Denver Airport Slammed For Wi-Fi FiltersSame standards being applied to Sudan and Denver? ( old news - 11:29AM Thursday Mar 06 2008) tags: business · wireless · contentTipped by Jon  The Denver airport is being criticized because their free Wi-Fi network prohibits surfers from browsing such dangerous websites as Boing Boing and Vanity Fair. The blockade was first discovered by Talking Heads frontman David Byrne. The airport is using the same filtering products used by governments who censor web-access. The filters aren't too bright, and cast a pretty wide net in trying to filter Internet nudity: In fact, out of the 25,000+ Boing Boing posts classed as "nudity" by SmartFilter, more that 99.5 percent have no nudity at all. They're stories about Hurricane Katrina, kidnapped journalists in Iraq, book reviews, ukelele casemods, phonecam video of Bigfoot sightings (come to think of it, he doesn't wear clothes either), or pictures of astonishing Lego constructions. Why is SmartFilter content to deliver a product with a 99.5 percent false-positive rate? Because it has promised its customers that it will stop their users from seeing nudity (fat chance -- it's a dead certainty that Smart Filter has failed to class innumerable sites containing nudity), and punishing 24,875 nudity-free posts to get at 125 that contain mild or "art" nudity is fine by them. Airport officials tell the Denver Post this week that they "preferred to deal with infrequent blocking complaints rather than angry parents whose children walked by a screen showing pornography." Boing Boing offers an entry tailored toward getting around such filters.
Related:- Verizon's Open Development Initiative? So Far It's A Joke
- House Defeats DTV Delay Bill
- AT&T Starts Selling DirecTV
- DTV Coupon Program Back On Track
- AT&T Slingbox 3G Fine Print Returns...
- Google Voice Invitations Going Out
- AT&T Offers Free iPhone U-Verse DVR App
- Verizon's New Wireless Pricing Is An Insult
|
page: 1 · 2  |
 
Millenniumle
join:2007-11-11
Fredonia, NY | ... It's the airport's wireless, let them filter it as they see fit. | |
|  | 
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: ... Especially since its 'free'.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
| | | 
mrchris
We don't miss you Bush
Premium
join:2002-10-01
North Babylon, NY | Re: ... Free? I guess you get what you pay for but they seem to be too cheap to actually go and purchase one that actually works without all the FP crap. | |
| | | | Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| Re: ... Er...I think they purposefully sought an ISP with such filtering in mind. Reading the post, they were worried about little Johnny catching a passing-by glimpse of boobies, and so they got a solution to cut it off at the source.
The filters may be a bit draconian, but it is their network, and it is free. If they want unfiltered access, hit up a paid WiFi hotspot and browse whatever they want. | |
| | | | |
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·DSL EXTREME
| Re: ... My thoughts as well. I'd be surprised if it wasn't full of Ad sponsored info. I think that I've seen some 'free' wifi in the Sunnyvale area before, and it was pretty bad. Very slow, but again, it was 'free'.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
| | viperlmw
Premium
join:2005-01-25
·Qwest.net
| DIA is owned by the public and is not a private entity. It's owned by the City & County of Denver Department of Aviation, and, correct me if I'm wrong (I'm sure you will), but any services then provided are public services. This is one of the pitfalls of public networks. You will always get someone agitating to get rid of boobies on a public network. They are afraid their tax money will enable someone to see boobs. | |
| | | Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA | Re: DIA is owned by the public If that's the case, even more reason to go overboard on filter service settings. If I was a Denver taxpayer, I sure wouldn't want my tax monies going towards paying the bandwith of porn viewers. They can get their jollies at home. | |
| | | | 
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Skype
| Re: DIA is owned by the public said by Thaler :If that's the case, even more reason to go overboard on filter service settings. If I was a Denver taxpayer, I sure wouldn't want my tax monies going towards paying the bandwith of porn viewers. They can get their jollies at home. One man's porn is another man's picture of a midget amputee wrestling with a chicken...
And that's the problem with porn filters. They don't know the difference.
What's the problem with the offended person or parent just dealing with it? -- "Hey man, you wanna take your laptop away from the check-in line, please? There are children running around here that don't need to see that!! And, please, keep both hands on the keyboard!!"
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
"We don't throttle any traffic," -Charlie Douglas, Comcast spokesman, on this report. | |
| | | | | Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| Re: DIA is owned by the public said by funchords :And that's the problem with porn filters. They don't know the difference. They certainly dont - it just throws that all out. (especially at the strict settings this airport seems to be set to)
said by funchords :What's the problem with the offended person or parent just dealing with it? -- "Hey man, you wanna take your laptop away from the check-in line, please? There are children running around here that don't need to see that!! And, please, keep both hands on the keyboard!!" Again, the airport wouldn't even have this WiFi installed if it was going to create problems/issues at the airport. It was added as a service to travelers, and like most services, if it becomes more trouble than its worth, they'd just take the whole damn thing out, screwing over the other 99.9% of users. | |
| | | | | |
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
| Re: DIA is owned by the public said by Thaler :Again, the airport wouldn't even have this WiFi installed if it was going to create problems/issues at the airport. It was added as a service to travelers, and like most services, if it becomes more trouble than its worth, they'd just take the whole damn thing out, screwing over the other 99.9% of users. First off, if you're a hotspot user with any brains, you use a VPN. If you use a VPN, then you're not getting blocked. So even the 1% problem is not solved.
Secondly, if your a porn hound, you probably have some on your hard drive, a CD/DVD, or a USB stick.
Third, if you're that turned on at the airport, you need to be in Senator Craig's 12-step Program.
If it has any effect at all, it's probably a placebo effect. It seems to block a lot of innocent activity, does anyone really know if it does anything useful at all?
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
"We don't throttle any traffic," -Charlie Douglas, Comcast spokesman, on this report. | |
| | | | | | | Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| Re: DIA is owned by the public said by funchords :First off, if you're a hotspot user with any brains, you use a VPN. If you use a VPN, then you're not getting blocked. So even the 1% problem is not solved. Yes, no electronic lock-out manuver is 100% failsafe. Case in point, look at the "uncrackable" HD media formats out there - all broken. What the filters/locks do though, is make porn browsing inconvenient for most people...which is doing its intended job.
said by funchords :It seems to block a lot of innocent activity, does anyone really know if it does anything useful at all? As per your blocking "lots" of innocent activity:
said by "Denver Post" :
With more than 4,000 Wi-Fi connections a day, the airport has received only two formal blocking complaints so far, he said. The filtering software appears to be blocking less than 1 percent of 1.7 million Web page requests a day. | |
| | | | | | | |
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
| Re: DIA is owned by the public said by Thaler :said by "Denver Post" :
With more than 4,000 Wi-Fi connections a day, the airport has received only two formal blocking complaints so far, he said. The filtering software appears to be blocking less than 1 percent of 1.7 million Web page requests a day. That's not a great score, that's a poor system of measurement. More than anything else, a traveler simply wants to get to his next step. So rather than figure out who to complain to, a traveler is more likely to figure out something else to do while waiting for his plane.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
"We don't throttle any traffic," -Charlie Douglas, Comcast spokesman, on this report. | |
| | | | | | | | | Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| Re: DIA is owned by the public said by funchords :said by Thaler :said by "Denver Post" :
With more than 4,000 Wi-Fi connections a day, the airport has received only two formal blocking complaints so far, he said. The filtering software appears to be blocking less than 1 percent of 1.7 million Web page requests a day. That's not a great score, that's a poor system of measurement. More than anything else, a traveler simply wants to get to his next step. So rather than figure out who to complain to, a traveler is more likely to figure out something else to do while waiting for his plane. Wait...less than 1% is a bad score? If such great volumes of legit traffic are being blocked by this filter, then why is it filtering less than 1% of all traffic? | |
| | | | | | | | | |
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
| Re: DIA is owned by the public said by Thaler :Wait...less than 1% is a bad score? If such great volumes of legit traffic are being blocked by this filter, then why is it filtering less than 1% of all traffic? Wow -- now THAT'S selective reading.
The number of complaints is less than 1 percent. That means that less than one percent actually went through the process and successfully figured out who to complain to and then registered a complaint.
So tell me, does this mean that
a. their filtering software is excellent,
b. that their complaint channel is hard to find, or
c. that affected customers never complain?
We really don't know. But let's review what we do know ...
out of the 25,000+ Boing Boing posts classed as "nudity" by SmartFilter, more that 99.5 percent have no nudity at all. That pretty much eliminates choice "a."
If I'm bored with time on my hands, I know that I might actually enjoy the challenge of choice "b." -- but I already know I'm weird that way.
So my thinking is that either "b." or "c." is more likely to be correct and that choice "a." is practically ruled out.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
"We don't throttle any traffic," -Charlie Douglas, Comcast spokesman, on this report. | |
| | | | | | | | | | Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| Re: DIA is owned by the public said by funchords :Wow -- now THAT'S selective reading. The number of complaints is less than 1 percent. No, again, you're misreading the statistic. Less than 1% by daily traffic volume goes blocked each day. Their actual complaint ratio is much, much smaller (At the largest, its 0.03%. I can't get specifically smaller, as I don't have the # of days in operation this network has been running.) | |
| | | | | | | | | |
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
| Re: DIA is owned by the public Ah, I see it now.
"The filtering software appears to be blocking less than 1 percent of 1.7 million Web page requests a day."
My fault, I'm sorry. I totally overlooked that line.
That makes its problems appear to be quite a bit more isolated than I first understood them to be.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
"We don't throttle any traffic," -Charlie Douglas, Comcast spokesman, on this report. | |
| | | 
battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000 | By this logic you must certainly agree that all filters to the schools should be removed. It should be fine for little kids in school to be able to make their way to porn. | |
| | | | 
r20119679
@verizon.net
 from:
woody7
| Re: DIA is owned by the public Little kids aren't interested in porn. Little kids are interested in doing what "grown-ups" tell them not to. | |
| | | PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| said by viperlmw :and is not a private entity. It's owned by the City & County of Denver Department of Aviation, and, correct me if I'm wrong (I'm sure you will), but any services then provided are public services. Which make this interesting. Didn't the Supreme Court already rule that a law mandating ISP censoring unconstititional; i.e., that the line of arugment that "prefering not to deal with angry parents whose children might see pornography" isn't justification for censoring what adults might acess?
This wouldn't affect me; I'd just use a VPN tunnel to get around it. Of course, I wouldn't be using my work VPN to look at boobies, but at least I can see boingboing ...
So do they ban the magazine stands from selling Playboy, Penthouse, Maxim, The Enquirer, etc? Who know what the little children might see ...
Isn't Colorado one state that passed strong anti-gay legislation? 'sounds as conservative as states in the Southeast. | |
| | | | kitsune
join:2001-11-26
Sacramento, CA
| Re: DIA is owned by the public said by PDXPLT :said by viperlmw :and is not a private entity. It's owned by the City & County of Denver Department of Aviation, and, correct me if I'm wrong (I'm sure you will), but any services then provided are public services. Which make this interesting. Didn't the Supreme Court already rule that a law mandating ISP censoring unconstititional; i.e., that the line of arugment that "prefering not to deal with angry parents whose children might see pornography" isn't justification for censoring what adults might acess? They may very well have. But it doesn't have anything to do with this. There was no law passed in Colorado stating that they had to have this filter in place. Nor do I blame them for trying to prevent porn being viewed in public. As for the magazine stands, have you not noticed that the porn mags are encased in black plastic for pretty much the same reason. | |
| | | | | PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| Re: DIA is owned by the public said by kitsune :They may very well have. But it doesn't have anything to do with this. There was no law passed in Colorado stating that they had to have this filter in place. You'd have a point if this was a private company; i.e., Starbucks offering a hotspot with censorship. But this is a government-provided service, one that is restricting what citizens may access. That makes it related, I think.
No wonder Europeans think we're all a bunch of repressed puritans. | |
| | | | | | Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| Re: DIA is owned by the public said by PDXPLT :You'd have a point if this was a private company; i.e., Starbucks offering a hotspot with censorship. But this is a government-provided service, one that is restricting what citizens may access. That makes it related, I think. So the porn viewers can get the entire service scrapped for the other 99.9% of users? Fantastic. | |
| | 
cableties
Premium
join:2005-01-27 | Re: ... My thoughts exactly. It is free. Get your email. Check the flights and weather. Read some news. Move along inside the great white elephant formerly relocated as Stapleton. | |
| |
battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000 | Call customer service and demand a full refund!!! | |
| | 
TechieZero
Tools Are Using Me
Premium
join:2002-01-25
Wesley Chapel, FL | I agree. When did David Byrne become a douche? | |
| joker5656
join:2006-06-23
Dallas, GA | it there network well its there network. i mean if i want to block sites on mine i'm allowed. there a busness and they should have the right to block it. we all know security programs don't work, no issue there. surely there are ways around the program. | |
| 
oldcyberdude
join:2000-07-27
Exton, PA
| Which is more infrequent? "preferred to deal with infrequent blocking complaints rather than angry parents whose children walked by a screen showing pornography."
I guess I wonder whether a screen showing porn in a public airport boarding gate is really more frequent than the site blocks. I think the parents and other passengers would take care of the porn surfer in short order  | |
|
p92414
@verizon.net | Oh, yeah... and shame on God for humans having to be born without clothing.
You're never closer to God than when you're naked.  | |
| 
click_310
Eat my shorts
join:2002-12-06
Savannah, GA
|  A filter on a private network, big deal.
But why is the owner of smartfilter trading with Sudan? -> »www.ustreas.gov/offices/enforcem···udan.pdf
to begin with.
Bear in mind that Sudan could be using a borrowed copy of the core software IMO. | |
| | Bane75
join:2002-09-20
Poway, CA
| Re: A filter on a private network, big deal. said by click_310 :A private network offering its services to the public has the right to impose restrictions as it sees fit. { flame me, but thats how it works } But why is the owner of smartfilter trading with Sudan? -> » www.ustreas.gov/offices/enforcem···udan.pdfto begin with. Bear in mind that Sudan could be using a borrowed copy of the core software IMO. Where exactly does it say that Secure Computing (the maker of Smart Filter) is selling to Sudan?
The article says, "that DIA uses the same kinds of software filters employed by the repressive regimes of Sudan and Kuwait." That statement simply means that sudan uses a web filter, not that they use smart filter, specifically. | |
| 
Lumberjack
Premium
join:2003-01-18
Newport News, VA
| Not a bad thing... But, their filter is crap. There are way better filters out there (I used to work on one ). More than likely they picked the cheapest they could find and slaped it on their with the most "secure" settings.
As others have mentioned I agree with the model. It's much better to block a whole lot of legit sites than to let one bad site through in a public setting. In other words, a lawsuit for little Joey seeing porn is harder to wipe off than uncle Bob wanting his fresh news feed.
--
»www.fairtax.org | |
| moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD | If people would show a bit of common sence...... ......we wouldn't have this problem.
If you want to watch porn, do it in private.  | |
| | |
See 7 replies to this post | |
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Beggars can't be choosers Want unblocked access, get an aircard. If they jam aircards, then bitch. | |
| dwang5
join:2004-03-04
usa | why are people complaining? Yeah I don't see what people are complaining about.
They are offering a free service.
If you want uncensored, buy your own 3g data card. | |
| stunod2002
join:2003-11-07
Carol Stream, IL | Not a problem After thinking about it for awhile I think I'm good with this.. It's in the open for everyone to see so yea.. block it.. Plus the airport owns it so they can do with it what they see fit..
I think they are actually do a good thing here.. | |
| MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| I am a frequent user of DIA WiFi DIA (which, by the way, has an airport code of DEN -- I never understood why people call it DIA) is one of my frequent destinations.
I find the "free wi-fi" at DIA basically unusable. It's ridiculously slow, makes you watch a long commercial before it connects, does not work with the browser on my Palm PDA (Blazer), and inserts really big banner ads on your Web browser window.
When I'm there I use the wi-fi at the Admiral's Club which is free because I'm a member. I believe there'a also free WiFi under the AT&T DSL users plan. | |
| | 
SolarPup
IT Geek-Dawg
Premium
join:2002-03-07
The Pound
clubs: | Re: I am a frequent user of DIA WiFi DIA = Denver International Airport.
Its a family-friendly connection... Im surprised they didnt use Websense... but blocking vanity fair is a little much... | |
| | | 
nipseyrussel
Nipsey Russell, yo
join:2002-02-22
Philadelphia, PA | Re: I don't think this even warrants being a "news story" boing boing explains why there were only 2 complaints: there is now way to lodge a complaint through the system or even a phone number to call. you had to track down a snail mail address and send a letter. | |
| | 
plk
bo may sleep in loft
Premium
join:2002-04-20
Ogden, IA | great idea I'm gonna start an Airlines.....smoking and porn flights NY to LA Oh.....yeah. Almost forgot....imagine what the flight crew wears. | |
| |
GoodOne
@verizon.net | Re: great idea Mile High Airways? | |
| 
Yauch
join:2005-06-24 | Same as it ever was... same as it ever...was | |
| | 
voipguy
join:2006-05-31
Forest Hills, NY | Re: Same as it ever was... I see the states, across this big nation
I see the laws made in washington, d.c.
I think of the ones I consider my favorites
I think of the people that are working for me | |
| lmackey
join:2003-01-18
Massillon, OH
| You might want to cut them a break Perhaps offering a solution would enhance the discussion?? With all due respect to the people at DIA, they are trying to do a good thing and make access available. I doubt they would be offended if I were to say that they are far from the vanguard of IP filtering technology. | |
|
SBSDEVIL
@netmovein.com | PHX does this as well PHX is using Websense. Why is DIA being singled out? | |
| 
rolande
Certifiable
Premium,Mod
join:2002-05-24
Powell, OH
clubs:
Host:
Linksys
AT&T Midwest
| Smartfilter has terrible quality control over categorization Through testing and eval work I was doing comparing several of the filtering engines on-box on a BlueCoat platform, I found Smartfilter's overall quality of categorization, relatively speaking, to be quite dismal to say the least. I ran a list of over 577,000 URLs, captured out of a production environment that Smartfilter allowed through either non-categorization or incorrect categorization, against a competing engine. Over 17,000 URLs were classified as Porn, Malware, or Proxy Avoidance.
A month later I ran the same list against Smartfilter again to see if the updates had caught up. Smartfilter only picked up about 2,000 of those 17,000 URLs.
Smartfilter's Nudity category is known to have terrible accuracy. It caused so many issues requiring overrides in our environment that we removed it from the blocked categories list.
Their product's biggest downfall is that they rely primarily on web crawling to feed the database. Whatever heuristics engine they are using to automate the categorization process is terrible. Not to mention the process to correct these problems is regularly problematic and fraught with issues. In any given day, nearly 60% of all URLs accessed in a production environment with Smartfilter are listed as uncategorized. The majority of these uncategorized URLs (upwards of 80%) turn out to be Porn, Malware, Remote Access, and Proxy Avoidance tools. Really gives you the warm and fuzzies about a product, when you see that kind of crap day in and day out for years.
--
Ignorance is temporary...stupidity lasts forever!
»www.thewaystation.com/
»blog.thewaystation.com/ | |
| 
PolarBear
The bear formerly known as aaron8301
Premium
join:2005-01-03 | Sound familiar? Maybe they should call it free Chinese wi-fi. Then they can filter derogatory political sites as well | |
| | | |
|
|
Parental Responsibility?
·