- From: Michael Dillon <michael@junction.net>
- Date: Mon, 5 Jun 1995 10:13:11 -0700 (PDT)
- To: rating@junction.net
- Cc: www-talk@www0.cern.ch
On Mon, 5 Jun 1995, Nathaniel Borenstein wrote: > suggest that the best place for followup discussions is probably the > rating@junction.net mailing list, since this is more or less its > intended purpose. Since I'm not sure if the "rating" list has been announced on www-talk, it was started with a two-fold purpose. One was to devise a system of ratings for the content of URL's that could be used by browsers to make a decision on whether or not to retrieve the document. This was intended to be more flexible and extensible than movie rating systems. The second purpose was to design a protocol (using RADIUS as a base) to allow browsers to have secure communication with a ratings server which would issue a rating for a URL to let the browser know whether or not it was suitable for retrieval. RADIUS is currently at the IETF draft stage (4th draft) and the specification document is available at ftp.livingston.com in /pub/radius > Borenstein, entitled, "KidCode: Naming Conventions for Protecting > Children on the World Wide Web and Elsewhere on the Internet Without > Censorship". > We look forward to any and all constructive comments. -- Nathaniel Perhaps KidCode is suitable as a means to meet your narrow goals of allowing WWW publishers to publish erotica and other materials in a controlled fashion, but I think it suffers from a fundamental "real world" constraint. It requires that a lot of work be done at the server. Server operators must know about the Kidcode system, set up the ratings and/or seek out ratings authorities to be rated. It seems to me that a system of rated URL's could be developped a lot quicker if we put all the work requirements at the point were there is an incentive to have these ratings. Schools want filtered access to the WWW. Parents want filtered access to the WWW. Church groups want filtered access to the WWW. These groups are the ones who are motivated to put in the effort and/or spend the money. Let's give them some guidance on how they can go about it. What I propose is that ratings be served up by special purpose "rating" servers. These servers can be operated and/or financed by the above-mentioned groups. It will require effort on their part to preview and screen URL's prior to rating them but I think they are motivated to do this effort and I think that pre-screened URL's are precisely what parents, teachers and church authorities want to have. Obviously, browsers will have to be modified, but this is not a major task since there are not many browsers in existence yet and they are continually under development. If it were as simple as having a modified browser query a "rating" server for a yes/no decision on a URL, it would be implemented today. However, there needs to be a more complex (but not complicated) system for rating URL's. And it is necessary for the transaction between the browser and "rating" server to be secure. Parents would not be happy to find that a college student has managed to set up a rating server to spoof an official one, and it is only a matter of time before students at the high-school level learn about packet-sniffing and spoofing techniques. However, there is already a secure authentication proposal at the Internet draft stage (RADIUS) that could be modified to allow browsers to authenticate their conversation with "ratings" servers. The problem we are trying to solve with rating servers is of larger scope than the problem you have discussed in the KidCode proposal. Even if we cannot find a way to merge both proposals into one, we should at least agree on a common system of ratings. It is entirely possible that someday a Web spider will crawl around collecting URL's whose KidCode appears to meet a certain standard and present thos URL's to the screening committee of a rating server. Michael Dillon Voice: +1-604-549-1036 Network Operations Fax: +1-604-542-4130 Okanagan Internet Junction Internet: michael@junction.net http://www.junction.net - The Okanagan's 1st full-service Internet provider
Received on Monday, 5 June 1995 13:19:08 UTC