Talk:Green Dam Youth Escort

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing / Software (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
 
WikiProject China (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

The user can still turn the filtering feature off[edit]

The software is similar to McAFee Parental Control though it has more features such as on-line game time limits and on-line chat limits. In the setting screen, the user can set image filtering and semanic analysis features on or off. It's password-protected and 100% under the user's control.

Software is free. Installation is mandatory after July 1st, 2009. But censoring is not mandatory. For those responsible parents, it's a free choice of voluntary censorship for kids.

YaoLinqing (talk) 10:12, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Trade barriers[edit]

Download the software here: <http://www.lssw365.net/lvhang/index.php/List/index/pid/2>. There is also a link to the user manual - it's the first link below the download button. I don't know Chinese, but based on the images in the manual, it looks like that this is Windows-only software. So they are not only censoring free speech, but free software as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.17.183.1 (talk) 17:46, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Paranoia within the Communist Party leadership knows no bounds. the case immediately raises issues of a trade barrier to entry. The major Chinese manufacturers have been dealing with installation for several months already, so their competitors won't have many products they can sell in July; the government has 'paid' so the product is free for one year.

    My guess is that they will not allow e.g. Dell China to install a competing US product (which does only what the govt and Jinghui ostensibly claims it does right now). What is on the blocklist is not transparent, so they have belt and braces. I see unlikely the government would cede control over the stealthy insertion to the list of sites to block, or their control over the back door. I have no doubt that, if installed, switching it off may be more illusory than real. Ohconfucius (talk) 07:16, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

The "trade barrier to entry" cuts both ways though, as the compulsory inclusion of Macrovision copy protection in video recording devices required by US DMCA seems to be a similar case of legal mandate requiring that a particular technology be licensed and used regardless of suitability or the market viability of competing options. However, I agree that this argument is unlikely to sway either government from continuing extremely stupid ideas. Granted a government spying on my and taking control of my computer is an entirely different level of problem than mere frustration that a congress that doesn't know a thing about technology sees fit to throw road blocks that they never imagined in the way of my legally using media. The fact that you can download the software off the web is rather intreging and I look forward to seeing the reports from western hackers as they tear it apart and figure out what it is doing. -- Bdentremont (talk) 06:00, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Apple?[edit]

Since the software is (a) for Windows only and (b) mandatory, does this mean Apple is now unable to sell computers in China? (Or didn't they bother at all? I doubt that...) -- megA (talk) 20:24, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I was wondering the same with regard to Linux. Presumably if the software can be "provided" on a separate disk, as many sources seem to indicate, rather than pre-installed, the actual usability of the software with the supplied OS would be irrelevant. -- Bdentremont (talk) 05:20, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
The Mac is now Intel-based, and is capable of running MSWindows (if you want to buy another licence). If the official wording is and means "must be shipped with GDYE or have it installed", then Apple could easily satisfy that requirement. It could probably be installed, but users who use OSX will not notice it because it won't even run. But then, it is known fact that an edict such as this can and will be interpreted strictly by enforcers, probably to mean "must be shipped with GDYE installed and fully functional"... Ohconfucius (talk) 02:21, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Which, again, would push Apple out of the market, unless they ship Macs without OSX installed (LOL) ... -- megA (talk) 20:47, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Does the software affect more than web?[edit]

I used Google to translate the page linked by 173.17.183.1 ([1]) and find the following description of the software.

"Green Dam season in defense of" protection of minors is a software tool for the health of the Internet, you can directly take the initiative to identify and block pornographic images, articles and bad pornography site, with a yellow filter undesirable information, control time spent online, manage chat friends , management, computer games and other functions, easy to use, for the majority of parents of children online behavior management to provide an effective technical means. At present, the software for the public beta stage"

While clearly a poor translation, "control time spent online, manage chat friends , management, computer games and other functions" seems to unambiguously suggest interference with computer functions outside of web browsing, particularly interpersonal communication such as "chat" which I'm sure the government would love to monitor. The current version of our article suggests nothing beyond blacklisting websites. Does any body have anything firm about the actual capabilities that they can add? Bdentremont (talk) 06:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Yeah, I saw that. When it comes to Chinese government censorship, it's always insiduous. They have proven it time and time again they cannot handle openness because it hands too much power to the people. So the Internet will take a bit longer to act as a democratic leveller behind the bamboo curtain. Ohconfucius (talk) 07:15, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
There have been allegations that this silly censoring piece of crap interferes with NOD32, causing the latter to crash. But Wikipedia is not happy with blogs as sources.Kxx (talk) 17:54, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I have just found here (roughly two thirds down the page) a list of applications the junk software tries to cripple. Just cannot find a way to make it into the article.Kxx (talk) 19:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your latest (excellent) update to the article - I was looking at my previous addition (today's BBC article) and thinking it needed a new section - I was thinking "Software flaws" for the section title but I'm sure there is something better, though "Incompetence" maybe isn't at the top of that list. Ideas?--Alf melmac 19:33, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Anomalies? Flaw a defect or error, would seem to imply that they didn't mean for it to do that. :) – B.hoteptalk• 19:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Would "Anomalies and software issues" be robust enough to cover what is likely to come? --Alf melmac 19:54, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Or just "Issues" (not the first time I've used that word today). Either way, I think "Incompetence" has to go before someone slaps it with a {{POV}}! – B.hoteptalk• 19:59, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Now changed (at least until something better is found) to "Anomalies and software issues".--Alf melmac 20:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Did You Know...?[edit]

I've put this article forward for Did You Know...? - tag = that from July 1, 2009, content-control software called Green Dam Youth Escort must be included with all personal computers sold in the mainland of the People's Republic of China...? --Alf melmac 23:28, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

pinyin name[edit]

Is "Luba – huaji huhang" correct? used here the box can be amended to zh-cp with a new |p= if we are certain.--Alf melmac 01:40, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Done.Kxx (talk) 02:33, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

"elaborate aggressive speech"[edit]

I doubt if this is a good phrase for what would become "aggressive speech that makes use of the subject to elaborate [on probably freedom of speech, human rights, democracy, or whatever the Party hates to see]" if translated literally. Any ideas?Kxx (talk) 02:56, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I read easily and take that inference from that, understanding it to be a translation of a tricky to translate language. Could you copy the original untranslated words here so that others could also view and comment how to translate it.--Alf melmac 09:14, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
This is the full text of the instruction/notice (found here, consistent with what was quoted by RFI):

关于封堵删除针对“绿坝”过滤软件的攻击性言论的通知

  根据中央领导同志指示精神,请各媒体对工信部关于计算机预装绿色上网过滤软件(即“绿坝-花季护航上网过滤软件”)的举措,加大正面引导力度,可组织专家、家长发表谈话,有针对性地回答人们的疑虑,旗帜鲜明地支持有关部门保护未成年人成长的举措,不要刊发质疑、批评性的言论。同时,请各媒体对所属网站加强管理,对论坛贴文中出现的借题发挥的攻击性言论及时予以封堵删除。

  中宣部新闻局
  2009年6月10日

The phrase in question is "借题发挥的攻击性言论".Kxx (talk) 18:12, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
My best two guesses, having looked at your literal translation, and each word and various combinations in babelfish are: (posts that) "take advantage of the topic to make (offensive) attacks" or "use the topic as a pretext for aggressive speech against it".--Alf melmac 19:07, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
These are pretty close in meaning to the original text. How about "offensive speech evolved from the topic"?Kxx (talk) 19:31, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Edit from? Zhejiang[edit]

I reverted an edit removing the paragraph with Microsoft's comment which had the rationale "removing irrelevant paragraph, the article is not about microsoft, that paragraph seems that is only there to show the writer's point of view about the subject" - the cite is wholly about GDYE - and as the software is specifically written for Microsoft, their words are certainly appropriate to the article, more so than anyone from linux, mac, BSD etc.

I checked APNIC for the ip making the removal - 218.109.144.131 - the address is coming from/through hzdtv.com, Gudang Scientific and Economic Park, No.398, Tian Mu Shan Road, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, P.R.C, which I note is discussed as generating a virus attack from another ip in the building see here.--Alf melmac 21:26, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

You can expect more edits from Zhejiang from my part. 219.82.148.60 (talk) 09:58, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Not on this article, but.. chinese "status quo" is of great interest to me.. so maybe on other articles heh :) 219.82.148.60 (talk) 10:01, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
We have many articles that you would be interested in then, I could draw up a shopping list in fact :p --Alf melmac 10:13, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Microsoft quote irrelevant and harms article's neutrality?[edit]

Is my belief that this quote:

Is completely out of context, and it's solely purpose is to diverge the neutrality of the article. And makes bad propaganda against the software. In this case, I think that it is completely irrelevant what their competitors thinks about censorship. (This would be the same as putting quotes of the FSF on the Microsoft's article).

I deleted the paragraph in revision 296188086 with the following comment: removing irrelevant paragraph, the article is not about microsoft, that paragraph seems that is only there to show the writer's point of view about the subject)

It was reverted back with the following comment: rv the paragraph is taken from a cite wholly about this software, just because it's it's microsoft's take makes it no less usefull or relevant

And is my belief that being from Microsoft affects the neutrality of the article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Green_Dam_Youth_Escort&diff=296229730&oldid=296188086

I understand that the section of the article where it is, talks about "concerns and reception", but I think that the editors should be VERY careful on the neutrality of what they write (being or not being about censorship).

Would you agree on putting a quote pro-censorship in Tor's article? Obviously not. why?

Greetz!!

--219.82.148.60 (talk) 06:30, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

The actual quote from http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a1yOb0DiH7Sc
In this case, we agree with others in the industry and around the world that important issues such as freedom of expression, privacy, system reliability and security need to be properly addressed,” said Kevin Kutz, Microsoft’s director of public affairs.
Computers and censorship are at the heart of this article. As a Giant in the Industry of Computers what Micosoft has to say on the combined subject matter is, without a doubt, relevant, pertinent and completely within context. Neutral does not mean incomplete. It means we don't take sides. We do our best to balance the presentation of information relevant to the topic. To not allow our reader/visitor to hear/read an important viewpoint from "a player on the field" would be our own form of censorship. The Microsoft quote is verifiable, confirmed via many sources, is 100% on topic, and has every right to remain in the article. In fact even more industry and world-wide responses should be included to provide balance and neutrality. I think the editors should be very careful on the open-ness of what they write (being or not being about computers)...and, of course, censorship.--Buster7 (talk) 07:47, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Furthermore, I ask editors to consider the first line from WP:NPOV:
Each Wikipedia article and other content must be written from a neutral point of view, by representing ALL significant views on each topic fairly, proportionately, and without bias.--Buster7 (talk) 08:01, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
The software is written for Microsoft machines only. Microsofts' view on this software is therefore more relevant than any other onlooker. I would be happy to have more information from either of the two Chinese software companies who made this, as well as any other Chinese officials' comments. I cannot see "freedom of expression, privacy, system reliability and security need to be properly addressed" as anything other than a concern. Please also note my concern (above) that at least one computer in the network you are using is either malicious or compromised and check your own machine for your stability.--Alf melmac 08:29, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
What you say is true Alf. Maybe Microsoft's point of view is important in this case for this reason. Then, should we add the same quote on this articles? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_content-control_software at least on the ones that run only on Windows. If not. Why not? I would like to add that "that quote" was made about this kind of software. I want you to know that I am not pro-censorship.. I was just amazed to see that in wikipedia, but I will respect what is agreed here. --219.82.148.60 (talk) 09:17, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Oh, about the comments on the sw vendors/gov officials, I could try to get them, but I dont speak chinese very well, so I have no idea.. About the network/ip compromised.. Why do you think its compromised? I could check for rootkits/etc.. but I think my computer is ok.. 219.82.148.60 (talk) 09:28, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Ah, and for the record, I think the quote is ok where it is now (thank you for the clarification). I was just expressing my point of view on the edition of the article :) /* arghh I allways forget to sign..*/ 219.82.148.60 (talk) 09:31, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Re compromised, I do hope your own machines are ok, I noted that another ip address in the same company's allocation had been said to have generated an attack on this forum (Netmarkattack: Intrusion.Win.MSSQL.worm.Hellkern), it may be a lone incident or not true, or if the machine is being used as an open proxy, it could have come as a result of that.--Alf melmac 09:45, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
its not my network (Im a home user, so..), but thank you very much for your concern. 219.82.148.60 (talk) 09:47, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Re Microsoft, the quote appears to be talking specifically about this particular software, in Bloomberg at least the quote begins "“In this case, we agree with others", I do not think the representative was talking generically in another context.--Alf melmac 09:49, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
mmm... well, ok.. anyway, I think the quote is ok where it is know.. (now I understand the reason it is there). 219.82.148.60 (talk) 10:03, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Refactor the "Concerns and reception" section[edit]

This section probably needs some restructuring for better presentation. Opinions from different parties should be sorted and grouped. Also, there are quite a few arguments in favor of the software published on Chinese media following the instruction from the almighty propaganda department. We will need to write for them as has been done on the Chinese Wikipedia to maintain NPOV.Kxx (talk) 19:44, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

We currently have comments from CCIA, Microsoft (Computer industry), foreign ministry, Central Propaganda Department (State), polls [can't decide if they are internet groups or not], human rights advocates and internet users, (Public), Chinese hackers, OpenNet Initiative (Internet groups), for those newer pieces from Chinese media (and maybe elsewhere) 'Media' if the piece doesn't represent any of the above.
However, this doesn't attend to those reports which carry both sides and would lose sense broken up, so maybe better being more simply split - Computer industry, Public, Media, and State (Internet groups then included in the Public or Media sections, depending on context).--Alf melmac 20:23, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Done. I retitled the section "Reception and responses" as "Concerns and reception" didn't quite cover what we now have, although "Concerns and responses" would also work equally well. If the split wasn't good that way round, please feel free to revert it and/or change the title as needs be.--Alf melmac 22:42, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Really nice work!Kxx (talk) 02:02, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Good, I'm very glad to be working with such collegial-minded editors :)
I saw the report of DIT's software to unistall/remove GDYE but I'm as yet undecided on how (and if) to include it - it could be in Computer industry section, but as it is made by the makers of FreeGate, which is mentioned in the Public section, it might be better after that section - we have a bit on 'problem un-installing' (ty for tidying that up so concisely Ohconfucius) would it be too out of place there (Functional defects section) - it can be seen as a remedy to functional defects for sure, but there might be a better way - comments?--Alf melmac 10:01, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
I have reservations about placing too much reliance on this source, a known Falun Gong mouthpiece. Let's wait and see if another source comes up. Ohconfucius (talk) 02:49, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Green Tsunami Released to Burst Green Dam Business Wire report.--Alf melmac 14:08, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Moved from article[edit]

On 16 June 2009, Recognize-Security published[1] this exploit for the Metasploit Framework.

  1. ^ "Green Dam URL Processing Buffer Overflow exploit for the Metasploit Framework". Recognize-Security. 16 June 2009. Retrieved 16 June 2009. 

I've moved this here as WP:SPS is likely applicable here (the about page is here) and I think this exploit has already been pulished as demonstrable in the UMICH's assessment.--Alf melmac 19:38, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Optional Nature[edit]

"so it is misleading to say the government compels PC users to use the software ... The government's role is limited to having the software developed and providing it free"

That PC vendors are only required to ship a CD is buried in this article, invoking unnecessary outrage in readers who skim. Dell to Link Up With AOL Dell shipped AOL CDs previously for customers wanting an option of filtered internet content. Panscient (talk) 14:47, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Why, where does the article say that it is obligatory to use the software? It's just impossible to uninstall once it's on the hard drive, that's all. Ohconfucius (talk) 15:45, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
To Panscient: The second sentence of the lead includes "it is mandatory to have either the software, or its setup files pre-installed on, or shipped on a compact disc with, all personal computers sold in Mainland China, including those imported from abroad" [emphasis added]. Dell did not have to, under orders from a government, ship that software: ALL PCs sold in China, AND those coming in from abroad, MUST have this software in some shape or another. The most recent announcement (by an official [who wished to remain anonymous] of a sub-agency) stated installing the set-up files only are an option has yet to be seen in an official annoucement from the PRC government. As far as I am aware, this is the only software on the planet that has been mandated by a government for inclusion on/with machines.--Alf melmac 15:52, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
According to what I have read, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) of the PRC is a nobody compared to Publicity Department of the Communist Party of China Central Committee (Chinese:中宣部), the almighty propaganda apparatus of the CCP. Some Chinese dissidents believe that the CCP use the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT)to test the water; now knowing that there is so much opposition, they begin to back off a bit; but the Publicity Department of the Communist Party of China Central Committee (Chinese:中宣部) did not lose face(丢臉), and to the CCP, lose face(丢臉) is a big no no. Arilang talk 00:50, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Here are some relevant quotes I found, from the software maker as well as .gov.cn channel itself (BTW, the word "preinstall" also means "bundle" in Chinese):

1) http://www.taizhou.gov.cn/art/2009/6/10/art_76_36883.html

据新华社电 昨日,工信部有关负责人说 - According to Xinhua wire yesterday [6/09], relevant MIIT leader said ... (blah, blah about keeping young people safe…) ... 这位负责人还表示,“绿坝”产品的有效识别率超过90%。考虑到不同层次用户的实际情况,“绿坝”软件运行环境对计算机配置要求低于目前市场主流产品,***并可由用户自行选择安装与否***,同时对用户上网行为不进行任何监控,也不搜集任何用户信息。

The ***end user can freely choose to install or not*** quote from MIIT offical is emphasized.

2) http://www.hngybz.gov.cn/news2.aspx?hyid=82644

绿坝预装只提供安装文件 用户可决定是否安装 - Green Dam “bundle/preinstall” only provide installation articles, end users decide install or not

工信部要求预装进电脑的只是一个软件安装文件,所以用户可以选择是否把它装进自己的电脑里让他运行 - MIIT asks “bundle/preinstall” on computer is only the installation, so end users can choose wheither to execute it to install on their own computer

3) http://news.qq.com/a/20090610/000087.htm

“工信部:上网过滤软件不监控网民 不强制安装” - MIIT: Online Filtering Sowftware Will Not Monitor Citizen, Will Not Force Installation (quote from software maker on MIIT mandate)

Thanks!

75.172.77.226 (talk) 19:43, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I think the lede is pretty clear about the so-called "optional" nature.Kxx (talk) 19:53, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Do you think this article can use more reference to the fact end users are not under any obligation to run/use this software? I agree with Panscient this article is not clear, and potentially POV on this. Suggest above citations be added.
Thanks! 75.172.77.226 (talk) 20:12, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Epoch Times' claim software can not be uninstalled is contradicted[edit]

The U of Mich. test report cited in the article has the following quote contradicting Epoch Times' claim:

http://www.cse.umich.edu/~jhalderm/pub/gd/

"We tested the uninstaller and found that it appears to effectively remove Green Dam from the computer."

The U of Mich. report also mentioned user data is not removed - this is consistent with windows application unintall guideline, as the software installer did not insert such files. Here's a quote from Microsoft Developer Network:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms954376.aspx

"The following should remain on the hard disk: User data files"

Thanks!

75.172.77.226 (talk) 19:43, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

The quoted sentence from the Umich guys is rather vague. What counts as "effectively remove"? How about leaving some program files (not user data) behind as indicated in the statement from The Epoch Times? Of course, "effectively remove" does rule out "running actively in the background" as claimed by The Epoch Times by common sense. But we don't know which statement is true. So we can only document both. (Given the vagueness of "effectively remove", I don't think we can easily clarify that.)Kxx (talk) 20:09, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Agreed, I'll add the UM cite after Epoch Times cite, so readers can see both.
Additionally user data files is not the only category of data uninstallers should not remove according the above cited Microsoft guideline, including some program files. Please see article for full detail.
75.172.77.226 (talk) 20:17, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Then there comes another point of vagueness. What are the "110 system files" mentioned by The Epoch Times? Which should be removed and which should not per the MS guideline? Again we don't know, and no sources say anything about that. Vagueness is annoying, but we have to cope with it.Kxx (talk) 22:23, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

The epoch time is not a credible source. It has political motive to defame Chinese government. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.185.224.165 (talkcontribs)

Thank you for the information. Well, I did say above that The Epoch Times was not reliable. Could this be proof? Ohconfucius (talk) 15:04, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
While The Epoch Times is not anywhere near a reliable source, it is the truth that the Green Dam Youth Escort can not be effectively removed. It will leave some program file(NOT user data) in your computer, and they still start with your windows(visible from Task Manager). "Whare's your source?" I'm really sorry, I could find a handful of sources before - just a few weeks after this soft's introduction, but by now most of them are removed(presumably by the govt or upon its request). If you don't believe me, just try it. Well, ff anyone could find a source, I'd really appreciate it(so we can actually put a cited statement into the article).

128.88.255.11 (talk) 05:07, 16 December 2009 (UTC) (User:Blodance not logged in)

Brief history on procurement of online filtering software[edit]

According to this June 15th article found on Beijing City Contracting Information Web (北京市招投标信息平台):

http://www.bjztb.gov.cn/news/200906/t401515.htm

- Works for "Sunny Green Internet" started in 2006.

- On 1/14/2008 an urgent RFP for "Green Online Filtering Software" was issued to the public, offering a competitive bid for two green online filtering software products, with cut off date 1/24/2008.

[recitation of relevant procurement regulation ommitted]

- On 1/21/2008 invitations for competetive bidding started, inviting companies already qualified to start submitting software system for selection, with 1/25 being the deadline.

- In October 2008 Green Web Navigation promotional material said over 70 companies had applied to submit produts, and China National Software Testing Center received 28 software systems.

I hope this information can elaborate on how the Chinese government "short listed" to two software systems; IMHO the article mentioned this without giving many details.

Thanks! 75.172.77.226 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:39, 22 June 2009 (UTC).

Censorship features[edit]

Whilst there could be current or anticipated Censorship features in the product, nothing in the section is reliably sourced at present. I am giving notice that the section will be removed unless reliable sources can be cited to back up the assertions. Ohconfucius (talk) 02:15, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Bit of drive-by quoting here: "Meanwhile, researchers inside and outside China found that the software censored more than pornography and actually blocked a wide range of content including Web sites on subjects including homosexuality and the spiritual group Falun Gong." - from "China schools move to cut censor software --- Green Dam ordered in many computers, but impact weakened", WSJ Asia Sep 17. Presumably that means there's a more thorough source to back up that sentence. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 06:24, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Cracked[edit]

As of early August 2009, GDYE has been cracked by Chinese crackers - it now can be uninstalled after installation, and various settings can be disabled. I might be able to find sources, although most of them are simply forum posts with the crack itself attached as a file. I'd doubt if there will be any news released regarding this, given that it would be unlikely that those endorsing GDYE would admit to it being a failure and a waste of money. As of now, the crack is distributed on Bittorrent, Rapidshare and eMule as well as through internet forums. -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs email 16:21, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Green Dam Girl[edit]

I think that Green Dam girl has become sufficiently notable to get her own page, or at least her own sub section on another page such as Moe anthropomorphism.

The character is rife with symbolism that is well known in China but which is lost on most foreigners, and it needs further explanation. At least she needs her own sub section on this page.

CrazyChinaGal (talk) 10:49, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Billion dollars law suit[edit]

China Faces Piracy Suit Over Censorship Software Arilang talk 15:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

I updated the file with Dec 2010 news of the lawsuit, which is continuing. Pumpkin888 (talk) 11:35, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Eytmology[edit]

What is it? It needs to be included.Curb Chain (talk) 05:27, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Reworked references[edit]

I've done some extensive cleanup of references, but it's not been in-depth, because I did not check the references. Because there are sources both from China and Taiwan, I've had to add the location parameter into citation tags, and specify both sides' internationally accepted names (People's Republic of China and Chinese Taipei, respectively). -Mardus (talk) 07:49, 5 July 2013 (UTC)