About censorship and methods of dealing with the Forbidden Registry
On December 5, the site of Artemy Lebedev’s studio entered the register of sites containing information whose distribution in Russia is prohibited. This situation is fundamentally different from previous scandalous situations, and therefore deserves a separate post on the topic that has already been harassed.
Taking this opportunity, I will also tell you about the results of the complaint to my provider about the unlawful blocking of an honest resource, as well as about the preliminary results of the visit to Roskomnadzor regarding the existing problems with the registry.
')
When the law on the registry was still only in the adoption stage, many expressed concern that it would be used to censor unwanted resources. When he began to act, many fears were dispelled: the registry was replenished, we can say only with sites with content types described in the law. Yes, there were errors with getting into the registry of Google, YouTube, the pages of the game Eve Online, but all these errors can not be called censorship, because there is no suppression of the "disagreeable opinion", statements.
Getting into the registry of the page of the game Eve Online, which described the virtual drugs as a game element, could be explained by an inattentive, cursory examination of the page by the Federal Drug Control Service Officer, who may not have noticed that this is a game. It also seemed logical reasoning that employees of relevant bodies simply use the results of search queries for certain keywords and do not really read the pages of the results, draw up an application for inclusion in the registry.
The situation with the strip studio Lebedev can not be attributed to the error "a cursory inspection", because the whole comic consists of only 3 frames. It also cannot be attributed to a software error, since there could be no automatic search for key phrases.
The registry says that the decision to ban the page on the studio site Lebedev took Rospotrebnadzor, while the rules of the registry says that the Federal Service for Supervision of Registrars keeps track of information only about the methods of suicide and calls for it. And if the version that officials perceived the Eve Online page as really distributing drugs, and a photo with two naked children (for which two or two google were registered in the registry) for child porn, you can still believe it somehow, but Forbidden "strip officials saw a description of the method of suicide, it looks completely absurd. After 1 month and 5 days after the beginning of the work of the registry, we were really confronted with censorship, the suppression of disagreeable opinions. What will happen six months later, the year of the registry is scary to imagine. It is possible that soon will be "forbidden" creativity Ylkina.
We are talking about a situation where the IP address of a truly bad resource falls into the registry, while a number of completely legal resources are located on the same IP address. When a situation occurred with an IP address in the registry on which the bookscan.us service was located, I wrote a complaint to my provider , which at that time filtered the entire IP address. Three days later I received an answer:
Indeed, after my complaint, the provider began to block only the forbidden resource itself, allowing access to “good” resources located on the same IP address. So, as a method of dealing with problem situations, this method is quite suitable for users.
* I remind you that according to the 149th law , and the rules of the registry, it can contain only those network IP addresses that allow you to identify the site on the Internet
Question: Is it possible to use this method when one page of the site gets into the registry, and the provider filters the entire resource?
The situation with the site of Lebedev Studio is such that the site is still in the registry, the strip from the site is also not removed, and the deadline for exclusion from the registry without a trial has already expired. As a result, we all may soon face the inaccessibility of the site of Lebedev’s studio. I am convinced that in this case you can also write a complaint to your provider and push that a separate page of the site got into the registry, and not the entire domain (the law provides for a separate case with a ban of the entire domain, and a separate case with a ban of a specific page).
Perhaps your provider will answer you negatively and refer to the fact that he does not have the technical ability to filter a separate page. In this case, it will be right to demand a reduction in the cost of services from your provider (since the volume of services provided to you has decreased, but for some reason the price has remained the same), since the provider’s “lack of opportunity” is not your problem.
As I wrote earlier , I made an appointment with the Roskomnadzor management to discuss existing problems with the registry. In the end, everything went as follows. When recording over the phone, they confirmed that I had an appointment with A. A. Zharov (head of Roskomnadzor) on the maintenance of the registry of prohibited sites. A few minutes later, the assistant of one of the deputies, Zharov, who was in charge of this question, called me back and clarified what question I had signed up for. She also suggested that it might be better not to meet with the head, but with Roskomnadzor specialists who keep the register in order to give them their suggestions. I replied that our proposals also included an important “political” question (why Roskomnadzor employees, contrary to the law and the rules of the registry, include in it, including IP addresses, related not to one resource), which means meeting with managers in any case is required. I was told that it was good, if anything, they would call me back.
By the day of the meeting, I prepared a number of materials, took a registry dump for November 26, which I found on pastebin.com, and analyzed all the addresses present there. It turned out that 42 of the 74 IP addresses present in the registry belong to more than one resource.
On the day of the meeting, when I arrived at the Roskomnadzor building, it suddenly became clear that a small incident had happened. When I called and made an appointment, I talked to the secretary Zharov, who, without warning me, forwarded my question to the same deputy, whose assistant later called me back. As a result, Zharova’s reception desk did not “dock” with the indicated deputy and “forgot” to warn me that now I’ve not signed up for Zharov.
It really was a completely accidental mistake by the secretaries and there is no malicious intent here, biting, etc. I immediately apologized to me, invited me to the office of Deputy Zharov (who, unfortunately, was busy at the time), where I spoke with his assistant.
As a result, we have now agreed to the fact that we have formalized all our questions and proposals on paper and handed them over to the Roskomnadzor leadership (unfortunately, in the government agencies, only writings have any effectiveness, and not productive discussions and meetings). Based on the results of consideration of our proposals (which should come soon), we will again meet with the leadership of Roskomnadzor and discuss in more detail. Perhaps even we, as the Anti-Corruption Fund, will be able to get into the registry working group.
We will keep you informed.
Taking this opportunity, I will also tell you about the results of the complaint to my provider about the unlawful blocking of an honest resource, as well as about the preliminary results of the visit to Roskomnadzor regarding the existing problems with the registry.
')
The situation with the site studio Lebedev
When the law on the registry was still only in the adoption stage, many expressed concern that it would be used to censor unwanted resources. When he began to act, many fears were dispelled: the registry was replenished, we can say only with sites with content types described in the law. Yes, there were errors with getting into the registry of Google, YouTube, the pages of the game Eve Online, but all these errors can not be called censorship, because there is no suppression of the "disagreeable opinion", statements.
Getting into the registry of the page of the game Eve Online, which described the virtual drugs as a game element, could be explained by an inattentive, cursory examination of the page by the Federal Drug Control Service Officer, who may not have noticed that this is a game. It also seemed logical reasoning that employees of relevant bodies simply use the results of search queries for certain keywords and do not really read the pages of the results, draw up an application for inclusion in the registry.
The situation with the strip studio Lebedev can not be attributed to the error "a cursory inspection", because the whole comic consists of only 3 frames. It also cannot be attributed to a software error, since there could be no automatic search for key phrases.
The registry says that the decision to ban the page on the studio site Lebedev took Rospotrebnadzor, while the rules of the registry says that the Federal Service for Supervision of Registrars keeps track of information only about the methods of suicide and calls for it. And if the version that officials perceived the Eve Online page as really distributing drugs, and a photo with two naked children (for which two or two google were registered in the registry) for child porn, you can still believe it somehow, but Forbidden "strip officials saw a description of the method of suicide, it looks completely absurd. After 1 month and 5 days after the beginning of the work of the registry, we were really confronted with censorship, the suppression of disagreeable opinions. What will happen six months later, the year of the registry is scary to imagine. It is possible that soon will be "forbidden" creativity Ylkina.
How to deal with "random" blocking honest resources
We are talking about a situation where the IP address of a truly bad resource falls into the registry, while a number of completely legal resources are located on the same IP address. When a situation occurred with an IP address in the registry on which the bookscan.us service was located, I wrote a complaint to my provider , which at that time filtered the entire IP address. Three days later I received an answer:
Indeed, after my complaint, the provider began to block only the forbidden resource itself, allowing access to “good” resources located on the same IP address. So, as a method of dealing with problem situations, this method is quite suitable for users.
* I remind you that according to the 149th law , and the rules of the registry, it can contain only those network IP addresses that allow you to identify the site on the Internet
Question: Is it possible to use this method when one page of the site gets into the registry, and the provider filters the entire resource?
The situation with the site of Lebedev Studio is such that the site is still in the registry, the strip from the site is also not removed, and the deadline for exclusion from the registry without a trial has already expired. As a result, we all may soon face the inaccessibility of the site of Lebedev’s studio. I am convinced that in this case you can also write a complaint to your provider and push that a separate page of the site got into the registry, and not the entire domain (the law provides for a separate case with a ban of the entire domain, and a separate case with a ban of a specific page).
Letter template
My site www.artlebedev.ru is unavailable . Tracing from your home computer indicates that the address is filtered on your hardware.
[further citation of trace results]
The registry form of banned sites at zapret-info.gov.ru indicates that the domain www.artlebedev.ru is not in the list of prohibited resources. From the news, I learned that a separate page of the specified site was located in the registry of forbidden sites, located at www.artlebedev.ru/strip/2012/11/22 . The form of the registry of prohibited sites also confirms that the address of this page is present in the registry.
I remind you that the law of July 27, 2006 No. 149- “On Information, Information Technologies and Information Protection” provides for a separate case when an entire domain enters the registry, and a separate case when the address of a specific page is included in the registry. Since in this case we are talking about the second option (the results of the query through the registry form of prohibited sites confirm this), it is illegal to block access to the entire site. This violates my right to access information, as well as an agreement between us on the provision of telematic communication services "Internet". Please unlock the resource, while maintaining the blocking of a separate page, the address of which is contained in the registry of prohibited sites.
[further citation of trace results]
The registry form of banned sites at zapret-info.gov.ru indicates that the domain www.artlebedev.ru is not in the list of prohibited resources. From the news, I learned that a separate page of the specified site was located in the registry of forbidden sites, located at www.artlebedev.ru/strip/2012/11/22 . The form of the registry of prohibited sites also confirms that the address of this page is present in the registry.
I remind you that the law of July 27, 2006 No. 149- “On Information, Information Technologies and Information Protection” provides for a separate case when an entire domain enters the registry, and a separate case when the address of a specific page is included in the registry. Since in this case we are talking about the second option (the results of the query through the registry form of prohibited sites confirm this), it is illegal to block access to the entire site. This violates my right to access information, as well as an agreement between us on the provision of telematic communication services "Internet". Please unlock the resource, while maintaining the blocking of a separate page, the address of which is contained in the registry of prohibited sites.
Perhaps your provider will answer you negatively and refer to the fact that he does not have the technical ability to filter a separate page. In this case, it will be right to demand a reduction in the cost of services from your provider (since the volume of services provided to you has decreased, but for some reason the price has remained the same), since the provider’s “lack of opportunity” is not your problem.
On negotiations with Roskomnadzor on registry issues
As I wrote earlier , I made an appointment with the Roskomnadzor management to discuss existing problems with the registry. In the end, everything went as follows. When recording over the phone, they confirmed that I had an appointment with A. A. Zharov (head of Roskomnadzor) on the maintenance of the registry of prohibited sites. A few minutes later, the assistant of one of the deputies, Zharov, who was in charge of this question, called me back and clarified what question I had signed up for. She also suggested that it might be better not to meet with the head, but with Roskomnadzor specialists who keep the register in order to give them their suggestions. I replied that our proposals also included an important “political” question (why Roskomnadzor employees, contrary to the law and the rules of the registry, include in it, including IP addresses, related not to one resource), which means meeting with managers in any case is required. I was told that it was good, if anything, they would call me back.
By the day of the meeting, I prepared a number of materials, took a registry dump for November 26, which I found on pastebin.com, and analyzed all the addresses present there. It turned out that 42 of the 74 IP addresses present in the registry belong to more than one resource.
On the day of the meeting, when I arrived at the Roskomnadzor building, it suddenly became clear that a small incident had happened. When I called and made an appointment, I talked to the secretary Zharov, who, without warning me, forwarded my question to the same deputy, whose assistant later called me back. As a result, Zharova’s reception desk did not “dock” with the indicated deputy and “forgot” to warn me that now I’ve not signed up for Zharov.
It really was a completely accidental mistake by the secretaries and there is no malicious intent here, biting, etc. I immediately apologized to me, invited me to the office of Deputy Zharov (who, unfortunately, was busy at the time), where I spoke with his assistant.
As a result, we have now agreed to the fact that we have formalized all our questions and proposals on paper and handed them over to the Roskomnadzor leadership (unfortunately, in the government agencies, only writings have any effectiveness, and not productive discussions and meetings). Based on the results of consideration of our proposals (which should come soon), we will again meet with the leadership of Roskomnadzor and discuss in more detail. Perhaps even we, as the Anti-Corruption Fund, will be able to get into the registry working group.
We will keep you informed.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/161935/
All Articles