⭐ 欢迎来到虫虫下载站! | 📦 资源下载 📁 资源专辑 ℹ️ 关于我们
⭐ 虫虫下载站

📄 rfc2057.txt

📁 中、英文RFC文档大全打包下载完全版 .
💻 TXT
📖 第 1 页 / 共 4 页
字号:
RFC 2057             Source Directed Access Control        November 19964.3  World Wide Web (WWW).   Fast becoming the most well known method of communicating on the   Internet, the "World Wide Web" offers users the easy ability to   locate and view a vast array of content on the Internet.  The Web   uses a "hypertext" formatting language called hypertext markup   language (HTML), and Web "browsers" can display HTML documents   containing text, images, and sound.  Any HTML document can include   links to other types of information or resources anywhere in the   world, so that while viewing an HTML document that, for example,   describes resources available on the Internet, an individual can   "click" using a computer mouse on the description of the resource and   be immediately connected to the resource itself.  Such "hyperlinks"   allow information to be accessed and organized in very flexible ways,   and allow individuals to locate and efficiently view related   information even if the information is stored on numerous computers   all around the world.   Unlike with USENET newsgroups, mail exploders, FTP, and gopher, an   operator of a World Wide Web server does have some ability to   interrogate a user of a Web site on the server, and thus has some   ability to screen out users.  An HTML document can include a fill-in-   the-blank "form" to request information from a visitor to a Web site,   and this information can be transmitted back to the Web server.  The   information received can then be processed by a computer program   (usually a "Common Gateway Interface," or "CGI," script), and based   on the results of that computer program the Web server could grant or   deny access to a particular Web page.  Thus, it is possible for some   (but not all, as discussed below) World Wide Web sites to be designed   to "screen" visitors to ensure that they are adults.   The primary barrier to such screening is the administrative burden of   creating and maintaining the screening system.  For an individual Web   site to create a software system capable of screening thousands of   visitors a day, determining (to the extent possible) whether a   visitor is an adult or a minor, and maintaining a database to allow   subsequent access to the Web site would require a significant on-   going effort.  Moreover, as discussed above with regard to electronic   mail, the task of actually establishing a Web visitor's identity or   "verifying" a credit card would require a significant investment of   administrative and clerical time.  As there is no effective method to   establish identity over the Internet, nor is there currently a method   to verify credit card numbers over the Internet (and given the   current cost of credit card verifications done by other means), this   type of identification process is only practical for a commercial   entity that is charging for access to the Web information.Bradner                      Informational                     [Page 16]RFC 2057             Source Directed Access Control        November 1996   Beyond the major administrative burden that would be required for a   Web site host to comply with the Communications Decency Act, there   are two additional problems presented by the Act.  First, many Web   publishers cannot utilize computer programs such as CGI scripts to   process input from a Web visitor.  For example, I have been informed   that the major online services such as America Online and Compuserve   do not allow their customers to run CGI scripts or other processes   that could be a significant drain on the online services' computers   as well as a potential security risk.  Thus, for this category of Web   publisher, the Communications Decency Act works as a ban on any   arguably "indecent" or "patently offensive" speech.  It is impossible   for this category of Web publisher to control access to their Web   sites.   Moreover, even for Web publishers who can use CGI scripts to screen   access, the existence of Web page caching on the Internet can make   such screening ineffective.  "Caching" refers to a method to speed up   access to Internet resources.  Caching is often used at one or both   ends of, for example, a transatlantic or transpacific cable that   carries Internet communications.  An example of caching might occur   when a Internet user in Europe requests access to a World Wide Web   page located in the United States.  The request travels by   transatlantic cable to the United States, and the Web page is   transmitted back across the ocean to Europe (and ultimately to the   user who requested access).  But, the operator of the transatlantic   cable will place the Web page in a storage "cache" located on the   European side of the cable.  Then, if a second Internet user in   Europe requests the same Web page, the operator of the transatlantic   cable will intercept the request and provide the page from its   "cache" (thereby reducing traffic on the transatlantic cable).  This   type of caching typically occurs without the awareness of the   requesting user.  Moreover, in this scenario, the original content   provider is not even aware that the second user requested the Web   page--and the original content provider has no opportunity to screen   the access by the second user.  Nevertheless, the original content   provider risks prosecution if the content is "adult" content and the   second requester is a minor.  The use of caching web servers is   rapidly increasing within the United States (mostly to help moderate   the all too rapid growth in Internet traffic), and thus can affect   entirely domestic communications.  For example, a growing number of   universities use caching web servers to reduce the usage of the link   to their Internet service provider.  In light of this type of   caching, efforts to screen access to Web pages can only at best be   partially effective.Bradner                      Informational                     [Page 17]RFC 2057             Source Directed Access Control        November 1996   In light of the existence of Web page caching on the Internet, it   would be extremely difficult if not impossible to for someone   operating a World Wide Web server to ensure that no minors received   "adult" content.   Moreover, for those Web page publishers who lack access to CGI   scripts, there is no possible way for them to screen recipients to   ensure that all recipients are over 17 years of age.  For these   content providers, short of not supporting World Wide Web access to   their materials, I know of no actions available to them that would be   reasonably effective at preventing minors from having access to   "adult" files on a World Wide Web server.  Requiring such screening   by these Web publishers to prevent minors from accessing files that   might be "indecent" or "patently offensive" to a minor would have the   effect of banning their speech on the World Wide Web.   The Web page caching described above contributes to the difficulty of   determining with specificity the number of visitors to a particular   Web site.  Some Web servers can count how many different Web clients,   some of which could be caching Web servers, requested access to a Web   site.  Some Web servers can also count how many "hits"--or separate   file accesses--were made on a particular Web site (a single access to   a Web page that contains a images or graphic icons would likely be   registered as more than one "hit").  With caching, the actual number   of users that retrieved information that originated on a particular   Web server is likely to be greater than the number of "hits" recorded   for the server.5.0  Client-end Blocking   As detailed above, for many important methods of communication on the   Internet, the senders--the content providers--have no ability to   ensure that their messages are only available to adults.  It is also   not possible for a Internet service provider or large institutional   provider of access to the Internet (such as a university) to screen   out all or even most content that could be deemed "indecent" or   "patently offensive" (to the extent those terms can be understood at   all).  A large institution could at least theoretically screen a   portion of the communications over the Internet, scanning for example   for "indecent" words, but not pictures.  Such a screening program   capable of screening a high volume of Internet traffic at the point   of its entry into the institution would require an investment of   computing resources of as much as one million dollars per major   Internet information conduit.  In addition it would be quit difficult   to configure such a system to only control the content for those   users that are under-age recipients, since in many cases the   information would be going to a server within the university where   many users, under-age and not, would have access to it.Bradner                      Informational                     [Page 18]RFC 2057             Source Directed Access Control        November 1996   Based on my experience and knowledge of the Internet, I believe that   the most effective way to monitor, screen, or control the full range   of information transmitted over the Internet to block undesired   content is at the client end--that is, by using software installed in   the individual user's computer.  Such software could block certain   forms of incoming transmissions by using content descriptive tags in   the messages, or could use content ratings developed by third parties   to select what can and cannot be retrieved for display on a user's   computer.6.0  Tagging Material   I am informed that the government in this action may advocate the use   of special tags or flags in electronic mail messages, USENET   newsgroup postings, and World Wide Web HTML documents to indicate   "adult" material.  To my knowledge, no Internet access software or   World Wide Web browsers are currently configurable to block material   with such tags.  Thus, the headers and flags the government may   advocate is currently an ineffective means to ensure the blocking of   access by minors to "adult" material.  Even in a predictable future   where there are defined standards for such tags and there are   readably available browsers that are configurable to make use of   those tags, a content provider--e.g., a listserv or Newsgroup poster   or a Web page author--will have little power to ensure that the   client software used to receive the postings was in all cases   properly configured to recognize these tags and to block access to   the posting when required.  Thus I feel that the tagging that may be   proposed by the government would in fact not be "effective" in   ensuring that the poster's speech would not be "available to a person   under 18 years of age," as the Communications Decency Act requires.   Although I strongly support both voluntary self-rating and third-   party rating (as described in the preceding paragraph), I do not feel   that the use of tags of this type would satisfy the speaker's   obligation to take effective actions to ensure that "patently   offensive" material would not be "available" to minors.  Furthermore,   since it is impossible to embed such flags or headers in many of the   documents currently made available by anonymous FTP, gopher and the   World Wide Web without rendering the files useless (executable   programs for example), any government proposal to require the use of   tags to indicate "adult" material would not allow the continued use   of those methods of communication for speech that might be deemed   "indecent" or "patently offensive."   With the exception of electronic mail and e-mail exploders all of the   methods of Internet communications discussed above require an   affirmative action by the listener before the communication takes   place.  A listener must take specific action to receive   communications from USENET newsgroups, Internet Relay Chat, gopher,Bradner                      Informational                     [Page 19]RFC 2057             Source Directed Access Control        November 1996   FTP, and the World Wide Web.  In general this is also true for e-mail   exploders except in the case where a third party subscribes the user   to the exploder list.  These communications over the Internet do not   "invade" a person's home or appear on a person's computer screen   unbidden.  Instead, a person must almost always take specific   affirmative steps to receive information over the Internet.7.0  Acknowledgment   I owe a great deal of thanks to John Morris of Jenner and Block, one   of the law firms involved in the CDA challenge.  Without his   extensive help this document would not exist, or if it did, it would   be even more scattered.8.0 Security Considerations   To be actually able to do the type of content access control that the   CDA envisions would require a secure Internet infrastructure along   with secure ways to determine the minor status of potential   reciepiants around the world.  Developing such a system is outside of   the scope of this document.9.0 Author's Address   Scott Bradner   Harvard University   1350 Mass Ave.   Cambridge MA 02138 USA   Phone: +1 617 495 3864   EMail: sob@harvard.eduBradner                      Informational                     [Page 20]

⌨️ 快捷键说明

复制代码 Ctrl + C
搜索代码 Ctrl + F
全屏模式 F11
切换主题 Ctrl + Shift + D
显示快捷键 ?
增大字号 Ctrl + =
减小字号 Ctrl + -