If they're fine with personal use then no problem. Do they expect you to be psychic and know where every link goes? If not, then don't use a work computer. Use a smart phone.
You take your kids to work? Usenet is such a yawnfest for kids today I think you'd have to nail them down to get the to look at it these days. They're probably too busy sexting their friends and looking at stuff that would make your hair curl if you knew about it.
Tim
I fail to see what that has to do with anything.
Lemme see - someone posts a disguised link to g***se (a clone obviously as Christmas Island got pissed off pulled the original) and I'm sitting next to them? Just an example.
People on Facebook manage to add SFW/NSFW so I don't see why USENET should be exempt from such simple netiquette.
Again, this is a big fat tangent and has nothing to do with Adam's post as that was obviously SFW.
I very much know about it - and I deal with what my kids can and cannot access on mobile networks and my own. Regularly... It is a battle, but not one I'm going to lose. I feel sorry for technophobic parents
I guess your kids never go around to their friends' houses? You've probably lost already, you just don't know it yet.
Tim
Looks like a prototype stun gun set to kill.
Difficult, innit? Our lad is 15, and we do all we can to monitor his online usage, but we cannot realistically monitor every web site he visits and everyone he talks to, 24/7. I know that, were I his age now, I would do all I could to prevent my parents monitoring me, probably successfully.
technophobic
You've
+1
What's asking to be opened? A locked door, marked "Do Not Enter - Authorised Personnel Only" or an unlocked door marked "Not a Nice Place"?
We've never restricted access to any of the 'net but we have taken the time to talk to them and explain that there are some nasty things out there (just like the real world) and that just because it's on the 'net or in an email doesn't make it true. They didn't have 'net access in their rooms though, only at a shared computer in a communal space so we could glance over their shoulders. Once one of them got a laptop with WiFi, at about 13/14, the access point was on a time switch and went off at midnight. But that was to try an make sure they went to sleep not browse the web...
Agreed, 5 minutes with google or mates in the playground will have most blocks bypassed.
Well... I can turn DNS logging on for starters and no, my DNS is not bypassable (firewall rule will redirect any attempts).
That leaves 3G which can be dealt with with a parental guardian app.
You mean you redirect everything on port 53? I would not be at all surprised to find a plugin that redirects all browser port 53 traffic to another IP address/port that has a DNS hanging of it. You could look at each packets payload and redirect from that assuming DNS queries are reliably identifiable (positive and negative) from the payload.
On the phone that you know they have, but not their other phone... ;-)
Tim
They can try to redirect as much as they like - my linux router will simply redirect them to its own DNS server (which of course is not redirected).
Definitely. I've tested... The limitation being that you have to use its browser - but it ensures all other browsers are disabled.
Which they are going to buy how exactly?
Good luck bypassing my firewall.
But then, I don't have children. :o)
I suspected after the first one that that might be the punchline. Those things are fine if you fit them the right way around, though, aren't they?
I persuaded my kids that I am quite capable of seeing exactly what they had been doing on the shared computer. (It's true too - I have admin rights, they don't.)
I then never bothered to check. The fact that they believed I could was enough to keep them careful.
Andy
traffic
Why would you have firewall rule to redirect port 43628 (or any other "unused" port) to your DNS? The plugin could negociate with the machine running the remote DNS what random port to use and change it every minute or ten. The only even vaugely reliable way is packet inspection looking for patterns unique (ha!) to DNS queries.
That's true - but it is so far outside of my kid's knowledge, if they did that, I'd give them a hug.
Then worry about packet inspecting firewalls :)
That reminds me, must take a pic and upload of what happens when a 13A fuse (not claiming to conform to BS1362) fails to blow, and turns into an arc lamp.
It came in on a fan heater to a repair event in Reading a month or two back. Fan heater was quite old but a very high quality metal one which you'd never find today. It had a high quality MK plug, but I did instantly notice the live pin was very slightly out of alignment and the plug top had very slight scalding visible.
However, I started by assuming there was a fault in the fan heater, and opened it up to inspect. Couldn't see anything wrong inside or any reason for it to have blown its fuse - as I said, it was much better quality than anything you would find today.
Then turned my attention to the plug. Inside, it initially looked burned around the fuse ends, but on closer inspection, this was mostly vapourised copper. It was only when I popped the fuse out that I noticed you could see right down the centre of the ceramic tube, because the arc had eaten away the fuse wire, before continuing to vapourise the fuse caps into a plasma. It was only at this point the the owner exaplained the arcing was from the plug and not the heater, and it didn't stop until they plucked up the courage to reach nearby and flick off the switch at the socket.
Anyway, the fuse was not to BS1362 or kitemarked - it was probably an old fuse predating mandatory conformance to relevant British Standards which was introduced sometime around 1970. There was no evidence it had ever been sandfilled either (which is there to quickly quench the arc which happens as the wire fuses).
Andrew Gabriel posted
What do electricians actually *do* when they PAT-test an appliance? Is it something that I can't do without special kit?
"In many low-risk environments, a sensible (competent) member of staff can undertake visual inspections if they have enough knowledge and training ... However, when undertaking combined inspection and testing, a greater level of knowledge and experience is needed, and the person will need: the right equipment to do the tests the ability to use this test equipment properly the ability to properly understand the test results"
What equipment? What tests? We do not know. We are not told.
You would know if you did a C&G 2377-22 (IIRC) :)
Basically you need a PAT tester.
I have done "sort of" PAT tests (not officially, just on my own stuff) with a Megger 1552 - it's got enough functionality to perform an insulation and earth continuity test :)
Something that measures insulation and earth continuity. An old fashioned "Megger" would me fine. However expensive boxes that say "Pass" or "fail" are easier to use.
HomeOwnersHub 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.