[COLUG] Parents Censoring Kids Web Access

[Dave Maxwell]

On Sun October 15 2006 2:49 pm, Jim wrote:


> _Secret_ censorship is probably counterproductive.
> _Overt_ censorship with logging makes the kids accountable.
>
> Jim Wildman might have some comments.
>
> _______________________________________________
> colug432 mailing list colug432 at colug.net
> http://www.colug.net/mailman/listinfo/colug432

I have to agree with Jim on this one.  Kids are inexperienced but they usually 
aren't any more stupid than you or I.  They *will* figure it out sooner or 
later.  If something they want to see badly enough is something you don't 
want them to see then they'll probably figure it out immediately.

There is another possibility you might consider:

_No_ censorship with *overt* logging.  A few conversations like "Son, what 
were you doing at megaporno.com?" may suffice to get them to regulate their 
own behaivor.

Unfortunately, I've been tasked with monitoring some public school proxies.  
Those *have* to be censored by law.  However, I know all too well that kids 
will try every trick in the book to get around them...so I catch them at that 
too.  One of the ways I do it is to scour the proxy logs for such attempts.  
A kid looking for an unblocked anonymous proxy is apt to trip over this:

#!/bin/bash

grep -i "prox\|anon\|hide\|cover\|censor\|bypass\|block\ 
cloak" /var/log/squid/access.log | sort | uniq

A similar script is used to find porno hunters but I can't post THAT one on a 
family list.

If it were up to me, I wouldn't overtly censor at all or do it with a very 
light hand and rely on catching them at naughty-naughties instead.  I think 
overt attempts to assert authority tend to breed defiance (not every kid who 
encounters a "blocked" message necessarily gets in trouble) while more subtle 
means may lead to *self* regulation (will they catch me doing this?).

Dave
-- 
You are capable of planning your future.