Website Restrictions

[#1]

My stepson was "abusing" his internet access so I put a separate firewall in place which filters all of his browsing (almost 10Gb a day at times !)
I had no problem with doing the research and making sure I sorted the most effective solution rather than relying on a potentially flaky and easy to bypass ISP solution.

[#2]

DomS,
So totally true.  The only effective control is to locally completely and explicitly censor what may be accessed, rather than attempting to filter out the "bad stuff".  This does though bring the burden of control to within the household, as only specified sites can be accessed or alternatively blocked.

[#3]

I didn't think DomS actually said what made their own solution any more effective than an ISP's solution or why it wouldn't be subject to the same drawbacks. Apart from the fact it was applied to only one member of the household.

[#4]

My solution (Squid3 + DansGuardian + Shorewall) allows me to monitor and track what he is doing.
If he finds a way around one solution, it is pretty obvious as the traffic through the server will not match the traffic reported by the filtering applications.
As he's grown up, he's been allowed access to more mature sites. It has worked well for him (and visitor access) while retaining full access for the adults in the house.

[#5]

DomS's solution is ideal, but I bet 80%+ of the population would be technically incapable if implementing something similar*. Likewise a significant proportion of children would be technically incapable if finding their way around an ISP solution.
Even if it isn't watertight, something is better than nothing for the families who can't do anything better.
* I'm not sure I'd know where to start or even if I'd need an extra firewall box.

[#6]

Whilst I agree that it is the customer's responsibility to decide what their own family/visitors can access; I think that an ISP should provide a solution that can either be implemented across the board or on a device by device basis.
My main reason for this view is that it would allow customers who are worried about sites their children visit being able to easily implement some form of controls without running the risk of installing some form of malware that claims to do the job.

[#7]

If it becomes the ISP responsibility  ,, it wont be long before we see the first court case for compensation because the ISP has not stopped a child access to something harmfull .
This is the Parents job not !!! the ISP

[#8]

I don't want it to be anybody's responsibility. Take a look at what talktalk offers, a simple radio button that you press and websites are blocked. You can also add individual sites as well. It worked for me very well, to well sometimes, it blocked the lottery results !
But it does work, it is optional and caries a disclaimer.
http://www.talktalk.co.uk/security/homesafe-demo.html

[#9]

Family filters - the airbags of the internet.

[#10]

Quote from: flexo1966

I don't want it to be anybody's responsibility. Take a look at what talktalk offers, a simple radio button that you press and websites are blocked. You can also add individual sites as well. It worked for me very well, to well sometimes, it blocked the lottery results ! But it does work, it is optional and caries a disclaimer. http://www.talktalk.co.uk/security/homesafe-demo.html

Now that looks to be a generic "across-the-board" solution; and I see a potential problem in that with "Kid Safe" turned on; whilst they might not be able to access Facebook; I would not be able to as well.  Similarly I would presume that blocking "file sharing" could stop users from downloading torrents of Linux distributions for example.
As you've said; it is optional - thereby making it your responsibility to either turn it on or off; which rather negates your "I don't want it to be anybody's responsibility" statement above!
The idea is good; however it needs expanding so that specific devices could be subjected to appropriate controls.  For instance with my Netgear router; there is a "block sites" setting which can be set to block most devices from accessing web sites; but I can set up a "trusted" device that has full access.

[#11]

I like the sound of Dom's solution, but maybe flexo1966 has a point, that something is needed for those that don't have the technical ability to set other things up.

[#12]

It was something that as far as I was concerned with children worked well. It was simple and I could turn it off and on when I wanted.
Is this a major project for an isp to complete ?

[#13]

I would imagine it probably is, both from the point of view of integrating it into their network as well as the settings into customers' accounts at the Portal. But I'm not a network engineer, so couldn't comment in more depth.

[#14]

I have not answered this poll because none of the answers suit me.  I don't mind others being given the option of a 'Family Filter' but I don't want to see the price of broadband rise for me as a result.  Because, like Anotherone, I suspect this is a major project for an ISP.

[#15]

I didn't answer the poll because I thought it was already a done deal, it's only a question of when plusnet get around to implementing it.