back to article Microsoft introduces warning on child abuse image searches

Microsoft is warning Brits who use its Bing search engine to hunt down child abuse content that they are attempting to view illegal material online. The company debuted the pop-up message on Bing in the UK following pressure from the Prime Minister David Cameron, who has been pressing internet firms to do more to help prevent …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Chris King Silver badge
    Facepalm

    Laws of unintended consequences...

    How long before the malware authors start copying these and creating ransomware pop-ups ? Not long, I reckon.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Laws of unintended consequences...

      Probably already in the wild.

      Ideally they'd snare an MP or two. I wonder what Claire Perry is up to at the moment ?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Laws of unintended consequences...

        Whatever you do, don't search for Claire's initials in bing.

    2. S4qFBxkFFg

      Re: Laws of unintended consequences...

      Already happened (and reported on this site months ago).

      This will make such scams more plausible though.

    3. Anonymous John
      Happy

      Re: Laws of unintended consequences...

      Quite a while ago. And one struck gold two days ago.

      "A man is fooled by an Internet virus into going to a police station to pay a fine for child pornography. He gives the police his computer to examine. They allegedly find child pornography on it"

      http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-57595811-71/man-gets-fake-fbi-child-porn-alert-arrested-for-child-porn/

    4. Tom Chiverton 1
      FAIL

      Re: Laws of unintended consequences...

      More entertainingly, can we script Bing to reverse engineer the CEOP list of terms ?

  2. JimmyPage Silver badge

    And can we know what's on this blacklist ?

    Or do we need a website where people can register terms that they have seen bring it up ?

    1. Crisp Silver badge
      Boffin

      Re: And can we know what's on this blacklist ?

      There's an easy way to find out.

      Enter a search term into Bing. If it pops up a message, then that item is on the list. You could even automate it like a dictionary attack (Except here we're testing a search term for a positive or negative response.)

      Though IANAL, and I don't know how illegal it would be to possess knowledge of the forbidden search terms.

      1. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge
        Black Helicopters

        Re: And can we know what's on this blacklist ?

        If you know the 'illegal' terms then

        1) you shouldn't be searching using them

        2) You can't plead 'I didn't know that term was illegal'

        OTOH, if the censors won't tell you what is actually illegal then how can you stop yourself from committing a crime?

        How long before searching for 'Little boy Blue' results in --->

        1. Tom 7 Silver badge

          Re: And can we know what's on this blacklist ?

          No we cant:

          ------------------------

          Good Afternoon,

          Thank you for your email. We do not have a public list of these terms.

          Kind Regards

          CEOP Reception

          -------------------------

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: And can we know what's on this blacklist ?

        um... can we not get this from a FOI request?

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: And can we know what's on this blacklist ?

        Maybe Edward Snowden could find out?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: And can we know what's on this blacklist ?

      Precisely. Come on Reg, enough recycling press releases, go digging and find out what's on the blacklist. After all, if we're not allowed to search for certain things we should at least be made aware of what those things are, or it's super-injunctions all over again.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: And can we know what's on this blacklist ?

      Which reminds me that in denmark there is a blacklist of sites which are censored. The censorship is "secret" and revealing the censorship list (or indeed seeing the list IIRC) is a criminal act.

      So in effect they have criminalised seeing a list of web URLs that, some of which if viewed might constitute another different criminal offence (one can never know until one takes a peek).

      Whew, I guess that's OK then ...

    4. Someone
      FAIL

      Absolute stupidity

      By all accounts, it doesn’t include search terms you would think it should. Presumably because they have duel use; you could be looking for the news reports and debate surrounding blocking and pop-ups or they have perfectly innocent uses. Then, if you’re Peterborough Town Sports Club, you can get a box stating “Warning! Child abuse material is illegal,” slapped near the link to your website on a Bing results page.

      So, we have a warning that’s only going to pop up on the most obscure of search terms. I had no idea what might be on the CEOP “blacklist,” so had to do a search to find a list of search terms that someone else had tried. Even then, it’s going to have false positives, and I don’t think the warning is shown if you set your Bing country code to anything other than “gb.”

      The solution is to remove offending links, which has been going on for years. Why has a warning not been tried before? Because it’s absolute stupidity. There must be many engineers at Yahoo!, Microsoft and Google banging their heads on the table.

  3. Tom 7 Silver badge

    Any idea how I access the CEOP blacklist

    Cant find one on their site - darent search for it!

    1. JDX Gold badge

      Re: Any idea how I access the CEOP blacklist

      No point, you won't be able to find it or any sites which talk about what's on it.

      1. Ragarath
        Facepalm

        Re: Any idea how I access the CEOP blacklist

        Obscurity! The best form of defence... hmmm.

  4. Steve Knox

    False Choice

    "If CEOP give you a blacklist of internet search terms, will you commit to stop offering up any returns on these searches? If the answer is yes...:"

    Then you've fallen prey to the false choice between child abuse and wholesale censorship which is being offered.

    "If the answer is no..."

    Then you've fallen prey to that same false choice, but have decided on the other side.

    If the answer is no, but you'll warn searchers of the dangerous waters they tread, then you're on the right track. Make sure to provide a way for suspect search returns to be investigated and blocked completely if found to be illegal, and you're doing it right.

    If Cameron had suggested these reasonable terms, he might have earned some respect, but a call to "commit to stop offering up any returns" on an arbitrary list of search terms is unambiguously excessive censorship.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: False Choice

      if only the people sharing child abuse images online would start refering to their material with the codename "david cameron"...

      1. moiety

        Re: False Choice

        if only the people sharing child abuse images online would start referring to their material with the codename "david cameron"...

        Or moon-faced twat. I absolutely love this suggestion.

        But the thing is, if they know enough to list these sites, then shirly they know enough to investigate and send a SWAT team in.

      2. Keep Refrigerated
        Trollface

        Re: codename "david cameron"

        Got any CP? (Cameron Porn).

        1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
          Childcatcher

          Re: codename "david cameron"

          "Got any CP? (Cameron Porn)."

          You want regular or hard core DC?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: False Choice

      I recall some years ago working at a prestigious German organisation. Web filtering was in place to stop us viewing naughty stuff.

      Unsurprisingly, the filters were primitive, and the English town of Scunthorpe was duly flagged.

      Interestingly, while planning a trip to Moscow I was researching the burial sites of famous Russians. This was prohibited as it was deemed as necrophilia. (Famous graveyards in Moscow, a must see!)

      Censorship is pointless, and criminalising the act of sharing visual space with something today deemed offensive and illegal but yesterday was OK, is somewhat bizarre. Where does it end? Who decides what I may see and what are the criteria? The answers are as shifting as the sands and the winds of the political climate.

      We are traveling on the downward slope to totalitarianism dressed up by sophists as the moral high ground. You would think we would know better.

      AC, obviously.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        London Necropolis Company

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Necropolis_Company

        go on CEOPS/IWF ban this. I dare you!

        As an aside,

        Brookwood Cemetary (once run by the above company who also organised trains from Waterloo) is well worth a visit.

        Oh CEOPS, the book 'The Necropolis Railway' should also be banned. You know that children and pets are buried in cemetaries so according to the 'Protect the Children meme', any reference to this must really refer to necrophilia.

        This is (As James May is often seen saying) a load of old cock!

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: London Necropolis Company

          Well, Bing ain't censoring the search term "nabakov's lolita", which returns over 14,000 hits. Perhaps it should? I've put a modesty bag around my copy. You can never be too careful. Invite the neighbours around for a coffee, and the next minute while you're making it, they're browsing your bookshelves...

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: False Choice

        It's like the man with the red flag all over again. For the benefit of non-UK residents, this was a short-lived scheme set up in the 1860s to ensure a man with a red flag should proceed "road locomotives" for safety reasons.

        This time, the government is desperate to censor the internet and exploit the national paedo hysteria in order to achieve this. But technology, as ever, is one step ahead of Cameron's Eton-reared brain. What a mess!

    3. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Big Brother

      Re: False Choice

      Hmm.

      "excessive censorship."

      Is there any other kind?

  5. hplasm Silver badge
    Meh

    "Microsoft is warning Brits who use its Bing search engine..."

    That's not too many then, is it?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: "Microsoft is warning Brits who use its Bing search engine..."

      So in the old tradition of twisting facts:

      "Google Chrome: the search engine of choice for child abusers and pedophiles"

      1. David Webb
        Coat

        Re: "Microsoft is warning Brits who use its Bing search engine..."

        And in the best tradition of correcting the correction:

        Google Chrome is a browser not a search engine.

        1. Dan 55 Silver badge
          Trollface

          Re: "Microsoft is warning Brits who use its Bing search engine..."

          Don't be so picky, I'm sure the data ends up stored in the same place anyway.

          1. LinkOfHyrule
            Joke

            Re: "Microsoft is warning Brits who use its Bing search engine..."

            Seeing as in Chrome you search from the url bar I will think you'll find Chrome offers a fully integrated peadoing experience so your're all wrong!

            Google - the peado's choice™

  6. OldBiddie

    What next?

    Covering up lads' mags in supermarkets?

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: What next?

      http://metro.co.uk/2013/07/29/lads-mags-told-to-cover-up-or-vanish-3902146/

      Of course, I'm sure you're being ironic, but for those that don't realise ... :)

      1. h3

        Re: What next?

        Don't see the difference between them and the womens ones like Cosmopolitan. (At least the covers anyway).

    3. jonathanb Silver badge

      Re: What next?

      Indeed it is

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/jul/29/co-op-lads-mags-ban-sale-censored

    4. Graham Marsden
      Coat

      Re: What next?

      "Covering up lads' mags in supermarkets?"

      Off-topic, I know, but I reckon their next edition should be "Burkha Special!"

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: What next?

        With speech bubbles saying, "I'm naked under this!"

    5. Tom Chiverton 1
      WTF?

      Re: What next?

      I assume we'll need to ban Men's Health too, far too many exposed nipples ?

      Oh, male nipples are OK ?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: What next?

        Howsabout if you photoshopped an image of male nipples on to a woman's chest? Only partially guilty of downloading pron?

  7. JP19

    Hmm

    Are these warnings there to try to prevent you from finding kiddy porn through Bing or to try to prevent you from finding out that you can't find kiddy porn through Bing and discovering what a waste of space CEOP, the IWF, Cameron and Perry are?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Hmm

      The whole, daft exercise is to send Daily Mail and Sun readers off to the polling booths in about eighteen months from now with their little pencils firmly aimed at the Conservative candidate's box.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Bing Search

    I caught my child watching porn what should I do?

    You have searched for terms related to child abuse, you have now been reported to the local authorities who will be at your door in seconds, they will take away your children and throw you in jail for 6 months before you can plead innocent. When you return to your 'normal' life, you will have your house graffiti'd and vandalised, death threats will pour through your mail box and you won't be able to get a job anywhere. You sicken us

    That about sums up what I think is going to happen.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Bing Search

      For the record, that search did not bring up the message. I had to try it just to see.

  9. Alister Silver badge

    The company debuted the pop-up message on Bing

    Don't know about anybody else, but I have popups blocked in every browser I use...

    ;-)

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Black Helicopters

      @Alister

      Don't worry; it's only a matter of time. Then our "organisation for more security" (with many thanks to all the law abiding spam firms which donated heavily to our cause) will start our next campaign: force browsers to remove all those distracting pop-up blockers.

      As you showed yourself they're only hindering decent websites from warning their visitors.

      Sure I'm jesting; but how long before morons pick up on this as well?

    2. Steven Roper

      Popup blockers

      This is probably not a popup in the traditional sense (as in a new discrete browser window), but a HTML floating div inserted dynamically over the page content. I've noticed a lot of sites doing this recently, presumably in response to the increasing numbers of people using popup blockers. Of course, disabling Javascript can reduce the incidence of this, but an increasing number of sites are circumventing this by simply not displaying anything at all without it.

  10. Jack Project

    In this hot weather I've been parched but thats the last time I search for "delicious lolly" online.

  11. Jamie Kitson

    Testing

    How many people are now going to try "illegal" searches until they hit this popup? And then hear a knock at the door?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Testing

      More than that ... I can see a craze developing along the lines of GoogleWhacking (finding search terms that return only a single result) of finding search terms that are actually innocuous but yet trigger the pop up.

    2. Philip Lewis
      Devil

      Re: Testing

      So, searching for "Pressure, Temperature, and Humidity Control" devices, known by the 4 letter acronym in the engineering world will land us where exactly?

      1. moiety

        Re: Testing

        I had to look that up. And got the following:

        PTHC Percutaneous Transhepatic Cholangiography

        PTHC Peterborough Town Hockey Club (UK)

        PTHC Personal Touch Home Care, Inc.

        PTHC Pre-Teen Hard Core (illegal child pornography)

        PTHC Peripheral Thyroid Hormone Conversion

        PTHC Peters Township Hockey Club (Pennsylvania)

        PTHC Palm Trademark Holding Company

        PTHC pigmented terminal hair cysts

        PTHC Panning the Thames for Humble Contributions (Birchgrove Group)

        PTHC Pressure, Temperature, and Humidity Control

        PTHC Professional Tree Health Care, LLC (Bradley, WV)

        ...then I had to look the first one up, because I couldn't even guess at what the fuck that meant.

        Wikipedia:

        Percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography (PTHC or PTC) or percutaneous hepatic cholangiogram is a radiologic technique used to visualize the anatomy of the biliary tract. A contrast medium is injected into a bile duct in the liver, after which X-rays are taken. It allows access to the biliary tree in cases where endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has been unsuccessful. Initially reported in 1937, the procedure became popular in 1952.[1][2]

        1. FrankAlphaXII

          Re: Testing

          Sounds pretty damned painful. Radioisotope Contrast injections are rarely pleasant anyway, but having one shot into your liver has got to hurt quite a bit and for awhile.

          1. streaky Silver badge
            Terminator

            Re: Testing

            "Radioisotope Contrast injections are rarely pleasant anyway"

            They're fine unless some clown first year junior makes a mess of your vein and blows it open as happened to me once in the mid-90's.

            Don't fancy the direct injection into the bile duct thing though.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Testing

          You're a very brave contributor. Or your front door is beyond Dover.

  12. jherz
    Holmes

    Research

    Will I get nailed if I want to search for information on breast cancer in children

  13. BornToWin

    It's the least they can do

    Any responsible entity would warn that CHILD PORN is illegal.

    1. EnricoSuarve
      Flame

      Re: It's the least they can do

      Because the reason paedos access it is that they didn't already know this right? Thankfully the government stepped in quickly using the same technical know-how and understanding which they used to stop online cookies tracking our every movement - yey for pop-ups, the criminals must be shitting themselves.

      1. streaky Silver badge

        Re: It's the least they can do

        "Because the reason paedos access it is that they didn't already know this right?"

        That would be the assumption given recent discussion. Apparently they only use http too.

    2. Duke2010

      Re: It's the least they can do

      Really? Is there a pop up to tell you its illegal to plant bombs? Is there a sign on every chained up bicycle warning you its illegal to steal?

      1. Ben Tasker Silver badge
        Joke

        Re: It's the least they can do

        If I saw a bike chained up with such a sign, I might find it very difficult to resist the temptation to nick the sign just for the ironic value.

        Really though, we should pressure our MPs to make sure that every bomb comes with a health warning label on it so that those who would use it understand the consequences....

        1. h3

          Re: It's the least they can do

          I saw a police one like that. All I was thinking is I am fairly sure something could get through that lock. (Angle Grinder / Thermite / pneumatic drill bet there is a chemical that will as well).

          I have no interest in stealing bikes but especially when it is the Police who many people trust I don't like them spreading disinformation which they do all the time.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: It's the least they can do

          "If I saw a bike chained up with such a sign, I might find it very difficult to resist the temptation to nick the sign just for the ironic value."

          Back in my misspent youth, I was walking home from a friend's house when I noticed that someone had put a chair out by the road, accompanied by a sign saying, "FREE".

          I took the sign and left the chair.

          My inner-vandal has also long wanted to go around finding those road-side places that sell vegetables, tacking on 'RE' to the beginning of the 'PRODUCE' signs.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: It's the least they can do

        Perhaps a campaign to help politicians out by sticking a "car theft is illegal" sticker on their cars for them might help them steer clear of car thefts :D

    3. Graham Marsden
      Childcatcher

      @BornToWin - Re: It's the least they can do

      It does rather depend on how "CHILD PORN" is defined.

      FYI, in the UK, even though it's legal for someone to have sex between the ages of 16 and 18, "sexual" images of someone between those ages could get you locked up unless you can demonstrate that you are in "an enduring relationship" with the person involved.

      Similarly, images of children in swimming costumes etc, could be classed as child porn depending on the "context" in which they are stored. That's a nicely nebulous term because it's not clear if that's "in the same folder as other porn" or "in a folder that's held with several others in a general classification 'porn'" or "in a folder as a sub-set of the folder 'images' which also contains a folder called 'porn'" or even "on the same hard drive as other porn.

      And, of course, there's cases such as the one of Julia Sommerville who was arrested for taking "child pornography" photos because her partner had taken pictures of her and her kid in the bath together and then got them developed in Boots.

      (I think those are the right details of that case, but I don't dare search for the relevant terms in case it tells me I'm engaged in an illegal search...!)

  14. Mike Bell
    Childcatcher

    Dick and Dom

    I wonder if that's a phrase that will fall foul of the Thought Police?

  15. JimmyPage Silver badge
    Black Helicopters

    Hmmmm, real tin foil hat time ...

    as alluded to by ShelLuser, I wonder if the real endpoint of this fun is to be able to ban ad/pop-up blockers ? That seems a much more rational reason than the guff spouted by Cameron.

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Anyone hear of these guys ?

    An organisation that offers to redirect banned sites (e.g. PirateBay et all)

    http://www.immunicity.org/

  17. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/01/bing_hits_uk/

    From one extreme to the other?

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Microsoft's latest Ad

    In the style of Cillit Bang's Barry Scott

    Bing and you don't see ring.

    I suspect this comment won't make it through moderation.

  19. DrXym Silver badge

    Nonce sense

    Blocking paedo searches is ridiculous. These people will find other ways to obtain what they are after and most likely in a way which makes it harder to detect, investigate and prosecute.

    It would be far more sensible to let them search away and the results they clicked on. Then when some threshold of confidence is reached that they are engaging in illegal activity, notify the police and assist them in the investigation that follows. In other words let the creeps hang themselves with their own searches. They'll be caught a lot more quickly that way.

    1. moiety

      Re: Nonce sense

      Absolutely. Surely the aim of any reasonable society is to nail the people responsible for producing and enabling kiddie porn. Filtering never has and never can work. Give them enough rope to hang themselves, then help string the fuckers up.

    2. Graham Marsden

      @DrXym - Re: Nonce sense

      "It would be far more sensible to let them search away and the results they clicked on."

      Sorry, but I don't agree with you because this would require that all our searches are not merely monitored, but all the websites we visit tracked *and* then all our activities recorded *just in case* someone has buried a secret cache of kiddie porn in a folder on the site "Humorous Anecdotes of the Great Accountants".

      1. moiety

        Re: @DrXym - Nonce sense

        And your reason for believing that isn't happening already is what exactly?

        You're already tracked by multiple heavy-duty advertisers. Other obvious choke points are ISPs and where the fibre leaves the country.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: @DrXym - Nonce sense

          "You're already tracked by multiple heavy-duty advertisers."

          Yeah, but Adobe and BMW can't throw me in jail for 15 to 25 because they want to polish their prosecutorial credentials in an election year.

      2. DrXym Silver badge

        Re: @DrXym - Nonce sense

        "Sorry, but I don't agree with you because this would require that all our searches are not merely monitored, but all the websites we visit tracked *and* then all our activities recorded *just in case* someone has buried a secret cache of kiddie porn in a folder on the site "Humorous Anecdotes of the Great Accountants"."

        Google and Bing already monitor your searches (in order to improve search results, sell advertising). That's what I'm referring to. They install also click handlers so when you click on a result they know which result you chose. Therefore, put a trigger on the kiddy porn search terms,. log the IP, install a tracking cookie and log the links they click. If the trigger fires more than some quality threshold and the search is determined to yield child pornography inform the local plod.

        Throwing up a message telling the person how naughty they are just motivates them to find other, less easy to detect ways of obtaining the material. The consequence is they'll do it for longer before getting caught, assuming they ever are and it will cost the police and the courts more money to secure a prosecution and conviction.

  20. Khaptain Silver badge

    Search Terms

    How do they know the search terms that peados use, or drugs users , or thiefs etc ....

    I imagine that the criminal underworld have their own terms, synonyms etc for their wares.

    1. Don Jefe
      Big Brother

      Re: Search Terms & Research/Off Switch

      And how do they update the list? Will the government sponsored paedo-image collectors have the filter? I assume they would have to in order to validate the filters. Doesn't that imply the filter can be turned off?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Search Terms

      Someone explained in an earlier thread that hardcore sites are often meta-tagged with a series of innocuous random words. These sites are then the top hits of an innocent looking search strings, which does not immediately trigger filters, and can be passed around.

  21. Martin 37

    Clippy says ...

    It looks like you are searching for illegal materials. Would you like help with that?

  22. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

    It could be worse

    Imagine what David Cameron would say if his censorship actually worked:

    "Parents can rest assured that when paedophiles want to look at naked children, they cannot look at pictures at home on computer screens."

  23. g dot assasin
    FAIL

    Pointless....

    Do the government really think your average paedo is searching Bing for kiddyfiddlers.com??

    We need to make it so politicians who have no clue about the Internet aren't allowed to be involved in drafting laws/policy concerning its use.

    1. Irongut

      Re: Pointless....

      If you follow that idea to its logical conclusion you realise we shouldn't allow politicians to draft any laws about anything ever.

      1. g dot assasin
        Thumb Up

        Re: Pointless....

        Even better!!

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Pointless....

      > Do the government really think your average paedo is searching Bing for kiddyfiddlers.com??

      Yes. John Carr, the Govt adviser has said on several BBC interviews since Microsoft's announcement that they know perfectly well the clever ones can get round this, the idea is to deter "newbies" from ever getting involved.

    3. Charles Manning

      That's what democracy is all about

      We give the punters one person one vote. There is no need to prove that you are capable of selecting the politicians that have their head screwed on right.

      Therefor the politicians that get elected are those that provide policies which the Great Unwashed think sound right, or desirable with no valid reason for thinking the way that they do. The politicians who say stuff that is scientifically validated or has the best outcomes do not get votes.

      Therefore, in order to get votes, politicians ignore the scientists and experts. They just do what sounds good to the voters.

      Net result: crap laws, countries going broke because the voters don't want the merry-go-round spending to stop and funding for stupid social programs which have public appeal, but the scientists tell us are pointless.

  24. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It's about time the government tackled the real problem of kiddy-fiddling and other forms of child abuse.

    Making it illegal to "look at pictures" is just farting around the edges and avoiding the vastly more difficult job that might actual make a real difference to someone's life.

    1. Crazy Operations Guy Silver badge

      That's what I've always thought. Its daft to think that "Viewing child pornography will cause you to go molest a kid" is just as daft as "Viewing pornography causes people to rape each-other"

  25. Tim 11

    since when did anyone ever use bing?

    Since this functionality hasn't been (and by the look of it won't be) implemented in google, it basically doesn't exist.

    Oh yes, and Yahoo! - I remember that - From 1998.

  26. JimmyPage Silver badge
    FAIL

    Does MS publish stats on Bing usage ?

    I'd be curious to know if they either surge or slump, given this news.

    I'd like to say I'd boycott Bing, but since I never used it anyway ....

  27. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    We were talking about this in work and someone came up with a good point:

    What if an abused child searches online for help? Something along the lines of "my daddy..... " (fill in the blanks yourself) would this trigger the pop-up? Will abused kids become too scared to try to find help online if they think their search will be flagged up?

  28. xyz

    I feel guilty even reading this article

    Suppose I'd better hand myself in.

  29. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Is Microsoft storing the yes click data?

    Or is it leaving that to a passing Google Car?

  30. David 45
    FAIL

    Three wise monkeys all rolled into one.

    Cocky Cameron again: "I can tell you we’re already looking at legislative options so that we can force action in this area". Bloke needs to be taken to one side and the net explained to him in words of half a syllable or less. He really does think he's on a roll, doesn't he? Talk about grandstanding, as our "friends" (I use the term loosely) across the pond have it.

  31. UKLooney

    would anyone use bing to search for child porn?

  32. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Soo....

    Has anybody been brave or stupid enough to try and trigger this on purpose?

    I did, but I'm not in the UK. I tried going to bing.co.uk and even a supposedly UK-based proxy, but I couldn't make the warning appear.

    1. Don Jefe
      Joke

      Re: Soo....

      You probably have to have Java, Flash and cookies enabled running IE9+ on Windows 7 or better for it to work.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Soo....

        You jest, but it wouldn't even surprise me if that were true.

      2. streaky Silver badge

        Re: Soo....

        Even better - it's probably some activex thing.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Meh

          Re: some activex thing?

          "Please install yet another damned version of .NET Framework to enable this snooping dialogue"

  33. Tom 35 Silver badge

    Perfect

    For all the Bing using kiddy porn searchers who don't know it's illegal but are looking for help...

  34. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Flame

    I wonder how many real victims of child abuse who have been photographed saw it and thought

    "What a f**king waste of time."

    Turning events that may have trumatized them for a lifetime into a cheap soundbite saying "vote for me."

    The abuse of children is vile. Exploiting it further by photographing it is worse still.

    But exploiting that to a) Improve your election chances by playing the TOTC card yet again b)Improve the states stranglehold on information slurping brings me close to vomiting.

    1. LinkOfHyrule

      Re: I wonder how many real victims of child abuse who have been photographed saw it and thought

      It effing disgusting - Cameron is a nasty little man - any intelligent person can see that. Only thick people vote for him though and he knows it - heck he spends every day clearly demonstrating it!

  35. Jolyon Smith

    Such warnings are proven to be highly effective.

    I mean, just look at the way that film piracy all but disappeared when they put those PIRACY IS THEFT warnings on all DVD's and blu-rays etc. That sure gave those pirates a wake-up call.

    You know it makes sense.

  36. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    paedos use bing?

    That's just gross.

  37. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "Microsoft said that the warning will appear when a search contains the phrases found on the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre's (CEOP) "blacklist"."

    Queue the hackers to "update" that blacklist with much more commonly used terms. Like a search for "fish and chips" will return that you're attempting to view illegal content. How about any search that mentions Microsoft will give the same error.

  38. druck Silver badge
    Unhappy

    No more Binging

    We are all so much safer now Bing wont offer a route from Penistone to Scunthorpe.

    1. MJI Silver badge

      Re: No more Binging

      Remember to pronouch Penistone with a hard E.

      Secret hovervan works

  39. Richard Cranium

    All Google need to do is make safe search setting the default at http://www.google.com/preferences I set that anyway simply because it delivers fewer unwanted results for my searches.

    In addition to that I use OpenDNS settings in my router with preferences set to block several categories of other stuff I might prefer my kids not to be looking at - drugs, alcohol, gambling, weapons.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019