Slashdot Mirror


A Parent's Guide To Linux Web Filtering

Roblimo writes "Not all parents want their children exposed to everything on the Internet, especially porn. So far, virtually all home-level Net filtering software has been for Windows. This tutorial on NewsForge, by Joe Bolin, shows Linux-using parents how to set up Web filtering for *their* children -- and shows them how to customize filters to fit their own tastes and beliefs instead of relying on a commercial software company's ideas of 'good' and 'bad,' too."

13 of 529 comments (clear)

  1. Complexity... by burrows · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I say just run the box in console mode, and if the kid can figure out how to configure X and open a browser, they are old enough for porn.

    Seriously, this is a little strange in it's scope. In the fourth paragraph, it defines for the reader what a "server" is, and then they expect the reader to be comfortable just jumping right in and editing the squid config. Seems like a little user-friendliness is probably needed before we can consider the parental filtering thing taken care of...

  2. Re:Why Censor? by eln · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Man, if you think the only things that you can find on the Internet are naked people and goatse, you must have been on the Internet for all of about 8 seconds.

    Parents need to protect their kids from extreme pornography, highly graphic images (like rotten.com and the like), and websites that foster extreme viewpoints and hate speech, like the Aryan Nations. These things can have a much more profound impact on a child's immature mind than it would on a mature and rational adult's mind.

    What your personal threshold for your family is as to how extreme content has to be before you feel the need to protect your kids from it is dependent entirely on your own belief system. This is why systems that allow the parents to decide criteria, rather than depending on things like Net Nanny, is so attractive.

  3. Still missing the point... by angst7 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So much is made about filtering content for children, presumably to prevent them from wandering upon unsuitable content. The fundamental flaw with this (techological limitations notwithstanding) is the notion that kids under the age of 13 or so should be left alone to browse the net.

    It seems to me that proper parenting requires an active participation with your kids, whether it be in watching TV, checking out books in a B&N, or spending time on the net. Simply throwing in a vchip, blocking channels or applying hole-ridden filters can never be a substitute for actively being entertained, lerning, etc. alongside your child.

    At least I think I read that somewhere...

    --
    StrategyTalk.com, PC Game Forums
  4. Re:Excellent by e9th · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Well, that sounds good, but I'm pessimistic. The same parents who bitch about our educational system but who won't sit down with their kids and discuss what Johnny learned in school today will continue to scream and scream loudly.

    "Why should I protect my children. That's what I pay taxes for!"

  5. Re:Why Censor? by dtrent · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Really, is only naked women or men. In Mozilla Firebird, I have setted it to "Block images from goat.cx" (not visit!) and if my kids pictures of naked people find, fine. I did as child. I run linux but don't need this.

    Well, there's naked people, and then there's porn. Personally I'm more worried about sites like bangbus which come 1/2 inch from condoning rape. I don't want my son treating women like that, and I don't want my daughter being treated like that, clothes on or off.

    As friend said "You Americans are so puritanical!"

    And that is just insulting. How do you resolve the above stereotype with the fact that most the porn *origninates* in the States? I suppose you think each and every German wears liederhosen too?

  6. Re:Censorware by any other name... by eln · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't know that most people really object to censorware as a concept to protect kids. What people object to is installing censorware in public, government-funded institutions like libraries where non-children can be affected by them, thus limiting constitutional rights.

    Other people using these things in their own home is none of your business, and if you make it your business, you're the one violating people's rights.

  7. You need to be shocked into reality by confused+one · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Go to Google and type in a bunch of keywords which would represent the most disgusting and/or disturbing idea you can think of. You'll get hits. With pictures.

    Then go looking for news articles about kids being lured to their death by people in chat rooms, etc. You'll find plenty.

    You need to monitor what your kids are doing on the net. The children aren't responsible for their actions, You are.

  8. Parenting by any other name... by goldspider · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I thought we were mostly in agreement here. Parenting is good.

    Putting limits on material they want their children exposed to is a HUGE part of parenting. So why do you oppose software intended to let parents do just that?

    --
    "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
  9. Oh Really? by mratitude · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Regarding all the "kids will hack it" and "watch your kids" content so far.

    The underlying issue is quite simple - Access to the Internet is the equivalent of allowing your kids to leave the yard without permission, not bothering to know where they are, who they're contacting or being contacted by and generally leaving them at the mercy of the big, bad world.

    So, establishing them on isolated segement NAT'd computers where every single 0 and 1 goes through a router that their parents manage or through a proxy service of the same circumstance isn't anything more complicated than insuring that Jack or Jane ask permission to leave the yard and to know where they're going and who they'll see when they do.

    With kids, you don't throw out the rules for sake of convenience or with the idea of being "progressive" about child rearing. The consequences are just too dire.

    --


    Mod me troll, if you must, I can't help it.
  10. You don't have kids, do you? by underpar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You are looking at this as though parents making mods or installing software are trying to prevent kids from looking at something they are actively searching for.

    The real reason we want this stuff is so the kids won't stumble on to something bad they had no intention of finding. The lack of trust being demonstrated is a lack of trust toward every jerk on the internet that doesn't care about my kid.

    That's my reason anyway. Does anyone here have kids?

  11. Re:look at the typical people demanding filters... by bckrispi · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Considering that the people usually screaming the loudest for government to "protect" their children are usually the dimmest bulb in the marquee sign

    You miss the point entirely. This article is good because it puts the power of filtering in the hands of the parent, where it belongs *NOT* the government.

    we have a few on our street who demand "GO SLOW! We love our children!" signs from the town instead of teaching their kids not to run into the road

    You're obviously not a parent. If you were, you'd never make such a moronic statement. Kids do stupid things. You can teach your child not to run in the road - is that a guarantee that 100% of the time the lesson is going to stick?? Hell no!!!! That's why residential neighborhoods usually cap the speed limit at 25.

    I don't see how filtering for linux is going to help. You're not very likely to find linux running in in a trailer park, folks.

    Insightful, my ass. This article isn't for Joe Sixpack. It's for Linux users who want a filtering solution. If I'm a Linux user, and I want to apply net filtering for my kids, this is how I do it. Pretty simple logic, huh bubba??

    --
    Xenon, where's my money? -Borno
  12. Squid and SquidGuard by rossz · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Being a little smarter than the average websurfer, I set up squid+squidGuard and set my daughter's computer up to go through the Linux box. She could easily bypass this if she had ever taken the time to learn the basics about computing, but she has never shown any interest when I have offered to teach her. Doesn't really matter, in the next week or two I will be reconfiguring the entire home network to force everyone through the Linux box and use a transparent proxy system.

    My proxy system enforces just a few basic rules:
    1. IE is not allowed. Never ever. I'm not taking any chances with my network's security.
    2. She loses internet access late at night. I got tired of telling her to shut down and go to bed every damn night, "just a few more minutes!" In her language a few more minutes == an hour.
    3. Warez, porn, and hate sites are blocked. I don't think she'll go porn surfing on purpose, but she's a little quick to go to links without thinking about it. She's also too willing to believe fringe and conspiracy theories, but I think that's very typical of teenagers.
    4. Music sharing programs are blocked. I told her to stop downloading pirated music as we couldn't afford an RIAA lawsuit, but she didn't listen to me, so now she can't even trade music when it's legal.

    I told her straight out, if you think a blocked site is legit, just tell me and I'll see about unblocking it. I have blocked a few fringe science, religion, and political web sites. When she refused to discuss the contents with me, I blocked the sites. I was perfectly willing to leave them unblocked, but only if she was willing to discuss them rationally with my wife or myself.
    --
    -- Will program for bandwidth
  13. Re:Excellent by japhmi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And as a society, we do have the right to tell you how to raise your children.

    No, you don't. As long as a parent isn't harming their child, they have the innate right to raise him or her as they see fit.

    If that child doesn't live up to the societies standards, than society has to take it up with the parents - it's their right and responsibility.

    Parents come in bitching about little Sally getting an F even though she did no work. If parents backed up schools, then we would have better kids in society.

    If the schools backed the parents up in return, then it'd be great. If I were a teacher, and a parent came in asking why Little Sally got an F, I'd point out the requirements for each grade level - and show how Sally did not meet them. (Then again, I'd have the policy that one of my teachers had explicit - if you turn in every assignment, and they're all complete, you will pass the class.)

    My kids - they're being homeschooled. 1st, my wife and I feel that it's best for my family. 2nd, we can't give them the kind of education we want for them in school.

    --
    "Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys" P. J. O'Rourke