> In article <Pine.LNX.3.91.960515233127.22212A-100000@discovery.igc.net> you write:
> >unwanted picture name in the html source... It would probably be a happy(?)
> >side effect that an incoming web page would have <IMG SRC="breast.gif">,
> >and the filterer would notice breast.gif and stop the connection... (Im not
> I know the attitudes responsible for your choice of example are not your
> fault, but that sentence gave me pause on just how screwed up our society
> (on this side of the atlantic, anyways) is. Of all the images one might
> want to scan for - I might for instance, sympathize with a scanning engine
> that catches things like "17_guys_being_slaughtered_by_an_AK-47.jpg" or
> "woman-being-raped.gif" - but no, we are busily scanning for "breast.gif"
> <sigh> What have we come to?
We have come to this point (at my school) because people do not name
their pictures "woman-being-raped.gif" or
"17_guys_being_slaughtered_by_an_AK-47.jpg" ... instead they are named
things like breast.gif and blood.gif... And it is better to have an
occasional picture from a web document ommitted because it was named
breast.gif and have the student ask special permission to download it
than to be sued by rabid parents... I am not a religious zealot or the
next Big Brother... all I am trying to do is save my school some money so
they don't have to buy 100 copies of SurfWatch... instead they can use a
more secure and efficient system by having the packets filtered at the
server level.
-Vermont Rutherfoord
omnilord@igc.net
http://www.igc.net/~omnilord/
> E7 E3 90 7E 16 2E F3 45 * Stuart Smith * 28 24 2E C6 03 02 37 5C
> <stu@nemesis.wimsey.com> * http://www.wimsey.com/~ssmith/
>