Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Family Safety Filter Blocks Google
mike.rimov writes "I saw that part of the brand new Windows Live package is the Family Safety Filter, so I decided to give it a spin. Turned it on, set it to 'basic filtering' (their lowest level), and went to Google ... oops, it blocks Google! So I logged into the settings and added Google as an exception. Google still wouldn't come up. Just in case, I turned off the family filter: voila, Google. As we all know, 'Don't be evil' is not part of Microsoft's motto! Oh yeah — and with the filter on, Microsoft's own search engine, live.com comes up." Anomaly?
Google is evil so thank you Microsoft!
You got the touch!
It probably wasn't intentional, most likely they pushed developers to focus first on microsoft based search engines, but really, I also find it hard to believe not a single person would have tried google first. I doubt it was a big conspiracy, but rather they knew about it but didn't want to spend anytime fixing it.
The musings of just another geek and his junk.
Google is unsafe... for Microsoft's monopolies.
Proudly supporting the Libertarian Party.
It's the "O"s in Google. They look like boobies.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
Just a wild guess: Perhaps the family filter talks to Live.com in order to filter "inappropriate" results out. Other search engines not owned by Microsoft don't support this integration, so the filter blocks them as they would otherwise be a trivial way around the filter.
Quality, performance, value; you get only two, and you don't always get to pick.
This is a classic filter issue, and a prime example of why using filters like this is a retarded waste of time.
A simply Google search probably will tell you how to work around the filter completely, as such Google is a banned website.
This isn't anything new, all of the filters out there do this sort of thing, this one just seems evil since its Microsoft blocking Google, but it happens with all of them.
The real solution is to realize that the person you're trying to prevent from seeing stuff on the Internet is going to find a way to look at it anyway. If you're doing this to stop kids from looking at something then you better keep them locked in a basement cause they'll just go somewhere else to find what they want. You can bet one of their friends doesn't have a porn blocker.
The solution to these problems for parents is to actually be a parent and remember that YOU are responsible for your children. Not Microsoft, not the computer, not your ISP, not the Internet, YOU. You can spend an entire lifetime trying to stop them from doing something and they'll spend their entire lifetime showing you how you can't. Unless of course you just ignore anything they do when you aren't watching them. Perhaps you should try a little education instead.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
From a post made in December, it also apparently blocks AdSense ads (which would make sense, since they're part of Gooooogle). Anybody else know what this "Safety Filter" blocks?
This guy's the limit!
I'd love to know WTF the author has done. It's never blocked Google on the three lappies its installed on here.
I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams
I'd imagine that they're not intentionally blocking google because they're a competitor (although it could be a contributing factor). I would think that they consider Live.com to be more compatible with family filter and google allows access to cached pages which the family filter may not be able to block.
Of course, one way that MS could show good faith would be to open up the family filter's API in some way so as to let it play nice with google and allow google to disable cached pages for users of the filter.
...spike
Ewwwwww, coconut...
I seem to recall a much older filtering software package (I don't recall which offhand - DansGuardian, maybe?) that will block Google if you have disabled "SafeSearch" in the Advanced Preferences - that is, if you have it set to "Do not filter my search results."
I tried to visit redhat.com and a chair shot out the back of my machine!
Good people go to bed earlier.
Anomally?
Sounds like smart marketing to me. Just block your biggest competitor.
I wonder if they blocked Mozilla too?
"I don't have to think. I only have to do it. The results are always perfect, but that's old news." - Meat Puppets
The navigation bar of Google's Blogger website was blocked for me. Random things were blocked that weren't noticeable as missing, popping up every time, so it felt like spyware. I tried to turn it off through Ctrl+Alt+Delete (actually, Ctrl+Shift+Esc since I use Vista). The process would not let itself die and restarted itself over and over. Then it blocked Wikipedia, I think before or after I went to "Stop Service." I asked if the owner of the computer meant to install it, and sure enough, it was hidden in some automatic update crap. The same automatic update crap rolls back my graphics drivers to the lazily outdated computer manufacturer-approved one, rather than the newest Intel one. The former has a problem with rendering bumpmaps on 3D objects so that if you're looking at an object with a bumpmap in front of an object with a bumpmap, both bumpmaps are rendered on the object nearest the camera. The latter fixes it. It also used to replace my wireless card driver with a driver from the same manufacturer meant for wirelessly communicating with other computers in a local area network, though this hasn't been a problem since I stopped using that card.
Rhetorical
You could accidentally search for "Live goat Porn" on google. Microsoft's search engine doesn't index any porn (Or much of anything else,) that's why no one uses it.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
>>>If you're doing this to stop kids from looking at something
I don't understand the big deal. So kids see nudity? So what? The human body is nothing to be ashamed of. Although I don't want my kids to see porn (sex), if they did would it be so horrible? By the time they're 13 they'll know what sex is anyway, and even if you shelter them completely, they'd better have SOME idea what they're supposed to do on their wedding night else I'll never get grandchildren! ;-)
American society seems to be built on the notion of keeping kids ignorant ("innocent") which is exactly the opposite of what our jobs as parents is meant to do. We're supposed to be teaching children about the world and preparing them to deal with it, not hiding it from them.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
They should rename it the "Parents That Can't Be Bothered To Pay Attention Filter" instead. The question "Do you want the government raising your children?" has already been put to the public, and the answer is obvious: a resounding "No!". Now I put this question to you all: Do you want Microsoft raising your children? Turn off the damned net-nanny and actually pay attention to what your kids are doing, damnit!
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
We have been led to believe Microsoft does extensive testing of products and features. Even if the blocking was unintentional, certainly they must have noticed it and the fact they don't block there own server. As a result, they should have either, white-listed Google or at least expressly and clearly stated Google was being blocked. Given Microsoft's past history, this kind of "aw shucks look it blocks Google but let's just mirk and ignore it" behavior is not acceptable and is predatory in nature in keeping with past behavior. Convicted monopolists are held to higher standards than average companies because they are on parole.
I tried it on my own machine. On Web Filtering Basic, it allows www.google.com, and on Strict, it does not. It logs my access to Google if Activity Reporting is on. It looks like Strict uses a white list, so blocking Google can be reasonably expected by a user.
Since I can use Google to find some really nasty anal porn and, what's even worse, those awful sinful bittorrents, why wouldn't the Family Safety Filter block it? Of course unless my parents lock me in the basement I can still find porn and all sorts of life-shortening stuff everywhere else. Since I'm so driven to get this mind-wrecking stuff, maybe they should lock me in the basement?
Windows Live Family Safety operates in two modes: basic and strict.
In BASIC mode, it uses a BLACKLIST to filter adult web content (porn). This mode is intended for teenagers, guests, etc. Google is available.
In STRICT mode it uses a WHITELIST limited to a small list of children's sites (Nick, Barney, Barbie, etc) plus custom sites the parent can add. This is designed for young children who really aren't going to care that they can't visit Google, nor CNN.com, nor Slashdot. This mode is to keep kids entertained.
The author of the post was probably running in STRICT mode and didn't realize the purpose of the software.
Ok, the Summary is #1 wrong, and #2 people here have no idea what the hell they talking about.
The FAMILY SAFTEY is working as it is supposed to, as it is designed to setup for your freaking KIDS...
On Basic, it allows Google.com, and that is working as intended.
On Strict, it does not, as some parents wouldn't want their kids using Google that WILL RETURN DONKEY PORN VIDEOS because there is no way to intelligently filter the Google results.
If Google doesn't want to be blocked on Strict, they can provide RSS OPENSEARCH features, like everyone else is doing. However Google is intent of refusing to provide RSS OpenSearch features.
The BROKEN here is Google not supporting a web standard in their search engine results and method of returning results.
As for the whole MS is keeping people from Google, this is insane. They have no locks on Live search even for IE users (letting people use any search engine easily as their default Browser search engine).
MS has even had to 'code' around Google's lack of standards in the OpenSearch and other areas to allow 'Search Tips' and dropdown features from Google Search, since Google doesn't provide the standard 'hint' or 'search tip' features that ARE a standard and other search engines and even sites like Wikipedia provide inherently.
Google is the ones locking the doors here, in several ways, and yet someone the 'intelligent' people at SlashDot haven't even noticed any of this going on? Go look up Search Connector and RSS Search feeds, and RSS Search filtered results. Everyone and their dog supports them, except Google.
They are even integrated in Windows7 Explorer so users can search inside a Folder or Open/Save Dialog box and get web pages, video, images, links, etc from just about any online search engine or provider of content EXCEPT GOOGLE because they refuse to support RSS OpenSearch and RSS OpenSearch Filtering.
This time it comes down to MS doing the right thing, and Google intentionally not 'playing nice with others' and by proxy it breaks the abilities of the Live Family Safety features on the strict setting. If Google doesn't want to be excluded, provide freaking intelligent results or results that can be ensured to not have donkey goat porn, which apparently Google can't do or doesn't want to do effectively.
This time it is MS providing the standard web search technology and is the OPEN search engine when it comes to interfacing with all the OPEN standards.