The OP didn't ask about setting up a personal firewall, or concerns about viruses.
You keep telling everyone that YOUR system is set up so that nobody can do anything you don't want them to do... why not just TELL the OP how you set up your system? Nobody CARES about personal firewalls in this thread, nobody even CARES about anti-virus software. You hate personal firewalls. We get it. We really do.
The question was: How do I keep students from using proxies on school computers to avoid blacklisted sites?
Why not tell him to forget the black list, and just create a white list, and then educate the teachers on when it's appropriate to request an addition to the white list? That way, no proxy sites can be accessed.
Because VB believes (and so does his stooge, that all living people have a right to free and open/unrestricted internet access from all locations and are able to control their own actions such that they will never do anything wrong/or violate security norms.
But in this case, we aren't talking about "responsible" adults. We are talking about children. Children are curious by there very nature, and are going to test and push whatever boundries are placed on them.
You might get away with trusting adults not to look at smut while at work even though there is nothing stopping them. Now, try trusting a room full of 14 year old boys to not look at smut that's easily available.
But they are a deterant. Do you advocate that because any good thief can steal my car in 30 seconds that I should not lock my door when I park on the street over night?
Your comparison is bullshit. The reason why you're locking your car is not to provide serious protection, but to give a clear indication that you don't want others to access your car without your permission. And this is relevant for your assurance.
For staying with your comparison: If you're parking your car in a dark sideway in Queens, NY, your car will get stolen. So adding an alerter besides your lock is a useless investion.
Not necessarily. Have the IT security person vest the power of "approving" sites on the fly after educating them on the types of sites they should be wary of. Periodically, the IT staff (or person) should review the whitelist for anything suspicious.
How many adults per student do you suggest? With no computer-based security in place, I could surf p*rn all day long with you coming to check on me every 5 minutes to see what I'm doing. All I have to do is pay attention to when you're looking over.
SOME control is better than NO control, as long as you realize that what you have is SOME control, and aren't deluded into thinking its TOTAL control.
Complete and overly utter bullshit - I own a car, you don't, locked or not, you don't have any right to expect anything from it. I lock my car to keep thieves and unethical types from TAKING what is not theirs.
But parking your car anywhere and then surrounding it with a bubble that can't be breached without permission would protect it - just like blocking all access except that which is authorized.
This is exactly the same mindset one would have in setting up access controls on their servers. If you have to bypass protocols in order to look at something, you know with certainty you are doing something that the administrator of the server does not want you to do.
So, because its highly likely an attempt will be made to steal my car, I should leave the keys in the ignition?
And this is completely nonsense, as the actual violation is a written-formulated policy that has to be accepted by any employee who wants to have access to the IT department.
If they're trying to violate this policy, that's enough to make them face consequences. Lawfully!
No, because you're twisting signalizations and security measures. A lock is no security measure, it's just a sign "don't steal my car!" in an expression that is reasonable towards an assurance. That's why your comparison is bullshit.
A better comparison would be an alerter, in a place where noone would hear it anyone. Doesn't add to security and also has no other means. Your car will get stolen and your investment was useless.
That's just it, you don't think. Camera's are installed to protect school properly, to protect kids from abuse by other kids, not to see computer screens and what's on them.
Hopefully you will not be somebody who is responsible for IT technics:
----------------------------- snip ------------------------------------------ vb@parametium:~ % dig MX invalid.com [...] ;; ANSWER SECTION: invalid.com. 6000 IN MX 10 mail4.jodoshared.com. [...] vb@parametium:~ % telnet mail4.jodoshared.com. 25 Trying 204.14.104.85... Connected to mail4.jodoshared.com. Escape character is '^]'.
220 mail4.myhsphere.biz ESMTP EHLO dingens.org
250-mail4.myhsphere.biz
250-PIPELINING
250-8BITMIME
250-SIZE 52428800
250 AUTH LOGIN PLAIN CRAM-MD5 MAIL From:
250 ok RCPT To:
550 sorry, no mailbox here by that name (#5.1.1) QUIT
221 mail4.myhsphere.biz Connection closed by foreign host. vb@parametium:~ %
I already told. You can forget content filtering. It seems to help first, but it will not solve your problem. Try social solutions instead.
The answer is: don't try to. This will not work at all. Better have tutors in the computer rooms. Don't let the kids alone. And talk to them. They're human beings, and not your prisoners you have to control. Your time and your care is very important for them. And when they're growing, don't have so much fear from sex. The problem is violence, not sex.
Yes. And that way, the net is unusable. And no teacher will find out, why nytimes.com will not be a possibility for the whitelist.
I think the entire group is waiting on your solution to the problem, one that prevents the people from doing things that are not permitted by the rules.
Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.