ecreational browsing at work meets its match
Keith Dawson
2000-03-22
Nearly everyone agrees that children's access to dangerous or
questionable material on the Net is a problem. The evidence is solid
that the products most directly aimed at solving it, the blocking
and filtering programs that some call "censorware," are seriously
flawed.
Inappropriate use of the Net in the workplace is a different sort of
problem entirely -- yet most of the suppliers tackling it rely on
the same tried-but-untrue approaches still doggedly pursued by the
home censorware industry.
Finally a better solution to the misuse of business networks may
have appeared.
The Internet's global nature and the First Amendment to the US
Constitution gang up on those who try to
forbid the online
distribution of inappropriate, dangerous, or simply embarrassing
content. If you can't block it at the source (that's called "prior
restraint") and you can't block it enroute (ISPs are common
carriers), then you have to block it at the destination. Logical,
but hard to implement. Watchdog organizations such as the
Censorware Project and
Peacefire document both the
structural failures of the filtering vendors to keep up with the Web's
growth and the
implementation failures
of their software solutions.
The problems of the home-filtering industry came to the fore last
week when two programmers published an
article (here's
another
source) titled The Breaking of Cyber Patrol 4. The
programmers, a Canadian and a Swede, told how they had
reverse-engineered this widely used filtering package to uncloak its
encrypted list of blocked sites.
The revealed list caused considerable embarrassment for Microsystems
Software Inc., publisher of Cyber Patrol, because it exposed the
product's shortcomings and its mysterious, arbitrarily overzealous
filtering. (To be fair, Cyber Patrol's blocking lists don't look as
bad as those of some
other censorware programs; at least there is no discernable
political bias.)
Microsystems Software went to court last Thursday and obtained an
injunction against the two foreign developers, claiming that their
software allows kids to bypass parental filtering. This is not at
all what CPHack does,
but perhaps the censorware company was too
embarrassed to go after the programmers for revealing their secret
list. How the judge expects to enforce an injunction against two
foreign nationals, let alone against the numerous
"mirror" sites
that have popped up around the globe, is another puzzler.
Despite all of its drawbacks in practice, there is a certain logic
to a filtering/blocking approach when the goal is to keep certain
materials off the screens of children. The problems caused by
unrestricted Internet access in the workplace are very different.
They are essentially management problems, and applying a
technological solution -- filtering software overseen by an IT
department -- isn't necessarily the best approach to solving them.
Yet many of the companies that make home filtering software also
sell versions of their products for the workplace. Examples are
SafeNet Pro,
SurfWatch @ Work, and
surfCONTROL.
Blocking access to certain Web sites in the workplace makes
employees grumpy. Even if they have no particular desire to surf
for porn on their employer's time, they may well resent being
treated like children. They may even spend time working to outwit
the censoring software -- not the sort of workplace attitude any
sane employer wants to foster.
A young Colorado company,
eSniff, has introduced
the first product that takes a radically more sensible approach to
managing workplace Internet usage. eSniff sells a box that plugs
into the company's network. It silently monitors all traffic and
flags instances of potential problem activity, saving copies on a
secured disk. Managers can view the exact material that employees
were viewing when a problem was detected. eSniff's patent-pending
software performs linguistic and mathematical analysis of network
traffic and flags management concerns in areas such as racism, porn,
trading, resignation, acquisition, confidential material, shopping,
and sports. eSniff monitors not just Web usage, but also intranet
traffic, email, chat, ftp, telnet, print jobs, and proprietary
protocols.
eSniff's CEO, Tom Donahue, told me that once a company installs an
eSniff box and tells employees that inappropriate Internet usage
will be monitored, problems of abuse dry up almost immediately.
Donahue claims that the payback time for an eSniff installation,
considering only gains in employee productivity, can be measured in
weeks or even days. An increase in network security and a decrease
in legal liability improve the picture even further.
The eSniff 100 is a headless Linux/Intel box meant to be installed
in a secure location, such as a locked closet. All interaction with
the box is done via password-protected Web forms; in a future
version this traffic will be secured with SSL encryption. The
product supports the English language in its first release. Spanish,
Japanese, German, and French versions are in the works. Refreshingly,
eSniff does not shrink from revealing what the product
costs:
$7999, plus $1600 per year for maintenance and upgrades.
|