Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Yahoo Blocked Emails About Wall Street Protests

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the you-didn't-type-the-magic-word dept.

Yahoo! 311

itwbennett writes "People trying to email information about the Wall Street protests on Monday using Yahoo mail, found themselves on the receiving end of messages from Yahoo claiming 'suspicious activity'. ThinkProgress.org has a YouTube video of users trying to send emails that mention the 'OccupyWallSt.org' web site, which seemed to be the magic phrase to get your email blocked. Via Twitter, Yahoo announced the blockage was now fixed, but 'there may be residual delays.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

No censorship on youtube (3, Funny)

brian0918 (638904) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470614)

Check out the footage of the tens of thousands [youtube.com] that showed up for the Day of Rage at Wall Street.

Re:No censorship on youtube (1)

MichaelKristopeit423 (2018892) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470672)

and the markets are currently down... where should the people go to show their rage at the people disrupting the markets?

Re:No censorship on youtube (2, Insightful)

Tsingi (870990) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470772)

and the markets are currently down... where should the people go to show their rage at the people disrupting the markets?

Organize a protest, part and parcel of how a democracy is supposed to work. Of course in a Fascist society, communications get blocked...

Re:No censorship on youtube (5, Insightful)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470832)

"Unless the people benefit, economic growth is a subsidy for the rich."
-- Richard Falk
"Post-Mubarak Revolutionary Chances", Aljazeera English 22nd Feb 2011

Re:No censorship on youtube (1)

iluvcapra (782887) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471068)

Communist! Everybody knows that, in a truly free society, the people who can't compete are ground into the dirt, and justly, by their own hand. And anybody who thinks this treatment is unfair is some kind of moral defective.

Why the mere fact that (my definition of) lazy people are able to afford food and shelter is prima facie evidence that the United States is a haven of socialism :)

Re:No censorship on youtube (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471128)

Don't forget the part about eating Irish babies!

Re:No censorship on youtube (3, Insightful)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471216)

Ursula LeGuin:
" Then there's Social Darwinism - bankers red in tooth and claw, surviving fitly, while small vermin live on the blood that trickles down... This metaphor, based on a vast misunderstanding of evolutionary process, hits its limit almost at once.

" In predatory competition, bigness is useful, but there are endless ways to get your dinner besides being bigger than it is. You can be smaller but smarter, smaller but faster, tiny but poisonous, winged... you can live inside it while you eat it... As for getting a mate, if combat were the only way to score, large size would help, but (despite our battle-fixation) most competition doesn't involve combat.

" You can win the reproductive race by dancing gracefully, by having a bluegreen tail decorated with eyes, by building a lovely bower for your bride, by knowing how to tell a joke...

" As for living space, you can crowd out your neighbors by outgrowing them, but it's cheaper and just as effective to corner all the water in the vicinity, like a juniper tree, or to be toxic to sea-anemones who aren't closely related to you...

" The competitive techniques of plants and animals are endless in variety and ingenuity. So why are we, clever we, stuck on one and one only?"

http://blog.bookviewcafe.com/2011/09/19/clinging-desperately-to-a-metaphor/ [bookviewcafe.com]

Re:No censorship on youtube (1)

enjerth (892959) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471234)

What's that supposed to mean?

What kind of world do you live in where the rich are not a subset of the people?

It wouldn't be possible unless the people are bound to the purchase of products and services against their own interests. You know, government mandates and government spending.

Is there such a thing as economic growth where only the rich benefit? What do they do, collaborate to give services to and manufacture products only for each other? How then could they collectively increase their wealth? Only if wealth is not exclusively measured in money.

This is an illusion based on the notion that money is wealth. The people have less money and the rich have more, therefore, the rich are wealthier and the people are poorer. Never mind that every single cent that the people spend, some of which goes to the rich, is deemed by themselves to be in their own interests, causing them to benefit from the exchange of money for products and services. Never mind that the value of money is intangible and unrealized, and it enriches no one's life until it is exchanged for goods and services, which are the real things that enrich lives.

Re:No censorship on youtube (1)

MichaelKristopeit423 (2018892) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470842)

communication can not be blocked unless you are relying on others to communicate for you.

Re:No censorship on youtube (1)

bberens (965711) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471028)

That's just silly. Any meaningful communication for events like this must be done over telephone, newspaper, internet, television, radio, etc. Mouth to mouth is a terribly inefficient means of getting the word out.

Re:No censorship on youtube (0)

MichaelKristopeit410 (2018830) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471110)

ur mum's face's just silly.

you're an idiot.

Re:No censorship on youtube (0)

MichaelKristopeit409 (2018828) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471118)

ur mum's face's just silly.

start your own telecommunications company. lay your own wires. launch your own satellites. it's a free country.

you're an idiot.

Re:No censorship on youtube (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37471034)

communications get blocked

Spam gets blocked. ThinkProgress got on the bad side of Yahoo's spam and malware filters as a result of their abuse of Yahoo's email system while marketing this non-event. The 'suspicious activity' message is a generic response seen most often by spammers that create large numbers of accounts to send unsolicited messages.

Naturally, the malcontents involved are now jumping up and down about this, certain this must be corporate repression, or something. Yahoo, being the has-been backwater that it is, will cave and issue some sort of apology to ThinkProgress, or someone. ThinkProgress will then hoot and holler about their 'victory', or something.

Re:No censorship on youtube (1)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470880)

and the markets are currently down... where should the people go to show their rage at the people disrupting the markets?

People should go near their PC, and profit from the opportunity to buy shares for cheap. If indeed the reason that the markets are down is the protests (doubtful...), then they will surely rise again when the protests are over, providing a nice opportunity for a quick buck...

If on the the other hand, the markets are down due to different reasons (more probably... European and US debt crisises), now is maybe time to join the protests, and try to effect a change...

Re:No censorship on youtube (1)

MichaelKristopeit411 (2018832) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470932)

so, now is maybe not time to join the protests as well...

you're an idiot.

Re:No censorship on youtube (1)

element-o.p. (939033) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471338)

Do you always end every post with the tag line "You're an idiot."?

If so...

You're an idiot. And annoying, to boot.

Re:No censorship on youtube (1)

residieu (577863) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470938)

Screw the markets! They made me walk a block out of my way on my way to work!!!!!!

Re:No censorship on youtube (1)

MichaelKristopeit411 (2018832) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470984)

your blame is misplaced. you're an ignorant hypocrite.

cower in my shadow some more behind your chosen remaining material based pseudonym, feeb.

you're completely pathetic.

Re:No censorship on youtube (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37471248)

Hey look who's back, my favorite closet goat fucker. So did you manage to get those warts cleared up? Amazing how fast they spread from your cock all the way up your ass. Mind you given the size of that thing you laughingly call a penis, it wasn't ever going to take that long was it.

Re:No censorship on youtube (1)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470986)

In front of where they work in wall street?

Find a place that has a lot of property owned by CEOs and Board of Directory members who get all kinds of bonuses while cutting jobs, losing money for the company, etc.

Maybe areas where people live that have a habit of favoring profit margins that facility money flow primarily to the wealthy rather than facilitating money flow throughout the economy?

Re:No censorship on youtube (1)

MichaelKristopeit408 (2018816) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471152)

and where should the people go to show their rage at the people disrupting the markets by showing their rage at the people they believe are disrupting the markets?

you're an ignorant hypocrite.

cower in my shadow some more behind your chosen medical technology based pseudonym, feeb.

you're completely pathetic.

Re:No censorship on youtube (-1, Flamebait)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470722)

Ahahaha.

Yeah that about sums it up. Then again why would think progress actually give a rats ass about anything factual instead of trying to spin it into LOOK EVIL CAPITALISTS!!!!!11! Instead of well there may actually be a filtering problem. Couldn't be because they're you're atypical leftie front group or anything. I mean this is pretty below the norm for them. Usually they're screaming about evil Jews, and the evil Koch brothers and shit like that.

Re:No censorship on youtube (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37470730)

Here toolbag... an actual video of the protests...http://youtu.be/vdWjmsVsq1Y

Re:No censorship on youtube (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37471252)

actual video

Your 'actual video' reveals a few dozen trust fund rebels, dirty hippies and basement renters sniffing each other in a square. The parent video's characterizations are entirely correct, and the mocking tone is very amusing.

"how we gonna tweet about cor-prorate greed?"
"on our I-phooooones!!!"

Rage on dude.

Re:No censorship on youtube (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471064)

It's not really fair to judge the scale of event by video or photos alone. It's trivial or someone with a little camera skill and some good editing to make ten thousand people look like fifty, or fifty look like ten thousand. That's without even resorting to photoshopping.

Not saying that's what happened here (It wouldn't be the first time an internet horde has decided to skip an event after realising it'd involve actual travel), but it's a common enough thing to be weary of.

Re:No censorship on youtube (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37471264)

I work on Wall St, the most people I've seen at any one time is maybe 200, and that's being very generous. Not only that, but it's a bunch of wannabe hippy kids, most of whom have spent all their time in the park drinking, smoking pot and eating pizza. The largest "march" they've managed was maybe 100. The whole thing is just a joke. They don't even seem to have any sort of consistent goal or message as it's a mix of hippies, hipsters, communists and anarchists, each spewing their own line of bullshit about how the world isn't fair and it's all Wall St's fault.

Re:No censorship on youtube (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37471366)

Insult everyone that has anything to do with the "protests." That'll completely destroy all of their arguments!

Re:No censorship on youtube (1)

element-o.p. (939033) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471364)

...but it's a common enough thing to be weary of.

I think you meant "wary"...although both words work in this context :D

Re:No censorship on youtube (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37471230)

Not what I saw:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdWjmsVsq1Y

Unethical for sure (0)

SoupGuru (723634) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470634)

I will certainly take my eyeballs elsewhere. You don't just not deliver email (yay double negative). Child porn, maybe. But once you start delivering this email but not that one.... well, that's not a direction I'd like to head.

There are a brazillion other webmail hosts out there. No need to worry if your emails are being delivered with most of them.

Re:Unethical for sure (0)

PyroMosh (287149) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470810)

Brazillion emails [permanenth...ltoday.com] ?

Re:Unethical for sure (1)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471060)

Actually, this looks like an honest mistake a spam filter could make.

Spam typically takes many different hosts (botnet) and sends different mails containing the same URL from each.

This is many different sources, with mail containing the same url.

False positives can happen. It's just that this one happened on something high profile.

If you send spam, that's what happens (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37470644)

Mail containing the same URL hit a bunch of spamtraps and caused a lot of complaints. That's the sort of thing that gets your mail blocked.

Nothing to see here, no grand conspiracy of censorship, just spam filters doing what they do.

Re:If you send spam, that's what happens (4, Interesting)

wierd_w (1375923) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470788)

I was going to ask how this url got blacklisted by the spam filter, but it it was unsolicited and mass mailed, then by definition it WAS spam, and the black listing happened automagically when users flagged it as such.

This scenario makes me wonder if a crowdsourced disruption campaign could disrupt email from major corporations intended for end user inboxes ("special offers" ahem...) simply by having the participants mass email each other a bulk list of urls relating to the target, then have them all report the chain letter as spam.

That would get a large number of corporate urls blacklisted for suspicious activity. (Assuming there aren't any sweetheart deals in place to specifically whitelist such web addresses, of course.)

Re:If you send spam, that's what happens (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37470914)

brilliant. this should be done

Re:If you send spam, that's what happens (1)

fifedrum (611338) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471008)

it happens all the time without organized action, at the top of every hour in fact, people get their rewards emails or whatever and mark them as junk, the next hour, the same sender is blocked (by IP) and the new Foo Rewards emails are blocked (by content). Every hour on the hour because the email delivery companies like to drop it in your inbox just as you sit down at the top of the hour, apparently.

Re:If you send spam, that's what happens (1)

wierd_w (1375923) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471144)

If this already happens, then the approach could be used as a diagnostic tool to catch sweetheart whitelists.

Something real spammers would pay money to know. (Email header spoofing is old news, but a list of 'always succeeds' addresses would be worth money... not that I am suggesting engaging with such filth, mind, but having such sweetheart deals abused in this way would force the deal to be dissolved rather quickly.)

Knowing that your email provider always lets, say, dell.com emails through and knowing it empirically through testing would open up some 'entertaining' lines of inquiry at the very least.

Re:If you send spam, that's what happens (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471222)

I'm not sure if it still does, but Apple's Mail.app used to come with a default mail rule that said anything from @apple.com was not spam. Of course, this rule didn't do any SPF checking, so any mail that had spammer@apple.com as the From: field would skip the spam checks.

Re:If you send spam, that's what happens (1)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471412)

Well, unless those whitelisted exceptions are checked by source IP addy or MX record back-checks.

Re:If you send spam, that's what happens (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37471226)

Every hour on the hour because the email delivery companies admins are too lazy to throw a random number into the 'minutes' column of the crontab.

FTFY

Re:If you send spam, that's what happens (1, Insightful)

Sarten-X (1102295) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470954)

But this is Slashdot! Everything's the government's fault, or Microsoft's, or Apple's! If you apply the slightest bit of common sense and it affects somebody's perception of some imaginary human right (like the right to have everything you do remain private, regardless of where you do it, or whether you did anything to keep such actions private at the time), then you're part of the problem, too!

So who are you working for?

But it shouldn't be the ONLY item. (1)

khasim (1285) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471004)

Their spam filtering is pretty weak if it can categorize something as spam on the basis of a single URL. From what I understand, this was confirmed by different people with Yahoo! accounts.

Is it censorship or incompetence?

And why couldn't it be fix immediately?

Yahoo can't get enough of that litigation action (1)

TiggertheMad (556308) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470652)

Wow, I don't know a better way of driving users away from an email service, then to try to filter their content. I wonder if the stockholders could sue for mismanagement over something like this? It seems to be a gross mismanagement of the company to do something like this, given that there are a lot of clever users out there that will work out what you are doing pretty quickly.

Re:Yahoo can't get enough of that litigation actio (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37470720)

You mean there are still people that use YooHoo? Wow!

Re:Yahoo can't get enough of that litigation actio (1)

Bob the Super Hamste (1152367) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470866)

I wonder if the stockholders could sue for mismanagement over something like this?

Probably not. Now to jump off the deep end they could have been considered to be acting in the best interest of their stock holders as they were blocking e-mails about a protest of wall street.

Yahoo? (1)

ideivid (1737726) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470666)

So, there are people still using yahoo to send email? :O I thought they were all spammers O_O

Re:Yahoo? (0)

pegdhcp (1158827) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470702)

I am keeping my account over there, as it would be taken if I will try to re-register for some reason in the future. But using their service is just another issue. Every modification they made in last few years took the quality lower then before levels.

Re:Yahoo? (0)

Tsingi (870990) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470820)

So, there are people still using yahoo to send email? :O I thought they were all spammers O_O

LOL! Good point.

My ISP sends email to to me via a Yahoo! account, which they provided. Which is why I don't get any email from my ISP. No one asked me, I refuse to use it, can't stand Yahoo, never could.

Re:Yahoo? (0)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470876)

Are you really using smilies on slashdot? You aren't one of those spammers are you?

Re:Yahoo? (0)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470936)

Yahoo Mail users outnumber Hotmail/Live users, and both FAR outnumber Gmail users.

Deal with it.

Talk about hypocrisy (-1, Troll)

milbournosphere (1273186) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470676)

When another country does it, we chastise them. We do it, and we look the other way. I'm starting to truly hate my government. It's ineffective, it's bankrupting the country, and it's taking away my rights. It's very nearly time to start exercising our right to throw these fuckers out of office.

Re:Talk about hypocrisy (4, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470744)

Since when is Yahoo a government agency?

Dumbass.

Re:Talk about hypocrisy (1, Insightful)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470868)

Yahoo has however colluded and collaborated with governments like the PRC to hand over information to incriminate political dissidents and support unequivocal censorship like the Great Firewall and similar principles.

So many people watched Yahoo do these things in China and said 'oh well, it won't happen here, so why should we worry?'

Ahem. The chickens are home to roost. Even if this was some kind of coincidental misfire of an adaptive spam filter, it demonstrates the capability if not the intent to do exactly the sort of things that the company has done in/with totalitarian states.

Re:Talk about hypocrisy (1, Troll)

Jerry (6400) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470878)

When?

When it, as a corporation, has more rights than a REAL corpus, a flesh and blood person. Corporations have always bought of Congressmen with "campaign contributions", which used to be called bribes, but since the SCOTUS ruling a couple years ago that corporations can bribe as many as they want with what ever amounts they want and they don't have to account to anyone showing how much and too whom, the Cabal is now complete. There already exists a revolving door arrangement between corporate CEOs & managers and the heads of the FDA, FCC, SEC, etc... Instead of fulfilling their mandate to protect the citizens from corporate greed and evil, they now protect the corporations from the wrath of the taxpayers.

So, when millions of voters elect a person or campaign for legislation to enable their wishes, a few million dollars, well placed, nullifies the votes of millions of REAL citizens. That kind of evil makes corporations an extension of our government and turns our republic into a cabal.

Re:Talk about hypocrisy (5, Insightful)

milbournosphere (1273186) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470908)

I'm also referring to the general communications blackout going on at this protest. Agreed, I guess yahoo can do whatever the fuck they want. But all the big media networks are conveniently looking the other way and ignoring protests up 10k + people. And people on the ground are getting arrested, cameras are being seized, and I've already seen several video accounts of police brutality. Yahoo may not be a government agency, but there are blatant violations of civil rights going on here, and the government doesn't seem interested in protecting peaceful protestors against those violations.

Re:Talk about hypocrisy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37471280)

Collusion with the government in prevention of protected speech is as bad as the government prevention of protected speech.

Re:Talk about hypocrisy (1)

Thelasko (1196535) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471408)

It's [cnbc.com] not [nytimes.com] a total [wsj.com] media blackout. [usatoday.com] It's just not front page news.

Re:Talk about hypocrisy (0)

Tsingi (870990) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470944)

Since when is Yahoo a government agency?

Dumbass.

Nice.

Yahoo! is hugely commercial, which is why I don't use it. Yahoo and the government have the same clients and the same product. You are the product, the clients (the ones who pay the bills) are big business.

Dumbass.

Re:Talk about hypocrisy (2)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471024)

An argument could be made that when a company grows to a position of such power that it has a level of control close to that of government, then it should be subject to the same constitutional controls as the government. Yahoo, however, is not even close to that level of power. Even at their height, they wern't.

Facebook, perhaps. They do control a mass-surveillance system and data mining operation that would be the envy of most governments.

Re:Talk about hypocrisy (4, Insightful)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471148)

the USA is a corporatocracy.

The corporations are its government.

Yahoo is a de facto government agency in this regard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatocracy [wikipedia.org]

Re:Talk about hypocrisy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37471310)

Maybe you could make a movie about corporate zombies. That would be great.

Re:Talk about hypocrisy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37471180)

well, it is now in our new corporate oligocracy.

Re:Talk about hypocrisy (1)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471198)

Dumbass.

I was thinking he was a smartass. We should compromise and just call him an ass.

Re:Talk about hypocrisy (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471346)

I don't know, perhaps about the time AT&T became one?

Re:Talk about hypocrisy (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37470794)

What evidence is there that this was some big conspiracy or that our government had anything to do with it? Sounds to me like Yahoo's spam filter caught the messages. If the government were involved I'd think there'd be more than just Yahoo mail affected. I'm not saying I don't think our government would stoop so low. I just don't think that's the case here.

Re:Talk about hypocrisy (1)

stephanruby (542433) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470846)

Can you really be sure it's the government who did this?

And not some republican yahoo users hitting the spam button (or the report suspicious phishing site button) when they saw an email they didn't like. This is not to say that I trust our government (or even Yahoo for that matter), but come on, can you really be sure this can't be a spam filter thing?

Re:Talk about hypocrisy (1)

element-o.p. (939033) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471404)

While I agree with your overall sentiment, I think in this case, your anger is misplaced. This looks a lot more like a spam filter doing what it was supposed to do rather than government censorship. Absent any evidence to suggest that the government pressured Yahoo into blocking these e-mails, I'm not inclined to blame the Feds for this one.

The revolution... (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470692)

...will not be Yahoo-mailed.

Need to encrypt your emails (1)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470710)

I remember now why I wrote the leetkey extension long time ago.

Encryption people - encrypt your emails.

Yahoo mail? (2)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470712)

This sounds eerily similar to the British monitoring twitter for riots... block the method of communication for the protestors and the problem will fix itself!
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2011/08/cameron-considers-blocking-facebook-twitter-after-riots.html [latimes.com]
http://technology-corner.com/british-police-will-use-twitter-to-monitor-protests.html [technology-corner.com]

I'm not sure if Yahoo did it intentionally (would be quite the coincidence), but if that is the case, a Yahoo account might not be the best thing to have for anybody with views of the government.

Re:Yahoo mail? (4, Interesting)

geekoid (135745) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470778)

It hit a spam trap. No conspiracy, no shadowy people preventing you from yahooing. Not big afroed white dude following you around.

Re:Yahoo mail? (1)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470910)

and I quote...

"Yahoo spokespeople claim it was a glitch, a mistake, unintentional, and they don't know how their spam filters became so sensitive."

Happens all the time right? Filter technology got invented yesterday?

On that note I agree with you mostly, I doubt individuals would get singled out, but the point is yahoo (accidentatly? O_o) blocked a path of communication for the protest, and that's just sad, and makes me wonder what else they do we don't know about.

Re:Yahoo mail? (1)

squidflakes (905524) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471300)

There have been reports that twitter is stripping the #occupywallst hash tag out of messages if it appears at the end.

No surprise here. (1)

idbeholda (2405958) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470740)

This is also why I don't usually send anything from my yahoo mail account. If someone needs to get in contact with me, they have my phone number.

Re:No surprise here. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37470962)

And AT&T thanks you for letting them pass that call along to the NSA.

Remember, kids, OBL stayed hidden in part because he used carrier pigeons and whatnot. Time to start taking RFC 1149 seriously? Probably not.

So that's what all the fuss is about (4, Informative)

kervin (64171) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470742)

I guess that's what I get for getting all my news from Slashdot.

I work in the Wall Street Area and for the last few days there's been literally dozens of cops, barricades, and they've blocking the subway stop ( at least the "J" which I use ). Coming to think of it, I did see a demonstration go by and a few people holding signs. But there are always demonstrations in the Wall Street area. It's just a common place for the cops to give demonstration permits in Manhattan I think.

If that what that was, I hate to break it to you guys, but the movement was a huge failure. At least so far. Besides the Authorities toughening security, it was business as usual

Re:So that's what all the fuss is about (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37470822)

Yep, Wall St. and gambl^H^H^H^H^Hbusiness as usual.

Re:So that's what all the fuss is about (3, Funny)

0123456 (636235) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471116)

I hate to break it to you guys, but the movement was a huge failure.

That's obviously because no-one knew about it due to Yahoo blocking their emails :).

Re:So that's what all the fuss is about (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37471296)

Not letting people peacefully gather and protest, or harassing protestors, is business as usual. You == sheep The people don't need Wall Street or bankers.

Re:So that's what all the fuss is about (1)

PhxBlue (562201) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471394)

If that what that was, I hate to break it to you guys, but the movement was a huge failure. At least so far. Besides the Authorities toughening security, it was business as usual.

I'm not surprised. You want an effective protest on Wall Street? Clog up the place at 7:30 a.m. on a weekday. That's how to get noticed.

Only if you had Yahoo's spam protection enabled (4, Informative)

stox (131684) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470768)

Accounts which did not have Yahoo's spam protection enabled did not have this blocked.

Welcome to the Cabal (0)

Jerry (6400) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470774)

Enjoy your Constitutional Rights.

Yahoo is a spam trap anyway (1)

ronmon (95471) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470780)

Does anyone use it for anything else?

Re:Yahoo is a spam trap anyway (1)

MagusSlurpy (592575) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470946)

It's been my regular email for 14 years, and it's my first initial followed by my last name, simple and professional. Just like phone numbers, I don't like to change it, because people never save the new one when you tell them. When I started on my first BS in '99, the university tried to get us to use their university email for everything, but I was one of those people who had the foresight to think to myself, "They're going to make us give up our accounts when we graduate. Why start using something that I won't be able to use in three or four years?" Hell, some major universities STILL don't vet email accounts upon graduation, and just let them die.

I registered my same screenname when GMail opened, and I'll transfer over if Y!M ever shuts down, but for the time being, it serves its purpose: email.

Wiretap Laws (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37470808)

If Yahoo is censoring emails, then they are intercepting a communication that is intended between two or more other parties, being the Sender or intended Recipients.

This is completely different from maintaining logs, and many states have their own laws regarding it. Ohio for example it falls under ORC 2933

prosicutors and legal authorities are hereby required to take legal action against Yahoo for this action, with the same vigor they would against an individual.

Any private attorneys looking to start a class action, this is your oportunity. I am sure many will stand behind you on it.

ThinkProgress (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37470816)

I know what site I'm on, but please anything with the word progress in it means overblown lying hippie garbage. Lets progress to not being able to think for ourselves.

Re:ThinkProgress (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471100)

And if they hate Wall Street, shouldn't they be protesting outside the White House and Congress for bailing them out?

Editorial control? (1)

PPH (736903) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470840)

No more safe haven for you, Yahoo!

Now lets see about that kiddie porn passing through your system. Unblocked.

In related news... (5, Interesting)

arielCo (995647) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470886)

My corp antivirus is blocking OccupyWallSt.org:

Trend Micro OfficeScan Event

URL Blocked

The URL that you are attempting to access is a potential security risk. Trend Micro OfficeScan has blocked this URL in keeping with network security policy.
URL: http://occupywallst.org/ [occupywallst.org]
Risk Level: Dangerous
Details: Verified fraud page or threat source

Yay

Re:In related news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37471284)

Corporations don't like OccupyWallStreet which threatens the entire basis of their existence! Film at 11.

Re:In related news... (1)

jank1887 (815982) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471368)

Problem loading page

The connection was reset

The connection to the server was reset while the page was loading.
# The site could be temporarily unavailable or too busy. Try again in a few
        moments.

# If you are unable to load any pages, check your computer's network
        connection.

# If your computer or network is protected by a firewall or proxy, make sure
        that Firefox is permitted to access the Web.

Network Solutions Using Cloudmark - Same Censorshi (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37470890)

Heads Up, Freedom Fighters:

Network Solutions (one of America's largest Internet Service Providers) is using Cloudmark, the same "spam filter" used for Internet censorship in China...

http://tinyurl.com/3b5ct4r ...to block emails referencing URLs (links) related to the "Occupy Wall Street" and "U.S. Day of Rage" events. Here is an example of one such email, which was sent but never delivered:

http://tinyurl.com/cloudmark-censors-occupywallst

Why is Network Solutions blocking legitimate political emails like this one? I don't know for sure, but tracing their origin, history and ownership is something I recommend for all who oppose the Kleptocracy:

http://tinyurl.com/3ep7k6g

And we all know who Big Brother answers to, so why should we expect less from an ISP founded by spooks?

http://tinyurl.com/edxn5

###

The Big Picture:

http://ldrlongdistancerider.com/images/Cloudmark_nsCensorship.png

How much was this URL spammed? (1)

Andy Dodd (701) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470902)

As others have said - if this URL was sent out en masse in a manner that many people would consider "spammish", then those emails would have been flagged by many as spam, and then future emails with that URL would be MUCH more likely to hit a spam filter.

Same reason, for example, emails from the Republican National Convention might be more likely to have issues going through gmail than the DNC - Not because of any political affiliations, but because the RNC are a bunch of damn spammers. I usually vote Democrat but will consider voting Republican if it's a particular case of a moderate Republican and the Democrat is a scumbag (both parties have plenty of scumbags...) - However, if in the runup to the election I get a bunch of rhetoric-laden spam emails, I'm going to make a point of NOT voting for the party who sent the spam.

So far, for whatever reason, I get rhetoric-laden spam every few days from the RNC, never from anyone with affiliations with the Democratic party, and I always immediately flag it as spam, to the point where that crap now automatically goes to my spam folder about 50% of the time.

Spam filter - Not censorship (2)

Sqr(twg) (2126054) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470912)

Before everyone starts crying "censorship" consider this, far more likely, scenario:

Among protesters there are always a number of morons. One of these morons thought it would be a good idea to use a few of his Yahoo mail accounts to send out thousands of emails promoting the OccopyWallSt website. This triggers Yahoo's outgoing spam filter, and OccupyWallSt.org is placed along with CheapViagraForYourPenis.net on the "100% certain spam" list. Any email trying to promote this website is blocked.

All webmail sites that offer free signup without any ID check must implement something like this, or they will be overrun by spammers.

The one responsible for the "censorship" is the moron who decided to send out the spam in the first place.

(Of course it is theoretically possible that it was somebody opposed to the protests who sent out the spam to trigger the blocking, but I find that scenario far less likely.)

As if Yahoo were big enough to have any effect (4, Insightful)

Timmy D Programmer (704067) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470960)

I doubt they would knowingly censor emails (other than if it had the earmarks of spam). Why bother I'm sure the percentage of those protesters that use Yahoo as their email is quite small. So blocking them would have little to no effect.

Crooks foiled? Oh no! outrage! (-1, Flamebait)

Kohath (38547) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471036)

So Yahoo made it harder for some criminals to commit crimes. And Slashdot editors think we should be upset with Yahoo.

oh for fucks sake (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37471046)

really? we're posting this bullshit? I miss good Slashdot.

That's what "The Cloud" gets you (1)

AK Marc (707885) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471056)

There is no other conclusion to The Cloud. You send all your information (email in this case) to a 3rd party you have no real influence over, other than being one of many customers. If they shut down your service for unethical reasons, you are left with a TOS that lets them do anything they want. Outsourcing has massive risks that are never talked about because so many "independent" experts depend on outsourcing for their livelihood that "core business" is the buzzword of the failing companies.

Oh yes, they only CENSOR in China? (1)

tekrat (242117) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471168)

I remember hearing about this from a friend, but couldn't find any news articles, didn't see it covered by the TV media, didn't hear about it on the radio, and now it's turning out that ytou can't email about it either...

And we're complaining about China?

And BTW: The "SEC" is cracking down on Standard and Poors, as well as anyone else that had the audacity to bet against the US during the credit downgrade.

How interesting. If any of you still believe you're in the land of the free, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. You're under the heel of your corporate masters, who are running Washington.

"Fixed" ??? (1)

Quila (201335) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471268)

What was there to fix? They put up a block, got caught, and then stopped the block.

Am I to believe some filter on emails was innocently blocking any mention of the recently created "OccupyWallSt.org"?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?