Google/Microsoft build indexed kiddie porn collection for law enforcement

[presence]

we should do everything in our power to protect children from harm.
[]
That's why internet companies like Google and Microsoft have been working with law enforcement for years to stop paedophiles sharing illegal pictures on the web.


[]
we always need to have a person review the images.
Once that is done – and we know the pictures are illegal – each image is given a unique digital fingerprint.


[]
This enables our computers to identify those pictures whenever they appear on our systems. And Microsoft deserves a lot of credit for developing and sharing its picture detection technology.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2509044/Google-chief-Eric-Schmidt-explains-block-child-porn.html#ixzz2l3Tnkdkf
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rw?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=MailOnline) | DailyMail on Facebook (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=DailyMail)

[LibForestPaul]

is there a repository of images and id tags. wouldn't possesing such a repository be illegal? wouldn't viewing such images be illegal? especially since it is kown beforehand that the image is likely child porn? what if they make a mistake, false positve, true negative.

[eduardo89]

Good. People who watch, sell, or make kiddie porn should be beheaded.

[ghengis86]

Good. People who watch, sell, or make kiddie porn should be beheaded.

while I agree with your sentiment...

would you draw the knife?

I'm unsure on the OP's implications with regard to privacy and whatnot...

[Keith and stuff]

Good. People who watch, sell, or make kiddie porn should be beheaded.
Why do you want so many wonderful police officers beheaded? They are just doing their jobs!

[aGameOfThrones]

TSA, TSA, TSA, TSA, 'Murica.

[otherone]

Good. People who watch, sell, or make kiddie porn should be beheaded.

The age of consent in Spain is 13.

[eduardo89]

The age of consent in Spain is 13.

I find that disgusting.

[otherone]

I find that disgusting.

It seems you'd be beheading a lot of your countrymen.

[eduardo89]

It seems you'd be beheading a lot of your countrymen.

I'm not a Spaniard, nor do I live in Spain anymore. And even though the age of consent is 13, I never knew any Spaniards who were making child porn or even sleeping with 13 year old girls.

[Christian Liberty]

Good. People who watch, sell, or make kiddie porn should be beheaded.

Selling or making it, maybe. But using it? As much as I have little compassion on them, that doesn't seem right somehow. Especially since its impossible to prove the viewing was deliberate.

And... does this include LEOs that view the stuff?

[tangent4ronpaul]

Yeah, I thought this was camels nose under the tent stuff... :rolleyes:


Cleaning up search: We've fine tuned Google Search to prevent links to child sexual abuse material from appearing in our results.
While no algorithm is perfect – and Google cannot prevent paedophiles adding new images to the web – these changes have cleaned up the results for over 100,000 queries that might be related to the sexual abuse of kids.
As important, we will soon roll out these changes in more than 150 languages, so the impact will be truly global.

Anyone remember the NetNanny craze where people were trying to prevent lil Johny from accessing porn on the net. This didn't work so well when the first search term was breast (and blocked) and the next terms were something like cancer or self exam...


https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Australian_government_secret_ACMA_internet_censors hip_blacklist,_6_Aug_2008

Australian government secret ACMA internet censorship blacklist, 6 Aug 2008



Summary

This list contains 2395 webpages or site variations derived from the those secretly banned by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) and used by a government approved censorship software maker in its "ACMA only" censorship mode. The last update to the ACMA list is August 6, 2008.

While Wikileaks is used to exposing secret government censorship in developing countries, we now find Australia acting like a democratic backwater. Apparently without irony, ACMA threatens fines of upto $11,000 a day for linking to sites on its secret, unreviewable, censorship blacklist -- a list the government hopes to expand into a giant national censorship machine.

History shows that secret censorship systems, whatever their original intent, are invariably corrupted into anti-democratic behavior.

This week saw Australia joining China and the United Arab Emirates as the only countries censoring Wikileaks. We were not notified by ACMA.

In December last year we released the secret Internet censorship list for Thailand. Of the sites censored in 2008, 1,203 sites were classified as "lese majeste" -- criticizing the Royal family. Like Australia, the Thai censorship system was originally pushed to be a mechanism to prevent the child pornography.

Research shows that while such blacklists are dangerous to "above ground" activities such as political discourse, they have little effect on the production of child pornography, and by diverting resources and attention from traditional policing actions, may even be counter-productive. For a fascinating insider's account, see My life in child porn.

In January 2009, the Thai system was used to censor Australian reportage about the imprisonment of Harry Nicolaides, an Australian writer, who wrote a novel containing a single paragraph deemed to be critical of the Thai Monarchy.

Most of the sites on the Australian list have no obvious connection to child pornography. Some have changed owners while others were clearly always about other subjects.
(...)


Detection and removal: There's no quick technical fix when it comes to detecting child sexual abuse imagery.
This is because computers can't reliably distinguish between innocent pictures of kids at bathtime and genuine abuse. So we always need to have a person review the images.

Yes, yes... like that grandma busted for producing child porn for that pic of her grandson taking a bath in the sink? Or the husband and wife busted for a picture of her breastfeeding? YEAH, RIGHT! "innocent" :rolleyes:


And here is where it gets REALLY CREEPY!

This enables our computers to identify those pictures whenever they appear on our systems. And Microsoft deserves a lot of credit for developing and sharing its picture detection technology.

Like say when they are out spidering the web? (but don't worry too much. Google has only managed to index about 4% of the web. They are also highly biased toward larger web sites that are linked to a lot. In short, it's pretty useless for this, but quite useful for other police state crap.


But paedophiles are increasingly filming their crimes. So our engineers at YouTube have created a new technology to identify these videos.

Now how would they be able to do that if 100% contrary to what they said in the second excerpt, they can tell what you are doing in a digital video clip or a Skype call.

How could they do that?

Do you remember YouTube/Google coming out with copy write infringement software that could tell if part of a copy written song or a clip from a movie was embedded in a YouTube?

Think about the X-BOX ONE and Kinetk camera system - how they are working to detect hand motions as controls and able to watch your workout and tell you if you have good form...

But hay, they are only pedo's - why should anyone care?

You might recall, that the Internet didn't used to have cops. Then we got them "to protect the children". Now it's a FUCKING POLICE STATE!

This has FAIL written all over it. It pretty much sucks that the US is rolling out a secret blacklist for the entire world. Now that would never be abused :rolleyes: like it has been in every other case in history were a country had a blacklist. and immediately pushed it into actively squelching political descent.

Is anyone else bothered that a private company is involved in law enforcement duties like this? Kind on par with private prisons. Makes you wonder when the courts are going to get outsourced too.

-t

[messana]

Selling or making it, maybe. But using it? As much as I have little compassion on them, that doesn't seem right somehow. Especially since its impossible to prove the viewing was deliberate.

Don't see why not. It would help stifle demand.

[heavenlyboy34]

Don't see why not. It would help stifle demand.
You should look into the miserable fail of the just-us ("justice") system. You don't want to trust them with any significant amount of power, I assure you. There is a very good chance it can be used against you or someone close to you.

[AngryCanadian]

Good. People who watch, sell, or make kiddie porn should be beheaded.

This has fail written all over it, if Google are indeed in support then there outrage over the NSA leaks are fake. Ironic this move by Google and Microsoft comes right after David Cameron failures in the middle east and the recent raid in Toronto.

If you support this then you might as well believe in terrorism claims by our governments.
This is censorship. But hey David Cameron did say he wanted censorship.


Has anyone noticed? how come the elitist minsters, wealthy members are getting away with Child Porn? remember the pentagon Child porn news story? of several pentagon officials being slightly charged with just some few offenses? :rolleyes:

Seems its all hush hush now.

[Tod]

But paedophiles are increasingly filming their crimes. So our engineers at YouTube have created a new technology to identify these videos.

Now how would they be able to do that if 100% contrary to what they said in the second excerpt, they can tell what you are doing in a digital video clip or a Skype call.

How could they do that?

How about facial recognition tied to a database that includes people's ages?

[dannno]

Don't see why not. It would help stifle demand.

So if law enforcement planted kiddie porn on your laptop, what kind of sentence do you think you'd deserve? Would you prefer a beheading as some others have thoughtlessly suggested in this thread?

[tangent4ronpaul]

How about facial recognition tied to a database that includes people's ages?

That's what Facebook's software does, only it links you to a lot more than a age. Any bets that they just start hoovering pictures of people of all ages and building a huge database?


Visionics FaceIt is First Face Recognition Software to be used in a CCTV Control Room Application
Award-winning Software is Part of a Revolutionary New Anti-crime System

in Newham, East London (UK) that Can Visually Identify Known Criminals
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/visionics-faceit-is-first-face-recognition-software-to-be-used-in-a-cctv-control-room-application-77257667.html

JERSEY CITY, N.J., Nov. 3 /PRNewswire/ -- Visionics Corporation announced
today that its FaceIt(R) face recognition software is now the first software
of its kind to be used in a Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) control room
application. In particular, the award-winning FaceIt(R) is now part of a
revolutionary new CCTV-based anti-crime system called 'Mandrake' that was
recently installed in the borough of Newham, East London, in the United
Kingdom.
The Mandrake system uses the FaceIt(R) software in conjunction with other
control room software and hardware to automatically scan the faces of people
passing the 144 CCTV cameras located around Newham. The system's specific
objective is to reduce crime in Newham by searching for matches in a
watchlist, a video library of known criminals, stored in a local police
database. When the system spots one of those faces, a security officer in the
control room is alerted and then can contact the police.

-t

[tangent4ronpaul]

Oh, this is cute...

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/11/google-blocks-child-porn-in-100000-searches-plans-filter-for-youtube/

UK Prime Minister David Cameron recently called on search engines to impose a blacklist of search terms related to child sexual abuse. Microsoft's Bing was "the first to introduce pop-up warnings for people in the UK who seek out online images of child abuse" back in July, a BBC story at the time noted. The UK is also forcing Internet service providers to roll out filters targeting all porn.

It was also reported by The Guardian today that "GCHQ [the British intelligence agency] will be brought in to tackle the problem of child abuse material being shared on peer-to-peer networks."

As pointed out in a comment, to paraphrase:

Isn't it interesting that both the US and UK, the governments with the largest spying organizations, decided that it was time to tackle this problem at the same time and announced working together on it on the same day... Others mentioned that GCHQ was also going after the TOR network.


http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/nov/18/uk-us-dark-web-online-child-abuse-internet

The announcement came the day before a Downing Street summit at which the prime minister will announce that British and US law enforcement agencies are to jointly target online child abuse by monitoring those who operate on the hidden internet. A transatlantic taskforce will identify ways of targeting criminals and paedophiles who use secret encrypted networks to distribute images of abuse.

Schmidt says that the changes introduced by Google show that his company is listening. In an article for the Daily Mail, which has been campaigning to clean up the internet, the Google executive chairman writes: "We've listened, and in the last three months put more than 200 people to work developing new, state-of-the-art technology to tackle the problem. We've fine-tuned Google search to prevent links to child sexual abuse material from appearing in our results."

HELLO EDWARD SNOWDEN! Last 3 months, gee - isn't that timing really cute? Cats out of the bag, so law is now being made by treaties between agencies, completely bypassing Congress and dumping a ton of the surveillance work on the very companies that just had egg on their face due to the gvmt spying...

A spokesperson for Yahoo said the company had a "zero-tolerance policy when it comes to child abuse content online. Our dedicated governance and safety teams remove all illegal content across Yahoo properties. In our search partnership with Microsoft, each search is checked against Ceop's [the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre] blacklist of search terms and no results leading to child abuse images, videos, or abuse-related file sharing sites are shown."

The US has a blacklist. I don't think I've ever seen that admitted before.

The new Anglo-American law enforcement initiative extends already close co-operation between the UK and US in monitoring internet communications. The FBI and other US agencies will be asked to co-operate with their UK counterparts, including the new National Crime Agency.

The government estimates that 20,000 people are using encrypted and anonymous networks, such as the Tor anonymising service, to communicate. Many of these will be carrying out perfectly legal activities.

ROTGLMAO!!!!

https://metrics.torproject.org/users.html

Try 3,500,000 - and that's just Tor

https://metrics.torproject.org/userstats-relay-country.png

Note: the 2M dip in users since Oct, is due to the botnet that was using Tor

The dark web is so called because sites are hosted in such a way as to be inaccessible through the open internet, and cannot be found by standard search engines.

In order to access them, users must first download special software. When they access the sites, the technology used means that they do so with a high degree of anonymity. The location of the server used to host a particular site is also protected by layers of encryption.

Downing Street said: "Child abuse online is not restricted by international borders and so neither must our response be."

The meeting at No 10 will be attended by representatives of BSkyB, TalkTalk, BT, Virgin Media, Google, Microsoft, the National Crime Agency, the NSPCC and the Internet Watch Foundation.

It comes four months after Cameron promised to tackle online child abuse, saying it "pollutes the internet". He vowed to end the proliferation of child abuse images on the internet and ensure that children were protected from viewing damaging material.

-t