"451" Error Will Tell Users When Governments Are Blocking Websites 255
Daniel_Stuckey writes "To fend off the chilling effects of heavy-handed internet restriction, the UK consumer rights organization Open Rights Group wants to create a new version of the '404 Page Not Found' error message, called '451 unavailable,' to specify that a webpage wasn't simply not there, it was ordered to be blocked for legal reasons."
This may work........ (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:This may work........ (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe we can have a contest for the most creative 451 pages. Who knows, maybe they can display personal information about you derived from your IP address, your cookies and even turn on your computer's camera. Ahhh, good times when you know the government isn;t just blocking the site, it's spying on those who tried to access it.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe we can have a contest for the most creative 451 pages
How about this? [geekadelphia.com]
Re:This may work........ (Score:5, Interesting)
Seems to me that issuing such an error code would already violate the gag order they routinely apply to these court orders.
Re: (Score:3)
I think you can define error 451 to mean "unknown reason", and then by process of deduction it must be due to government blockage.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Haha, "court order"!
You naive believer in due process.
Here in the UK, an unregulated quango called the Internet Watch Foundation can block anything it pleases with no judicial or even executive oversight whatsoever.
Re: (Score:3)
Here in the UK, an unregulated quango called the Internet Watch Foundation can block anything it pleases with no judicial or even executive oversight whatsoever.
Only if your ISP implements it. I don't have a list of which ISPs do and don't, but it won't be hard to find.
Re: (Score:2)
Strange, when I disconnect from my VPN I get blocking message from Virgin Media, so it's not like they are hiding anything when the censor a website. Do you have any examples of websites silently blocked by court order?
Re:This may work........ (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
I think that's an "Error 1984: 451 redirected to 404." 2+2=5
Re:This may work........ (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It would be an error code (Score:5, Informative)
40X errors can still return an entity. The HTTP spec even says that the server SHOULD return an entity explaining the error. I'm afraid you're the one being a moron.
Re:It would be an error code (Score:4, Informative)
Just to clarify, if a web site is being blocked, then that web site can not send an error page to the client making the request.
The error would come from whichever device is blocking the web site, and it would prevent forwarding of any data packets to the blocked site. The blocked site can't return an error page because it has no way of knowing someone trying to access it was blocked. Whatever device is doing the blocking is the one that can send an error code, if at all.
Returning an html error page would be entirely optional, and I seriously doubt whomever is doing the blocking would give a rat's ass about a fancy custom error page. If they did, it might make for a nice amplifier in a DDoS attack. ;-)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I'd say make the message less harsh "Unavailable pending a regulatory review"
The problem is, the page isn't unavailabe pending a review. It's unavailable because a court has mandated that it be blocked or because a review has assessed it as containing illegal material.
I'd have have 451: Unavailable for Legal Reasons followed by "It's child porn" or "The cunts at the Premier League convinced a court to get a site hosting no illegal content blocked despite the site doing nothing wrong or illegal".
Nonetheless, the page is indeed unavailable for legal reasons.
Already exists? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Already exists? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Already exists? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
So it's just a question whether it's for the 2nd, 3rd or 4th time.
Re: (Score:2)
What's more interesting than the fact that wikipedians are up on this proposal is that Microsoft already uses the same status code in Exchange Active Sync.
Re:Already exists? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe I'm being dense, but how is an error code (intended for remote coffee pot control [wikipedia.org]) that indicates the status "I'm a teapot" relevant to indicating a government-initiated content block?
woosh (Score:3)
They don't get it. The people who block your content in-line can send you back any page they choose, including a 404.
Re:woosh (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe you don't get it. It's not a solution, it's a protest.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. Even as a nerd there are better technical ways to protest censorship, like TOR.
Re:woosh (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not the government in many of these cases that's doing the actual blocking, it's ISPs where the people that have to install the filters are your typical slashdotter.
Re:woosh (Score:5, Insightful)
By way of example, Youtube obviously complies with DMCA takedowns; because it would be ruinously risky not to; but they (sometimes to the displeasure of the takedown-demander) always note 'Video X has been removed because of a complaint from FooCorp Media'.
Unless a company is an enthusiastic partner in the censorship scheme, it isn't in their interest for their customers to think that they've fucked up or are deeply unreliable when they are acting on a legal demand.
Re:woosh (Score:4, Insightful)
Just because they're legally required to block the content, doesn't mean they agree with the block or want to do it. On the contrary, it would be more in the ISP's interest to show that they're being legally pushed to block the content rather than the content just appearing not to work.
It's not the government in many of these cases that's doing the actual blocking, it's ISPs where the people that have to install the filters are your typical slashdotter.
Except when they receive a National Security Letter they are not allowed to tell and doing so can result in your life being ruined by the government.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This page blocked and we aren't allowed to say why
Re: (Score:2)
Do they have National Security Letters in the UK?
Honestly curious. Obviously, the equivalent of the US version.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I'm not allowed to tell you.
Re: (Score:3)
I think the nearest equivalent would be a D-Notice [wikipedia.org]
Re:woosh (Score:5, Insightful)
They don't get it. The people who block your content in-line can send you back any page they choose, including a 404.
Of course they can. The idea is that those doing the blocking have been forced to do so, and thus can use this alternate error page to distinguish these cases, and show their users how much of the internet they're missing due to government intervention.
A standard 404 could be legitimate, and isn't going to help garner any group support for open-ness.
Re: (Score:2)
And the same government people who demanded this can rewrite the 451 to a 404 on the fly, and your average user would have a hard time noticing anything funny about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Those government people probably can't connect to the net at all without their kids help. They would have to ask the ISPs to do the rewrite just like they had to ask the ISPs to handle the actual blocking. But to do that, they'd have to tacitly admit that there was an element of the dirty secret about what's being blocked.
Re:woosh (Score:5, Interesting)
I guess the average user probably wouldn't but who doesn't get the rather obvious reference to Fahrenheit 451 and the burning of books?
I think its probably the perfect symbolism, and even if most people don't get it now they will learn.
Re: (Score:3)
Usually the governments are not blocking pages directly. Instead they tell the ISPs or content providers to do the blocking on their behalf. So the ISP can block the page but still tell the customer that it's because of the government.
I get the reference but... (Score:3, Informative)
... shouldn't it be a 3xx or 5xx error code? 4xx means the client screwed up.
Re:I get the reference but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, living in a country, that's sufficiently oppressive to ban you from reaching any Internet-site it is your pleasure to visit, is a client's screw-up.
Re:I get the reference but... (Score:5, Insightful)
4xx means the client screwed up.
Only if by "screwed up" you mean "requested something that couldn't be delivered". 4xx is also used for things like "Payment required" and "Forbidden". The four hundred range is exactly right for this type of code. Asking for something you are not allowed to have is, in a very technical sense, a client error.
Re:I get the reference but... (Score:5, Funny)
Better idea: open up a 600 "Non-Technical Fault" range. You could even go into more detail: a 600 error could be a generic block, while a 620 might mean "Copyright Infringement", a 630 "Terrorism" or even a 666 "Satanism and/or Heavy Metal".
Re: (Score:2)
3xx definitely doesn't make sense here, I doubt the server is going to redirect you somewhere to get the now 'illegal' material.
I will say that I prefer on looks that this would be a 5xx error. It fits very well with the description of the 5xx class of messages "Response sta
Why not 403? (Score:2)
According to Section 10.4.4 of RFC 2616, 403 means:
The server understood the request, but is refusing to fulfill it. Authorization will not help and the request SHOULD NOT be repeated. If the request method was not HEAD and the server wishes to make public why the request has not been fulfilled, it SHOULD describe the reason for the refusal in the entity. If the server does not wish to make this information available to the client, the status code 404 (Not Found) can be used instead.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
4xx doesn't always mean the client screwed up, 403:Forbidden is usually a permissions problem. Yes it could mean the client didn't send the correct credentials, but it can also mean that you genuinly don't have access to that resource.
403 is an improper reply for a permissions problem. 403 is for resources that are there, but won't be given to anyone, no matter what their credentials are. 401 is for permissions problems, which the client can fix by providing the proper credentials. (Obviously if a site doesn't want to tell unauthorised people which resources are available or not, they will report 401 until proper credentials are given, and only then report 404 or 403 or whatever).
Re: (Score:3)
Re:I get the reference but... (Score:4, Insightful)
client screwed up
...at the ballot box.
Damnit not another (Score:3)
one of these threads.
Hey, that's what he gets (Score:3)
for bitching.
Reference to... (Score:5, Informative)
For those who missed the reference and didn't click the links, this is a reference to Fahrenheit 451.
Re: (Score:3)
For those who missed the reference and didn't click the links, this is a reference to Fahrenheit 451.
Anyone who didn't get the references need to: Go back to highschool chemistry, and read more books.
Re:Reference to... (Score:5, Funny)
For those who missed the reference and didn't click the links, this is a reference to Fahrenheit 451.
Anyone who didn't get the references need to: Go back to highschool chemistry, and read more books.
We can't!
Re:Reference to... (Score:5, Funny)
The judge specifically told me I'm not allowed to go to any more high schools.
Re: (Score:2)
They would read more books, but they keep getting those damned 451 error messages...
Re: (Score:2)
For those who missed the reference and didn't click the links, this is a reference to Fahrenheit 451.
Fahrenheit 451 is interesting, because contrary to what many believe it wasn't really about government censorship, and the culprit in the story isn't the state, but the people, and how they embraced apathy and lack of substance with watching TV over reading books. Source:the author [laweekly.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Fahrenheit 451 is interesting, because contrary to what many believe it wasn't really about government censorship, and the culprit in the story isn't the state, but the people, and how they embraced apathy and lack of substance with watching TV over reading books.
For one thing, they're the same thing, as an apathetic electorate tolerates this sort of censorship. For another, a work means what it means, not what its author intended it to mean. Or does the law prevent death of the author [wikipedia.org] from taking effect until 70 years [wikipedia.org] after the literal death of the author?
They didn't just tolerate it, they actively caused it. Turning to mindless entertainment and shortened 'factoids' (that lack substance and depth) on TV. Bradbury saw the TV as an opiate. Only after people stopped reading did the state employ firemen to burn books.
Why not 666? (Score:2)
666: Blocked by your evil government. Move to a free country or fight for your right. Use it or lose it.
Re:Reference to... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Which is just another reason it'll never happen. It's a loaded reference; what government is going to link themselves to F451 on purpose?
They will do just that. If this become part of the specification they will be obliged to follow them or else we can reject their censorship software on the basis that they are not compliant. eg: "No one is supporting paedophilia or aiding terrorism we simply want specification compliant software!". And when they do get compliant, everyone get the reference. It is win-win as far as living under a oppressive regime can be.
Old(ish) but brilliant (Score:5, Informative)
Already being done pretty much (Score:4, Informative)
If I visit www.thepiratebay.org on a browser that doesn't have an anti-censorship plugin installed, I get
"The page you're looking for has been blocked.
"We're complying with a court order that means access to this website has
"to be blocked to protect against copyright infringement."
Amendment... (Score:3)
Re:Amendment... (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, they're still watching. They just (hopefully) can't decrypt it.
Old News (Score:2)
June 9th, 2012 An HTTP Status Code For Censorship?
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=451%20error%20code%20slashdot&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fyro.slashdot.org%2Fstory%2F12%2F06%2F09%2F1927246%2Fan-http-status-code-for-censorship&ei=By8NUoTOMqeH2AWY6YDwBg&usg=AFQjCNFZN6sSLNmmIWvJGLOMT1FevZ8Jmg&bvm=bv.50768961,d.aWc [google.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I see what you did there... (Score:2)
451... Nice... Ray Bradbury would be proud :)
actually, not so much (Score:3)
Actually, not so much. While most people assume 'Fahrenheit 451' is about censorship, Bradbury claimed it was really about TV replacing books. [laweekly.com] He even fought (unsuccessfully) to keep Michael Moore from using the title 'Fahrenheit 9/11' for his film.
Re:actually, not so much (Score:4, Insightful)
It was more than that. It was the books being replaced by the people own volition. The people allowed it, let it happen, and even condoned it. Which one could argued it exactly what is happening.
We're going to need some subcodes or something... (Score:4, Interesting)
I would be strongly in favor of not having censored pages look like nonexistent or technically glitched pages, as there's nothing more insidious than silent censorship; but I have to wonder if an HTTP response code is the right tool for the job.
The various existing codes are not particularly granular, and an anti-censorship pressure scheme that has any hope of succeeding needs to be granular.
It doesn't help me if all I now is "Example.org is unavailable for legal reasons". I need to know what jurisidiction, what law, what court order(if any), what private actor (in the case of something like the DMCA), and ideally the asserted reason. Ideally, all that information would be properly marked up (not just a text blob) so that a browser could pretty-print it for the end user, a spider gathering statistics or scraping could gather statistics, and so forth.
You need to, as directly as possible, tie the entities responsible for the fact that you can't see the page to the message that you can't see the page. If you don't do that, people might generate some diffuse displeasure; but will have little way of knowing who is behind the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
[] Unauthorized copies of Copyrighted materials
[] Jihadist tips and chat rooms
[] Politically Incorrect information
[] Child Pornography
[SUBMIT]
We are sorry, but for legal reasons, the [CANCEL] button has been removed from this page.
Re: (Score:2)
The example error message the Open Rights Group gives in TFA does exactly what you're asking for.
451 (Score:2)
Well, you know... (Score:2)
We all want to change the world.
Previously discuess on /. here (Score:2)
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/06/09/1927246/an-http-status-code-for-censorship [slashdot.org]
I knew it sounded familar
Paper? Bah. (Score:3)
What's the Curie temperature of an HDD platter's magnetic coating?
nuce, but not quite technically correct.. (Score:2)
of course we know that server errors are 500s codes, not 400s.. and that is essentially what this is.. the server (or client's upstream) is taking the action... not the client.
so i propose that the number instead be...
HTTP/1.1 507 SOL
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
451 is appropriate, as others in this thread have pointed out. 4xx indicates client is trying to access something that cannot be served to them, for whatever reason.
403 for instance is an access denied message - "this content is here, but you aren't allowed to see it"
5xx indicates server errors. in the case of blocked content, there is no server error. you just aren't allowed to see the content you are requesting, so the comparison to 403 is incredibly appropriate.
Expired (Score:2)
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-02 [ietf.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't mean we can't use it anyways to prove a point.
response.setStatus(451);
Re: (Score:2)
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status-03 [ietf.org]
420 Not Found (Score:4, Funny)
I couldn't find your webpage, but dude, I totally found my stash!
(See also: hash error)
It's not "Page Not Found"!!! (Score:2)
I have a huge peeve with people calling 404 error "File not found" because url's are not files! "Page" is closer, but then it's not always a page requested via http.
C'mon people, get this straight! It's not hard, now write this 100 times on the chalkboard:
"404 Not Found"
420 (Score:2)
Thailand (Score:2)
When I was in Thailand and tried to access a wikipedia page about King Rama IX I actually got a friendly page telling me that that page is banned in Thailand. At least they were upfront about it. Much nicer than a 404 or 451.
Of course, I then just pulled up the Google cache copy of it and read that.
How appropriate (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
That's why embedding intelligence in your codes is a bad idea. Sometimes the world changes in ways that your original intelligence scheme did not anticipate. For example, what happens if you run out of codes that begin with 3? You're suddenly left with an intelligence system that is is either no longer able to meet your needs or no longer accurate.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
how is it temporary? 404's have more chance of being temporary... unfortunately.
the block is an intentional permanent problem that doesn't go away without some human doing something.. much like many other 4xx states.
Re: (Score:2)
quite many countries have implemented the blocking so that you'll served some page, just not what you were looking for.
Re: (Score:2)
Censored site are often hijacked by scary-looking redirect to state propaganda. If this is accepted in the future specification, that propaganda page will require to return this status code. eg: "HTTP/1.0 451 Corrupted Government"
Non compliant censorship can, additionally, be protested on the basis that they are not compliant.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I tried to go to the government's website but I got a 413 error :(
Re: (Score:2)
I tried to order dessert in a restaurant and received a 314 - Pie Moved error.
Re: (Score:2)