GFW BLOG（功夫网与翻墙）

Microsoft must allow online freedom in China

2008-07-08T00:03:00.000-07:00

来源：Uncensor

Microsoft is aiding the repression of freedom of expression and information in China through complying with requests by the Chinese government that has resulted in censorship of the internet.

Microsoft’s action have included filtering the results of searches for politically sensitive terms and displaying the message “Certain content was removed from the results of this search”. Microsoft have also restricted users of MSN Spaces from including particular terms in their account names and titles. As the list of restricted terms have not been released, the extent of censorship is unkown and may result in excessive self-censorship by its Chinese users.

Microsoft have also removed blogs that are critical of the Chinese administration, such as the blog by Zhao Jing which criticised the authorities crackdown on a Beijing tabloid which exposed official corruption.

In addition, Microsoft have voluntarily signed the ‘Public Pledge of Self-discipline for the Chinese Internet Industry’ which requires Microsoft to 'refrain from producing, posting or disseminating harmful information that may jeopardize state security and disrupt social stability'.

This censorship contradicts the very principles and values that Microsoft was founded upon. It also contravenes the rights enshrined in constitution of the People's Republic of China to freedom of expression and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) which China has signed.

Act now by printing out the following letter by clicking on the Act Now button and mail it to the address below.

Degrading Transparency: Comparing Google, Yahoo and Microsoft

2008-01-26T01:51:00.000-08:00

作者：Nart Villeneuve 来源：www.nartv.org

Google, Yahoo! and Microsoft all maintain versions of their search engines for the Chinese market that censor political content. One of the key issues that emerged concerned transparency. In 2006, all three search engines, following Google’s lead, introduced a message that informed user when the results of their searches were censored. The presence of a mechanism of notification is a critical component of transparency. This notification informs users that their search results have been censored and indicates, to a certain degree, the reason (often unspecified “local law”) why based on what the user searched for. The message appeared only when the user’s results were censored and thus it was possible to connect the censorship to specific keywords or websites.

By 2008 the level of transparency has decreased. While Google’s censorship notification has remained essentially the same as it was in 2006, Yahoo! and Microsoft have altered the way in which users are notified of censorship. Yahoo! has put its censorship message at the bottom of every page regardless of whether results are censored or not, in effect de-linking the censorship notification from the results. Microsoft has removed the text completely and buried the censorship notification with a separate “help” page. These developments represent a significant degrading of transparency and accountability.

By removing or hiding the placement of the censorship message, which is vague to begin with, users may be unaware that their results have been censored and by de-linking the censor message from what the user actually searched for the topics and websites that are censored remain hidden from the user. The de-linking of the censorship message from the search results impacts the ability to determine what precise sites and “key words” are being censored.

The presence and placement of a censorship notification, along with the specificity of its content and its connection to the results, is an integral component of transparency. The specificity of the reason why content has been removed is an important component that is lacking in the case of China. In other cases, Google has cited specific laws, such as the DMCA, and other legal documents with which they must comply and reported the information, to some degree, to Chilling Effects.org. Yahoo maintains a list of sites its censored for copyright violations. However, in the case of censored political content in the case China nothing other than a reference to “local law” has been provided.

The presence of a notification that is directly connected to the results (notification appears only when content is actually removed in relation to what the user searches for) positively impacts the ability to accurately identify censored website and restricted keywords. When such notifications are either absent or disconnected from the results (for example, a notification that appears on every page regardless of whether results are censored or not) the ability to determine censored sites with a high degree of confidence diminishes as sites may simply not be indexed by the search engine. Therefore the notification is critical not only for informing users but also for the monitoring process.

June 26, 2006
Engine	Presence	Placement	Specificity	Connection	Screenshot
Google	Yes	High Notification is placed under results	Low Results removed to comply with local law	Yes Notification only appears when results are censored	screenshot
Yahoo	Yes	High* Notification is placed under results	Low Results removed	Yes*	screenshot
Microsoft	Yes	High Notification is placed under results	Low Results removed, link to “help” page that mentions local law	Yes	screenshot

* Yahoo China’s web crawlers operate from within China, behind the GFW, therefore sites that are blocked by China are not indexed by Yahoo (and thus do not need to be censored by Yahoo) leaving only sites that are either not blocked by China or are indexed during periods when there is variation in the capacity of China’s filtering system to actually be censored by Yahoo. The behaviour documented here refers to sites indexed by Yahoo but subsequently censored, not sites that are not indexed by Yahoo at all.

January 25, 2008
Engine	Presence	Placement	Specificity	Connection	Screenshot
Google	Yes	High Notification is placed under results	Low Mentions “local law”	Yes Notification only appears when results are censored	screenshot
Yahoo	Yes	Medium Notification is placed at the bottom of every page	Low Mentions “local law”	No	screenshot
Microsoft	Yes**	Low A link to a separate “help” page which contains a link to section that contains the notification	Low A link to a separate “help” page which contains a link to section that mentions “local law”	No	screenshot

** There is no notification on the actual page that results the search results. The user must click a “help” page and then navigate to yet another section that state that results may be removed in compliance with local law. the notification mentions pornography as a possible reason, no mention is made of political content.

Presence: The presence of a form of notification that informs users that results may be censored.
Placement: The location of the censorship notification message, particularly its placement in relation to the results.
Specificity: The extent to which users are informed about specific laws, orders and/or regulations leading to censored results.
Connection: Notification appears only when content is actually removed in relation to what the user searches for making it possible to determine which specific web sites and keywords have actually been censored.

(The versions of the search engines tested are the specific version for China. Google (www.google.cn) and Microsoft (www.live.com/?mkt=zh-cn) have their servers located outside of China and are tested directly while Yahoo’s (www.yahoo.cn) servers are hosted in China and are tested from inside China. This is necessary to test the search engines without interference from China’s filtering system.)

This is the start of an effort to more systematically monitor transparency over time so I am asking for feedback. Is this information useful? In what ways can it be improved?

Microsoft and Yahoo! Inc. Joint Statement to U.S. Congress Human Rights Caucus on Policies Related to Access to Internet Content

2007-06-06T04:41:00.000-07:00

来源：Microsoft、Yahoo

February 1, 2006

As leading global providers of Internet-based services, we are deeply concerned about recent developments in China that have prompted this meeting of the Caucus. We are actively exploring whether there are potential approaches to guide the practices of our industry on these matters, not only in China, but also in other countries where Internet content is treated more restrictively than in the United States. As these efforts continue, we hope to benefit from the views of members of this Caucus and other Members of Congress, other companies in our industry, and major non-governmental organizations, as well as key departments of the Executive Branch and the Chinese government itself. While we believe that companies have a responsibility to identify appropriate practices in each market in which they do business, we think there is a vital role for government-to-government discussion of the larger issues involved. We urge the United States government to take a leadership role in this regard and have initiated a dialogue with relevant U.S. officials to encourage such government-to-government engagement.

We want to assure members of the Congressional Human Rights Caucus, and the public at large, that we do not consider the Internet situation in China to be one of "business-as usual". Beyond commercial considerations, we believe that our services have promoted personal expression and enabled far wider access to independent sources of information for hundreds of millions of individuals in China and elsewhere in the world. While we will actively work to encourage governments around the world to embrace policies on Internet content that foster the freer exchange of ideas and promote maximum access to information, we also recognize that, acting alone, our leverage and ability to influence government policies in various countries is severely limited. Indeed, there are undoubtedly officials and domestic competitors in most markets who would see great advantage in our withdrawal from their countries. We think such a decision would not be in the best interests of the people we serve there. The presence of multiple Internet information providers, particularly from companies with the most comprehensive search capabilities and the richest mixture of content and services, has been a powerful force for openness and reform in all countries, including China. We want to continue to make those services available, while working with governments to find better ways of protecting the interests of all users of our services.

微软首次公开承认部分共享空间地址被金盾系统屏蔽

2007-04-12T10:05:00.000-07:00

From 未了忘却Blog

微软首次公开承认部分共享空间地址被金盾系统屏蔽。

由于大量国内的Windows Live共享空间处于207开头的北美IP段，因此遭到连带屏蔽，微软客服承认这是由金盾系统造成的,微软目前也没有办法。以下是微软客服的答复:

尊敬的客户,您好!感谢致信Windows Live Spaces技术支持中心。我们查看了您的来信，了解到您的问题是空间无法访问,我们十分理解此现象给您空间使用带来的困难。如果您无法正常登录或者访问共享空间,出现“无法显示网页”的错误信息，并且使用的是中国地区的网络，那么可能是您最近发布的网络日志中包含有政治性或者比较敏感的词语，被中国网络的监督系统自动屏蔽了。我们建议您通过使用国外的IP代理来尝试解决问题.我们建议您通过调整日志内容来解决:

一、检查最近发布的网络日志是否包含有政治性或者比较敏感的词语,进行删除。

二、如果您无法确认哪些属于违禁的词语,可以通过删除最近的日志来尝试解决。

三、若您认为第三种方法会删除一些重要的日志，那么您可以将要删除的日志先进行文字备份，然后只删除最近的日志内容包括更改标题，将其成为一篇无内容。标题简单的日志(例如:标题为『1』、『test』)，然后重新发布。排除其日志不存在问题后，可以将内容重新添加上去发布。

由于此监督系统运行于中国网络中，不受控于Windows Live Spaces技术支持中心，所以无法为您提供哪些词语受禁，也无法阻止类似的情况再次发生，为此我们感到很遗憾。但是希望您如果在测试过程中发现某些禁语，可以及时反馈给我们，这样有利于我们为其他客户提供更好的帮助以及改进我们的服务。

不得不说这是中国的悲哀。