Derived Trust and Safe Browsing Mode

Interesting perspective related to Safe Browsing 
Mode from planetidentity.org.......

>
><http://www.planetidentity.org/>Conor Cahill - 
>Intel ­ 
><http://conorcahill.blogspot.com/2007/07/derived-trust.html>Derived 
>trust 
><http://www.technorati.com/cosmos/search.html?rak=&sub=mtcosmos&url=http://conorcahill.blogspot.com/2007/07/derived-trust.html>
>[Technorati links]
>
>
>
>
><http://conorcahill.blogspot.com/2007/07/derived-trust.html>July 
>08, 2007 12:27 PM
>
><http://ejnorman.blogspot.com/>Eric Norman, 
>commenting on my 
><http://conorcahill.blogspot.com/2007/07/they-just-dont-get-it.html>chastization 
>of Chase asks me:
>Do you have any idea about what your mother 
>would have an easy time of? That is, your mother 
>would be able to say, "Yes, this is my bank", or 
>"Wait a minute; something is wrong here" and get the right answer every time.
>
>Would the green address bar be enough for your mother?
>
>I started to answer in a comment myself, then 
>thought that this topic was important enough to 
>require its own discussion topic.
>
>The answer to the "green address bar" being 
>enough, of course, is: No. Color, pretty locks, 
>etc. would not be enough for my mother nor, I 
>suspect, many other mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, etc.
>
>What my mother needs is a means of deriving the 
>trust of a site from other people that she knows 
>and trusts and to have any site that isn't on 
>that list to either be totally blocked or to set 
>off all kinds of bells and whistles so that it's 
>impossible for her to not realize she's walked 
>out of the nice safe world into the dark inner city of the internet.
>
>My mother would trust sites that I, or probably 
>most of my siblings, had said were OK (which is 
>essentially how she does things today, but with 
>a phone call and without protection within the 
>platform that she really is looking at the actual site one of us said was OK).
>
>This would require some client enhancements in 
>browsers and possibly in mailers, some 
>reputation based host that she could point her 
>client towards to say "include Conor's list in 
>my set of sites," a means to get real-time 
>approval, support for multiple such lists (so 
>she could include my sister's list, or my 
>brother's list) etc. etc. I think she would set 
>it to block any non-OKed sites. Others would 
>probably want to be able to add their own sites as well.
>
>As I think about this, much of it feels like the 
>kind of infrastructure <http://www.aol.com>AOL 
>has in place for their 
><http://daol.aol.com/safetycenter/parentalcontrols>parental 
>controls (where the parent can control what 
>their youngster has access to), though this 
>would be the reverse direction and rather than a 
>control, it would be advisory (because my mother 
>could change the settings on her browser and do 
>whatever she wants on her computer).