Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

HTTP Error Code 451 Approved For Censored Web Pages (mnot.net)

Posted by Soulskill on from the what-if-governments-start-censoring-error-codes dept.

An anonymous reader writes: The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) has finally approved the new 451 status code for HTTP error messages involving web pages which have been repressed or removed for legal or political reasons. The initiative was proposed in 2013, and gained interest from various groups, such as Lumen (formerly Chilling Effects), who see the potential of the Bradbury-inspired code to help develop comprehensive indexes of censorship on the internet. Mark Nottingham, chair the IETF HTTP Working Group, says, "It'll be an RFC after some work by the RFC Editor and a few more process bits, but effectively you can start using it now."

8 of 141 comments (clear)

  1. We should differentiate between the two by deodiaus2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Use 451 for legal reasons,
    Use code 452 for political ones.
    And a citation of what particular stature is being offended.

    1. Re:We should differentiate between the two by fustakrakich · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Law is political

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    2. Re:We should differentiate between the two by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That is pointless. For those cases governments do not want information revealed, the censorship demand will come with a gag order forbidding to even tell that it is being censored. In these cases this code cannot be used.

      Therefor such a code only has value in a state based on justice and integrity where the rule of law is generally accepted and respected. Ironically this is a state least likely in need of such a code.

    3. Re: We should differentiate between the two by donscarletti · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, you and he are making the distinction between laws that you like and laws that you don't like.

      I agree that many laws, like the laws against child porn and malware are good. However if we tolerate the notion that these are not political issues since they are stemming from the natural order of things, then we must tolerate that to others, that the list of natural apolitical issues may be broader than they are to you and banning other things is not a political issue either. There is not a regime on earth that bans things that it does not consider harmful to the people. Remember that.

      --
      When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
  2. i have a better idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    How about instead of a special code to indicate when a page has been censored, we just, you know, refuse to censor it in the first place?

    The question is what kind of internet we want to have in the future. One where people here can't see this subset and people there can't see that subset? Geo-locked content and politically inconvenient things disappearing?

    Does no one remember John Gilmore: "The internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it?" That could still be true if nerds the world over would refuse to cooperate with censoring regimes.

  3. Ironically... by Etcetera · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This appropriateness of this code is based around an interpretation of the novel that the creator doesn't share:

    “Useless,” Bradbury says. “They stuff you with so much useless information, you feel full.” He bristles when others tell him what his stories mean, and once walked out of a class at UCLA where students insisted his book was about government censorship. He’s now bucking the widespread conventional wisdom with a video clip on his Web site (http://www.raybradbury.com/at_home_clips.html), titled “Bradbury on censorship/television.

    http://www.laweekly.com/news/r...

    --
    Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
    1. Re:Ironically... by Moof123 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I read the article you linked, and frankly it left me scratching my head. I think he managed to write a book about censorship unintentionally, as it was the only way to get to his real point about the perils of television. When I read the book I found the whole picture walls thing to be secondary rather than primary. Maybe he pulled a Homer?

      It would be like finding Orwell's diary and finding out he thought 1984 was about the perils of video cameras rather than government control, propaganda, and surveillance (to badly simplify).

  4. Re:451 by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Arguably, the correct code for 1984-style censorship is either a 404 or a 200 that returns a page full of historically corrected and party approved content.

    The honest censor is the one who says "yup, this exists and you can't see it." The effective censor is the one who successfully conceals the existence of whatever they are trying to keep you away from.