course, I then just pulled up the Google cache copy of it and read that.
how is it temporary? 404's have more chance of being temporary... unfortunately.
the block is an intentional permanent problem that doesn't go away without some human doing something.. much like many other 4xx states.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
We all want to change the world.
#DeleteChrome
The ideal number indicate censorship!
Fahrenheit 451 is interesting, because contrary to what many believe it wasn't really about government censorship, and the culprit in the story isn't the state, but the people, and how they embraced apathy and lack of substance with watching TV over reading books.
For one thing, they're the same thing, as an apathetic electorate tolerates this sort of censorship. For another, a work means what it means, not what its author intended it to mean. Or does the law prevent death of the author from taking effect until 70 years after the literal death of the author?
[] Unauthorized copies of Copyrighted materials
So your proposed response body includes a form. In the details field I'd write "Works incorporating a portion of a copyrighted work to criticize that work".
for bitching.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
This is too good. I mean no coincidence it is the same number as Ray Bradberys dystopian novel "Farenheit 451", about censorship where books are outlawed, and firemen burn all that are found...
Therefore we need a code that means "we aren't allowed to show you the real code".
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
"And we also broke the back button until you hit SUBMIT. Submit, citizen!"
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
Fahrenheit 451 reference aside, shouldn't this be a 5xx code? The 4xx codes are supposed to be returned when the client has made an error (for example, 404: the client requested a resource that does not exist). 5xx codes are for when the server has failed to process a valid request.
I prefer this page instead:
This page was ordered censored by people in your government. We were silenced under threat of jail.
Here are the names and phone numbers of the politicians in your country that mandated it, and the dates they are up for re-election.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html Error codes are meant to be for technical reasons. Who cares WHY the page is not available. It's not available. That's technical & that's all.
As this is a total scam, why would they not assign 419 to it?
To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
Not entirely. If that were the case, there would be only one 4xx code: 401 NO.
But in fact there are different codes for permissions, payment, structural changes, etc. It is not that strange that a new outside force gets a new code. Even then, this is an OSI layer 9 or layer 10 (Financial, often erroneously called "Economic") issue.
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
Perhaps there could have been a slightly better numbering system, like using a period to separate the components (e.g. 4.4 for 404). But this takes up an extra byte once you get to e.g. "4.10 Gone", and you can't have a scheme that can take up an arbitrary number of bytes, so you may as well specify it as three bytes.
HTTP also depends on the numbering scheme to facilitate graceful degradation: any status code can safely be handled the same way it would be handled by the x00 code, but without caching (if any, which 200 OK allows).
In practice, there's almost no chance we'll ever run out of HTTP status codes. Saving the extra byte times trillions of HTTP requests is probably worth it.
Wonder what the public key field is for?
Some seem's
hehman mrman thatman ughman
I would like it to be very clear that the above person (3023069) is NOT the Jane Q. Public (1010737) who has been around Slashdot for years. This person has only been posting for about 2 days.
I do not yet know Slashdot's policy on impersonating other users, but I intend to find out.
(post 2)