Slashdot Mirror
Rethinking IM Privacy For Kids
mackles writes, "Now that the world has read the despicable instant messages from Rep. Foley, should parents take a second look at monitoring their kids' IMs? After all, it was IM logging that exposed the scandal; would we have found out otherwise? Cost is not an issue, there are free monitoring tools. Should parents tell their kids before they monitor? Parents and their tech-savvy kids are at odds on the topic. From the article: 'As many as 94 percent of parents polled this summer by the research firm Harris Interactive said they've turned to Web content filters, monitoring software, or advice from an adult friend to keep electronic tabs on their children.' The article quotes one 18-year-old as saying, 'A lot of kids are smarter than adults think.'"
If you can install tcpdump on that thing, I'm sure you could use that. You'd need somewhere to store the logs though..
So I'm not a parent yet, but having had parents who did a kick ass job raising my sister and myself, what if parents just, you know, talked to their kids once in a while? A parent that genuinely listens and cares about their children is going to be much better received - and far more trusted - by their kids than one who tries to become the FBI and wiretap everything their kids do. It just seems like common sense to me.
I know, I know, think of the children, blah blah blah. I hate election years.
And most kids are not as smart as they think they are. News at 11.
we should outfit them with a camera, GPS device and listening post. Never know what those kids are up to. We should rigidly protect them from all outside evils real and imaginary and then at age 18 turn the poor unsuspecting souls loose. See what happens.
-- No Sig is a Good Sig
"When I was 14, my parents were the most ignorant people in the world. When I turned 21, I was amazed at how much they had learned in the last 7 years."
-- Mark Twain
Clearly this shows we should be monitoring politicians and not the kids.
t
Do your kids have admin rights on the computer(s) they use? They may be able to check whats going on, but may be unable to do anything about it.
Ultimately you can install a key logger, even if they get encrypted connections going or install software that makes it harder for you to snoop. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some kind of key logger that logged what keys were sent to which app at what time.. that could give you a 1-sided "replay" of activity even in the face of them putting stealthier software on the machine(or using web based chats via https anonymizers or something)
As someone else pointed out though - i'm not sure you want to be in a technology cold war with your kids. You need to come to an understanding about why they want to disobey you. There is probably a lot of ignorance and arrogance on both sides of the parent/child relationship, and the right meeting is somewhere in the middle.
The internet is a hostile place for adults also. The struggle of parenting would seem to be hw to let your child grow into an adult that makes responsible decisions about their privacy, personal safety, etc, while still giving them boundaries that let you sleep relatively comfortably at nite as they learn how to do this.
I'm not a parent, but it seems to me that the "threats" are the same as they've always been, but the vectors are different this time around (and they'll be different again in 10 years)
My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
The house, the phone line, the DSL service, and the computer are all in my name. I'm the one my kid puts at risk if he does something illegal. Can someone give me a good reason to *not* monitor what my kid does on the internet?
When kids shoot up schools, people ask "where were the parents? They should have known." When kids end up teenage parents, people ask "where were the parents? They should have taught them better." When kids get connected to the internet, people say "mind your own business! Privacy! Big Brother! OMG 1984!!!"
Pick one. Either kids have a right to privacy and the responsibilities that come with the lack of supervision, or they don't have that right, and the parents have to accept some responsibility if they don't know what their kids are doing.
120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
...my parents occasionally look at things like history (snicker). However, I was the most computer-savvy person in my house, and ran the router/server. Now, I go to sites/do things that they might not like, but it hasn't harmed me or warped me in any sort of way. I learned my morals from them, and make my own decisions.
Now, I know that I'm not most teens, and most are stupid and don't give a flying fsck about anything, but children (especially later teenagers) don't get nearly enough respect. Just the question that "should we tell them we're spying on them?" makes me want to throw up. Jeez, no wonder kids think their parents are stupid...
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
Kids (even kids with good parents) do legally and morally wrong things all the goddamn time - that's why they don't have the same rights as adults. Some kids are more rebellious than others, that's just human nature. Some kids just need watching. The "oh, just talk with them and have a good relationship with them, that's all you need to do" crew are either childless or naive.
there is no need to sign your posts. this isn't usenet. your username is right there above your post. stop it.
If your kids are smart enough to monitor what is running on their computer, shouldn't they also be smart enough to realize if someone is trying to sexually manipulate them?
I've been on the internet since I was 11, got an ICQ account first thing.
Staying safe on the internet is pretty simple. Don't hand out real name, age, or location. Gender either if it can be avoided.
Teach your kids that, make sure they realize WHY it is important ("Do you want to end up raped and dead in some ditch? No? DON'T GIVE OUT PERSONAL INFORMTATION THEN.") and trust in them not to take a plane trip somewhere to meet some weirdo halfway across the country.
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
Kids have no right to privacy when it comes to areas that can cause them harm.
I would bet that slip and fall in the shower is a more frequent cause of death for teens than online predators. Did you also install a bathroom cam?
Yes, dad, the 54G can do logging. Actually that's probably better than the silly keylogger Judy and I have been using against you and mom for the past year. (BTW, having 'g0d' as your admin password is really lame - we didn't even need the keylogger to figure that out. :P I'll walk you through the firmware update after I get home from band practice.
Your loving son, Jack
P.S. Do not let Judy do the install - she's bound to get the interface names reversed and broadcast the log files to the universe. (If you don't believe me, ask her why that botnet attacked our computer last fall. I told her the target IP was the first param, not the second one, but did Little Miss 31337 listen to me? Of course not.)
A marriage is always made up of two people who are prepared to swear that only the other one snores.
If you have to tell your 16 year old boy that it's legally and morally wrong to exchange graphic sexual emails and IM's with a middle aged politician no amount of monitoring will help because you've already failed as a parent.
If you have to tell your middle aged politician that it's legally and morally wrong to exchange graphic sexual emails and IM's with a 16 year old boy, you've already failed as a voter.
Raise your kids like that and watch what happens when they finally move out from under your thumb.
It'll be a total disaster, and yes, it will be your fault.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Worse yet is if they don't go crazy when they get out, because they have become used to 24 hour surveillance, and feel that being spied on is for their own good.
I'm disinclined to agree with the idea that youth are that susceptible to harm from exposure to "inappropriate" content or behavior, especially when a physical seperation (such as the internet) is present. I see the merit behind the argument, and I empathize with the legitimate desire to protect kids, but it relies on the fallacies that children/teens do not have adequate coping mechanisms and/or are better off in ignorance.
The fact is that children are better able to adapt to new events and information than adults are, provided that they have a stable home environment. That's because everything is new to them. Of course they need guidance and assistance along the way, but the new experiences in and of themselves are not destructive. On the contrary, without exposure to these experiences, kids may have difficulty dealing with things later in life. In regard to alcohol and drugs, for example, most parents realize that their children will be exposed to these things no matter what they do, therefore they preemptively explain the effects, potential consequences, what choice they believe is best, and how to deal with pressure from other kids/peers (which is often significantly higher than any potential pressure that might be exerted online, I might add -- indeed most people have an easier time being confrontational in the pseudoanonymity of the internet than they do in real life).
Likewise with sexual misconduct, both online and in the real world. When I was in first grade, some kid brought a Polaroid to school and convinced some other kids to go in the coat room and take pictures of their privates. While I have no idea what sparked this behavior (although in retrospect it was possibly indicative of serious misconduct at home), I do recall that several children willingly complied in innocence (aka IGNORANCE), until one child finally told the teacher because her parents had told her that it was naughty to take off her clothes in front of strangers. The two key things, I believe, to learn from this experience are that most of the kids were woefully unprepared for the real world by their parents, and that regardless of their behavior, the kids were probably no worse off for the experience. Of course we all got a lecture afterwards, but it shouldn't have been an afterthought. Sexuality is an innate part of our existance, and shamefully pretending that it doesn't exist doesn't benefit our children in any way; rather it merely produces another generation of shameful adults.
The point is that regardless of your views on the morality of ANY issue, if children are ignorant of the basic facts, then that is the sole greatest danger. Protecting them 24/7 is neither possible nor healthy. Of course parents should be involved in their children's activities, and ask questions about what they're doing, who they're talking to, etc., but kids are people too, and they need some amount of privacy (based on age, demonstrated responsibility, past behavior, etc). Yes, people on the internet, as in real life, CAN be dangerous, but the internet has the added safety feature that it's fairly anonymous. Teach kids to maintain their anonymity, to tell you if someone is asking/telling/showing them something inappropriate, and they'll be better off. Of course, if you have no bond or trust with your child (and 24/7 monitoring isn't exactly a great way to generate trust), or if your child has repeatedly demonstrated willful disregard for instruction, then by all means -- monitor them day and night. But really, that should be a last resort, not a primary consideration.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere