AW: Blocking Offensive Material(??) with Firewall

["Kunz, Peter" <Peter.Kunz () sisclear com>]

Totally off-topic here:

> [...]
> > The problem is one
> > that societies have tried to deal with for millennia: what
> > constitutes offensive speech/material. We've been debating that
> > in the US for a long, long, long time. The problem is that you
> > need to answer that question _first_ before you can tell a
> > stupid computer how to do it. Good luck.
>
> See above for where to get that definition.  Somewhat curiously,
> some American radio programs that are exported seem to censor some
> songs whereas when played on local radio it is uncensored.  Maybe
> that is to appease the censors in foreign countries ?
        [Kunz, Peter]  I believe it's a licensing issue. Certain video tape
sin Europe have other soudntracks than the movie. The Ford Cougar commercial
wiht Dennis Hopper features 'Born to be Wild' by Steppenwolf. Supposedly the
US version had to do without, due to licensing issue, ie Steppenwolf or
their label asking for too much...

> > In the last few years I've been asked probably 200 times
> > "how can we block offensive content with our firewall?"
> > My preferred response these days is "when was the last time
> > your organization terminated or disciplined someone for
> > accessing offensive content?" If the answer is "never"
> > then don't even _bother_ trying the technological route.
>
> How many answer that as "never" ?  In an age where you have
> to deal with "sexual harrasment", I wouldn't be surprised to
> find an answer that wasn't "never".  Even usage of the 'net
> in a manner not authorised (i.e. not work-related) might be
> enough.
        [Kunz, Peter]  IMHO, most companies will slap your hand, at least
outside the sue-happy US. Termination is only the result of major
wrong-doping or if your boss has been looking for a reason - your fault if
you give it to him. the problem with INFOSEC today is people. People won't
do what you tell them to. Why? Because no one cares if they don't. If sr
mgmt doesn't enforce sanctions, whoopie, what are they good for. Marc's
quote sums it up nicely... Sad state, I know...

> Firewalls use little CPU now (except if you run one which must
> have a GUI interface active) so I can't see why requiring them
> to actually do some work and look at what goes through them
> would be a large penalty to performance.
        [Kunz, Peter]  It's probably not a performance, but a reliability
issue. Can you guarantee the FW will filter out all the bad stuff? Will it
just cut a stream as soon as it catches 'sex' - probably out of a mail on
'sex ual harassment'?... Is the technology there?

        cu
        -pete