Tag - Censorship
Although it doesn't always seem like it, the Windows Live Messenger team like to take care of their customers. Getting someone in at the weekend to remove a stupid message block and now explaining what went wrong.
Dharmesh Mehta, a lead on the Windows Live Messenger product management team who's emerging as something of a regular poster at MessengerSays (the official Windows Live Messenger team blog), has given an apology and some details of why YouTube was blocked for several hours last weekend.
The main things that worry me about what is said here are:
- one, how much of our messages are this third party seeing - there are severe privacy issues surrounding this, do the company only get sent URLs that appear in messages or all of our messages? how much control does Microsoft have over this? and why if "manually checking the URL" happens did someone still think to block YouTube.com?;
- and two, why does it take an uproar like this to get a website "unblocked" - while other legitimate websites are still blocked.
>> Post at "Inside Windows Live Messenger" blog (aka MessengerSays)
>> Send the Messenger team feedback
Dharmesh Mehta, a lead on the Windows Live Messenger product management team who's emerging as something of a regular poster at MessengerSays (the official Windows Live Messenger team blog), has given an apology and some details of why YouTube was blocked for several hours last weekend.
As some of you noticed, we had a problem from Friday night to Saturday morning where our Messenger service was incorrectly blocking some legitimate IP addresses. We sincerely apologize for any difficulties this caused our users. And we want to thank those of you that reported this problem to us so that we could quickly fix it. Because of your help, the incorrect block was only in place for a few hours.
As you can imagine, we are very serious about our efforts to block virus, malware and other harmful URLs from being passed on to our users. And we're continually working to improve this process so that we can keep our users safe without having a negative impact on your Messenger service.
There have been some pretty outlandish speculations on what happened so I'd like to give you some facts about our process for trying to block unsafe URLs and about what happened Friday night:
As always, we're open to feedback on how to make Messenger an even greater service. And again, our apologies to the users that were impacted by this.
As you can imagine, we are very serious about our efforts to block virus, malware and other harmful URLs from being passed on to our users. And we're continually working to improve this process so that we can keep our users safe without having a negative impact on your Messenger service.
There have been some pretty outlandish speculations on what happened so I'd like to give you some facts about our process for trying to block unsafe URLs and about what happened Friday night:
- There are a number of factors that can be used to determine whether a URL is potentially harmful: number of times a URL is sent, the frequency of the URL being sent, the number of accounts the URL is sent from, manually checking the URL, comparing with other "block lists", etc.
- When a URL is deemed harmful, a block can be instated for a specific URL (i.e. www.domain.com/page) or an entire domain (i.e. *.domain.com)
- This entire process for Messenger is managed by a 3rd party that is a Microsoft partner
- On Friday, Microsoft did not request to block any of the URLs that were accidentally blocked
The blocks were made by our partner as a result of their process to block harmful URLs - We are still investigating the specific reason our partner made these incorrect blocks and we will work with them to improve their process for detecting harmful URLs while not blocking safe ones
As always, we're open to feedback on how to make Messenger an even greater service. And again, our apologies to the users that were impacted by this.
The main things that worry me about what is said here are:
- one, how much of our messages are this third party seeing - there are severe privacy issues surrounding this, do the company only get sent URLs that appear in messages or all of our messages? how much control does Microsoft have over this? and why if "manually checking the URL" happens did someone still think to block YouTube.com?;
- and two, why does it take an uproar like this to get a website "unblocked" - while other legitimate websites are still blocked.
>> Post at "Inside Windows Live Messenger" blog (aka MessengerSays)
>> Send the Messenger team feedback
Censoring messages is nothing new for Windows Live Messenger. It was introduced as a security measure and blocked websites leading to various viruses that were spreading across the network. This was of course a good idea, in the years that notorious viruses plagued users these measures were necessary and the system appeared to have worked.
However, implemention of the system was criticized as it slowed down conversations due to its sloppy programming. Using phrases like '.pif' would end group conservations, paving the way for hijacking multi-conservations your friends were trying to have.
However it was when Microsoft blocked all .info domains being sent over the network that the system came under heavy scrutiny. Then the andyman discovered the list of blocked strings and websites within Messenger, including services that were found clean and virus free. In recent weeks links were blocked to the hit web messenger eBuddy.
Now Fanatic Live have discovered links to YouTube have now been blocked. The reason? We're not sure, but the website has nothing to do with viruses or any other security issues.
With all the talk of net neutrality and criticisms over countries blocking access to the website this is going to portray Microsoft in a bad light. Moreover as YouTube is owned by Google one could question weather Microsoft is trying to create direct competition with their new video service Soapbox. Microsoft have just received a $1.4bn fine for their anti-competitive behavior.
The worrying thing, however, is that this is probably not the end ...
However, implemention of the system was criticized as it slowed down conversations due to its sloppy programming. Using phrases like '.pif' would end group conservations, paving the way for hijacking multi-conservations your friends were trying to have.
However it was when Microsoft blocked all .info domains being sent over the network that the system came under heavy scrutiny. Then the andyman discovered the list of blocked strings and websites within Messenger, including services that were found clean and virus free. In recent weeks links were blocked to the hit web messenger eBuddy.
Now Fanatic Live have discovered links to YouTube have now been blocked. The reason? We're not sure, but the website has nothing to do with viruses or any other security issues.
With all the talk of net neutrality and criticisms over countries blocking access to the website this is going to portray Microsoft in a bad light. Moreover as YouTube is owned by Google one could question weather Microsoft is trying to create direct competition with their new video service Soapbox. Microsoft have just received a $1.4bn fine for their anti-competitive behavior.
The worrying thing, however, is that this is probably not the end ...
Microsoft have been known for blocking links stupidly in the past. But I think this one takes the bullet ... you can now longer receive links to to the hit web messenger eBuddy within Messenger! mess.be had this to say on the issue:
Microsoft have made a mistake from blocking things from day one, it is an inefficient system that was poorly coded and even made Messenger slower. Blocking one of the most successful services to take advantage of their product was an error of judgement and like I said last week Microsoft don't seem to be pleasing those who work closely with their products.
>> Source: mess.be
A considerable number of people may have, for whatever reason, reported the popular web-based IM client through the Report abuse option that's sitting in every "Help" menu since version 8.1. But I'm not even seeing those hardly annoying, automated "I'm using eBuddy.com!" messages anymore.
Or perhaps Microsoft just accidentally blocked the site of a competitor... again. But while last week's mistake was corrected in less than a day, the ban on eBuddy.com has first been noticed by Messer Bram already last Wednesday.
Either way, it's probably yet another example of a safe URL being blocked as part of Messenger's inefficient worms and SPIM filter. Both parties were contacted and I'm awaiting their reaction.
Or perhaps Microsoft just accidentally blocked the site of a competitor... again. But while last week's mistake was corrected in less than a day, the ban on eBuddy.com has first been noticed by Messer Bram already last Wednesday.
Either way, it's probably yet another example of a safe URL being blocked as part of Messenger's inefficient worms and SPIM filter. Both parties were contacted and I'm awaiting their reaction.
Microsoft have made a mistake from blocking things from day one, it is an inefficient system that was poorly coded and even made Messenger slower. Blocking one of the most successful services to take advantage of their product was an error of judgement and like I said last week Microsoft don't seem to be pleasing those who work closely with their products.
>> Source: mess.be