LockedRecommending Internet Filters to Church Members

52 postsstarted by garylm-p40 52,630 viewsoriginal topic

New Member
#1
The Relief Society president in my old ward once asked me if I would address the sisters on the issue of blocking pornography on home computers during a special meeting. Feeling that I lacked the necessary sensitivity to address the matter, I declined. I suggested that she ask the bishop to address the sisters, and that I would help the bishop if any technical questions came up. This turned out to be the best solution.

At one time I had recommended Net Nanny to friends and neighbors, but after having downloaded an update from their site, and after watching all the filthy names of filtered web pages scroll by as the update was performed, I decided that the filter needed to be outside of my house.

I now recommend to friends and neighbors that the filtering be done at the ISP level. The less you have to think about it, the better off you and your family will be.

Still, I'm not sure how to handle the question if it comes up in a church meeting. Perhaps there's a policy by now, and I think bishops now have a pamphlet to help the members, but how should I respond in Elders Quorum meeting if somebody asks which filter to use?
Member
#2
garylm wrote:The Relief Society president in my old ward once asked me if I would address the sisters on the issue of blocking pornography on home computers during a special meeting. Feeling that I lacked the necessary sensitivity to address the matter, I declined. I suggested that she ask the bishop to address the sisters, and that I would help the bishop if any technical questions came up. This turned out to be the best solution.

At one time I had recommended Net Nanny to friends and neighbors, but after having downloaded an update from their site, and after watching all the filthy names of filtered web pages scroll by as the update was performed, I decided that the filter needed to be outside of my house.

I now recommend to friends and neighbors that the filtering be done at the ISP level. The less you have to think about it, the better off you and your family will be.

Still, I'm not sure how to handle the question if it comes up in a church meeting. Perhaps there's a policy by now, and I think bishops now have a pamphlet to help the members, but how should I respond in Elders Quorum meeting if somebody asks which filter to use?
We have had this question come up and we usually teach the members how to go out and decide for themselves. There are several sites that rate filtering software, like http://internet-filter-review.toptenreviews.com/, which are fairly comprehensive and helpful in making decisions.
Senior Member
#3
bhofmann wrote:We have had this question come up and we usually teach the members how to go out and decide for themselves. There are several sites that rate filtering software, like http://internet-filter-review.toptenreviews.com/, which are fairly comprehensive and helpful in making decisions.
This is the best way to handle it. The Church currently does not endorse any specific product but ask members to do their own research and pick which is best for their situation and circumstances.

Tom
New Member
#4
bhofmann wrote:...decide for themselves
Most people would say they are installing the filter for their children's sake, but assuming that at least five percent of otherwise good dads have a problem, and even a few moms, I would want to recommend a solution that didn't have an override option.

If filtering software is used, maybe mom and dad could each know half of the admin/override password, requiring them to both be present when the configuration is modified.
Member
#5
garylm wrote:Most people would say they are installing the filter for their children's sake, but assuming that at least five percent of otherwise good dads have a problem, and even a few moms, I would want to recommend a solution that didn't have an override option.

If filtering software is used, maybe mom and dad could each know half of the admin/override password, requiring them to both be present when the configuration is modified.
This is true. However, there are many other suggestions for setting up a home environment that encourages righteous behavior. Provident Living has some suggestions here, http://providentliving.org/content/disp ... -1,00.html and here, http://providentliving.org/content/disp ... -1,00.html.

Internet filtering is only one part of the protection.
Community Administrator
#6
garylm wrote:I would want to recommend a solution that didn't have an override option.
The big problem there is that many times the filters work automatically and end up filtering out valid sites about sensitive subjects such as breast cancer, STD, etc.

Personally I think a two-person override is a bit much. Simply keeping a non-erasable one month log of overrides should take care of the issue.

Don't forget that as portable devices become more powerful, the home computer isn't the only means that can be used to access filth.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
Senior Member
#7

Cell phones

RussellHltn wrote:Don't forget that as portable devices become more powerful, the home computer isn't the only means that can be used to access filth.
My daughter has turned one today, and I am already dreading the whole "I want a cell phone" talk for reasons along this line. Perhaps I'm more worried about any sons I may have in the future. I just hope as cell phones are able to access more and more, they make cell phones that parents can administer/control.
#8

There's Hope!

mkmurray wrote:My daughter has turned one today, and I am already dreading the whole "I want a cell phone" talk for reasons along this line. Perhaps I'm more worried about any sons I may have in the future. I just hope as cell phones are able to access more and more, they make cell phones that parents can administer/control.
Happy Birthday to your daughter!

I'm not trying to say that this is the only cell phone provider company that has anything like this, as I'm sure most or all of them do now. I just happen to have Verizon and they do have this feature in place today. By the time your daughter is old enough to have a cell phone, I'm sure the technology will be even more advanced. So, there is hope :) Check with your current cell phone company for any features such as this that they may have. You can also see the incoming calls and outgoing calls on your account online. Even if your child deletes the information on their phone, you can still see it online.

I copied this from their webpage so you could see what they say.
ChaperoneSM

Chaperone lets you easily locate your family members handset from your Verizon Wireless phone or PC - in real time, at any time.

Chaperone with Child ZoneSM lets you define a zone - specific area, such as a school or summer camp. When your family member enters or leaves the zone with their handset, Child Zone will automatically send an alert to your phone with the time and location of your family member's handset.

Subscription and airtime required for use; only in National Enhanced Services Coverage Area; accuracy & completeness of information is not guaranteed; not a child management tool or substitute for adult supervision.

© 2007 Verizon Wireless
Community Administrator
#9
margiestroble wrote:Chaperone with Child ZoneSM
So the kid just leaves the phone in the locker when they skip class. :rolleyes: The one advantage of being older - you were once a teenager too, so you know how they think. :D

I'm all for protecting smaller children, but older ones need to know better. There's a school of thought that says the best way to deal with it is to trust the child and then check up from time to time. Let them learn self-restraint. Otherwise you may be setting up a situation that when they leave home then they become the wild child they could never be.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
Member
#10
tomw wrote:The Church currently does not endorse any specific product but ask members to do their own research and pick which is best for their situation and circumstances.
True, but the church does use a product or system employed in its own filtering for Family History Centers and what not. Is there any way to use this same service or a very close match to it at home? I realize we don't have the Cisco Pix firewall installed at home, but I'm mostly referring to just the same data source as far as which sites should be blocked.

-Jeff
Member
#11
jeffphil wrote:True, but the church does use a product or system employed in its own filtering for Family History Centers and what not. Is there any way to use this same service or a very close match to it at home? I realize we don't have the Cisco Pix firewall installed at home, but I'm mostly referring to just the same data source as far as which sites should be blocked.
Enterprise filtering products are typically very customizable and allow the enterprise to choose what types of sites are allowed and what types of sites are blocked. Just using the same product still does not mean you would have the same filtering in place. Additionally, enterprise applications are not priced for the home user.

No filter is perfect. They either block sites that shouldn't be blocked or they allow sites which you may not want allowed. Filtering products are usually only capable of blocking known bad sites. Unless they are updated very often and have a good mechanism for harvesting and analyzing new sites in a timely manner, they are going to have gaps in their coverage.

Tom
Senior Member
#12
jeffphil wrote:True, but the church does use a product or system employed in its own filtering for Family History Centers and what not. Is there any way to use this same service or a very close match to it at home? I realize we don't have the Cisco Pix firewall installed at home, but I'm mostly referring to just the same data source as far as which sites should be blocked.

-Jeff
I'm not aware of the product that the Church uses but I'm sure it is a commercial corporate system. At one time I thought that at least part of the Church was using a solution from BlueCoat (Cerberian) but I can't verify that. Two my knowledge there are two different methods for blocking available.
  1. Replicated database of blocked sites. This method replicates a database of blocked sites to all machines that are doing the filtering. Much like a virus checking solution that has to have a copy of all virus definitions locally, these machines on a daily basis check with the master database to ensure that they have the latest "block" list. The advantage of this approach is that lookups are fast because they are on the local machine (or network). The disadvantage is that sometimes the DB can get out of sync because of communication or connection problems.
  2. Proxy access to blocked sites. In this approach, the master database of blocked sites is kept at a central location (vendor's location) and each request for a site is first check with the central site before it is allowed to go to the original site. This approach has one big advantage which is that the database does not need to be distributed amoung potentially thousands of machines. The disadvantage is that each request has to "phone home" for permission .. causing a slight delay when going to any particular site.
Tom
Community Administrator
#13
tomw wrote:Two my knowledge there are two different methods for blocking available.
I think #1 is used on machines connected via dial-up. #2 is used by the systems that have a Cisco PIX box - which should be all broadband networks.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
New Member
#14
tomw wrote:Proxy access to blocked sites...causing a slight delay
Doesn't MStar's filtering service employ proxy access to cleared sites, with staff on-hand to pre-browse URL requests that don't yet appear in the database? How long would the delay be if a site did not appear on the cleared or the prohibited list?
Senior Member
#15
I do remember seeing that the Cerberian product was used for FH sites between at least 2002-2004, but they never said if they replaced it with another system or are using a different or in-house system that uses the Blue Coat database only.

Another update on what became of Cerberian: The people that built Cerberian are still around, the only difference really is they are now part of Blue Coat, and they do offer a free filtering application for home PCs that uses the same exact database as its corporate counterpart, that can be downloaded and set up in a couple of minutes.

One of the problems with some filters is you have to download the database, and get updates regularly. That was the case with alot of the earlier ones, some of those are still around in fact. Most of the big corporate solutions now keep the database on their servers and your copy of their filtering software just queries the database when you request a given URL. That makes the filter harder to defeat.

The local library here used one of the first big filtering software packages that hit the market, and that was rendered largely useless right away, they used another, and are now using a third. The last two use the offsite database method of storing URLs, while the first used the database download/update method of keeping updated. That's why it was rendered useless because users could defeat the updating mechanism.
Member
#16

Blocked Sites

garylm wrote:Doesn't MStar's filtering service employ proxy access to cleared sites, with staff on-hand to pre-browse URL requests that don't yet appear in the database? How long would the delay be if a site did not appear on the cleared or the prohibited list?
I have no experience with Mstar so I cannot speak about how they do it. They may be able to do it in a very short period.
Assuming you are using a centrally managed enterprise content filter, it would depend on the approach that is taken. A company can choose to either block or allow uncategorized sites. If they allow them, then there is always risk that a new uncategorized site will contain objectionable content. If they choose to block uncategorized sites then the site will be blocked until someone reviews the request to allow the site.
Community Administrator
#17
When the church first started Internet access they did use MStar. Since then I think there's been a parting of the ways.


On another note, I aways have to smile when I see the main forum page and see the most current topic for this section is "Recommending Pronogorphy..." I guess I just have a warped sense of humor. :D
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
Member
#18
RussellHltn wrote: On another note, I aways have to smile when I see the main forum page and see the most current topic for this section is "Recommending Pronogorphy..." I guess I just have a warped sense of humor. :D
Yeah, it is an unfortunate title. Ironically, it is one that would potentially be blocked by a content filter. Any chance an admin could change this to Internet Filtering Software?
Senior Member
#19
lakeytw wrote:Yeah, it is an unfortunate title. Ironically, it is one that would potentially be blocked by a content filter. Any chance an admin could change this to Internet Filtering Software?
The title was changed on the post but the thread (which keeps a separate title) is harder to change. I'll see if I can dig into the DB to change it.

Tom
#20

One decent solution

I have used many different 'solutions' in an attempt to filter internet for my home. By far the most effective is what I now use:

Built from an old machine, make sure it has two network cards, and a working hard drive, cd-rom, and video (very basic video card)-
  1. install SME Server linux os - this will boot from the cd and configure your system as it is installed. One network card will be for incoming access (i.e. from your cable modem/dsl modem/whatever), the other 'serves' the connection to your home after filtering.
  2. install Dansguardian, squid internet access monitor, and sarg reporting package
  3. use a router/switch to connect from your SME machine's 'out' network card with enough ports for your computers (or a wireless router)
  4. create accounts on the SME server for all your home users.
The results of the above configuration provide-
  • login requirement for all internet access
  • restriction of access as per your Dansguardian/Squid configuration (can even be by 'group'... some with very strict restrictions, others not)
  • logging of ALL access BY USER
  • administration of all of this or more
I set these up for others as well, but I have been impressed enough with it's effectiveness (compared to client software) that I thought I would mention it for those who would be knowledgeable enough/bold enough to try to set one up themselves.:) An old machine, a couple network cards, several hours of configuration and you have a home network filtering solution.

Craig Jensen
Member
#21

Log Log Log

I would think that good logs would be the most useful way to monitor family internet usage. Blocking software is imperfect. If I have logs for machines, I can tell if someone was trying to view something inappropriate, or if they managed to get around the blocking software.

Public logs let people know that they are responsible and accountable for their usage.

I am more concerned about IM and email traffic for my own (future) children. I can block them from certain web sites, but if I couldn't live without IM, and I don't know how to filter it.

Does anyone know of a proxy / firewall / logger app that does webmail and IM as well as squid? It would be best if it worked on a WRT54G, but I could set up another firewall if I needed to.

Thanks
Barrie
New Member
#22

Internet filter

Hi everybody, i was looking over the church sites on internet about the internet filters, but i have'nt found, then i found this forum, i'm from venezuela, my english it's not so good, but i want to share with you a solution, i found a site that have a free internet filter, i think it's good, i haven´t tested yet, because i don't have internet on my home, and i did download it from my work, this saturday i'm going to test it in my mother's house, anyway i let you all the site and if you test it before of me let me know how functionally is, sorry for my terrible english, my language is Spanish, see you, and take care

http://www.radiance.m6.net/
Community Moderators
#23
The church highly recommends getting internet filters for the computers and placing content filters on media sources. Now the church doesn't suggest any certian filter for obvious reasons but there are many free filters out there for general usage. Also if the bill that places any inappropriate content on a different port (I think 3200 was the suggested one but I would need to look into that) then port 80 you can use your router's port filter to block that port and you have a effective filter. Also mentioned before are logs to track what family members are going to. I have a server which monitors network traffic and logs information like that.
- David
Member
#24
Hmmmm. I went online about 15 years ago so I could do genealogy. Since then, I've learned to use the internet for many good and useful purposes. For a period of several years early on, porn would show up on my computer inexplicably. I talked to others doing genealogy and found that they did NOT have the same problem. I changed ISPs to one that was supposed to help, but it did no good. When I moved to another state and another ISP, the problem followed me.

I figured out that I was receiving email that automatically opened porn sites. It was not appearing uninivited--when I found my computer history (on accident--I didn't know it had one! <g>) one day, I figured out who brought that into my home. It took a good five years after that person left my home before most of the filth stopped. Now I still get the oddball "harmless" email, but it is regularly quarrantined by my ISP. The best spam filter that I have used over the years is available to ISP vendors, not to individuals. Postini stopped me from receiving a lot of bad email. The key for me was removing the person seeking porn from my home. Software & ISPs hampered, but did not greatly interfere, with his pasttime.

As for filtering software, it needs to be adjusted. Two examples: 1) As my oldest children are daughters, I frequently received email regarding my "girls". 2) Upon the birth of one child, I sent out an email announcing her arrival. Because I forgot to tell everyone it was a girl, I got a truckload of email asking me the sex of my newborn. (Remember, we're talking fellow genealogists here, & the top genealogy program of the time used the term "sex", rather than "gender".) I was too exhausted to realize that I got no email responses to my announcement. Then the phone started ringing because I did not respond to the follow-up question. They got censored from my view, due to my own chosen, but naive, filter settings! LOL!

(Disclaimer: I have no affiliation with Postini. It just did the job I desperately needed accomplished.)
Community Administrator
#25
scion wrote:For a period of several years early on, porn would show up on my computer inexplicably. ... I figured out that I was receiving email that automatically opened porn sites.
For anyone else with a similar problem, the description sounds a lot like Ad-ware that has surreptitiously install itself. (Frequently called spyware or malware) Porn sites aren't the only places that one can go to have that happen. It doesn't take much more then mis-typing a popular destination.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
Member
#26

Experience with NetNanny, CyberSitter

bhofmann wrote:We have had this question come up and we usually teach the members how to go out and decide for themselves. There are several sites that rate filtering software, like http://internet-filter-review.toptenreviews.com/, which are fairly comprehensive and helpful in making decisions.

I wouldn't consider having a computer without some sort of Internet Filtering program - even after all our kids leave the nest in a few years. I've used both CyberSitter and ContentWatch (now called NetNanny), and had a number of problems with CyberSitter corrupting images on download, blocking too much, etc, and switched to NetNanny/ContentWatch about two years ago.

I am very happy with NetNanny. They were bought out by ContentWatch a few months ago, which (as far as I can tell) basically just bought them for their name and customers - it appears to be ContentWatch rebranded. Someone mentioned that you could see the names of objectionable sites being downloaded with the old NetNanny - no longer true.

NetNanny stores all configuration information on-line, which is nice - if you have multiple PCs, they all share the same profile, so any changes get replicated to all PCs. Here are some of the features that I really like:
- accurate filtering of websites.
- you can set up a shared password for overriding a fliter block. When an override is made, an email is sent to me. I've told my entire family what the override password is, along with an explanation that I'll get an email whenever they use it. That's a great system.
- previously overrided sites are stored in a list, and then you can permanently okay frequently overrided sites.
- you can tell it to not filter certain programs, such as your kids' online games, outlook, and so on. (I made the stupid mistake of telling it to not filter IE, which defeats the entire purpose of having the filter!)
- it only impacts performance a little - less than CyberSitter.
- you can turn off internet access during certain periods. The kids can still override this with the shared password, but they know I'm getting an email, and it serves as a gentle reminder to go to bed. If the kids are staying up late to get homework done, they can still do it.

One problem that I think all Internet Filters have - they are incompatible with VPN software - or at least the software we use at work. This means that I can't install VPN on my home computers. Not that big a deal any more as my work issued me a laptop. As I understand it, both try to replace one or more DLLs used in TCP/IP, so they step on each other's toes. I've heard of web based VPN, and maybe that works differently.
Community Administrator
#27
bcpalmer60 wrote:I wouldn't consider having a computer without some sort of Internet Filtering program - even after all our kids leave the nest in a few years.
Can I ask why? From a technical standpoint, I don't see how that enhances security.

If it's a self-control or temptation issue, then that's a different matter. If it's the latter, then that's OK. I'm more curious about the technical and security issue.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
Member
#28
RussellHltn wrote:For anyone else with a similar problem, the description sounds a lot like Ad-ware that has surreptitiously install itself. (Frequently called spyware or malware) Porn sites aren't the only places that one can go to have that happen. It doesn't take much more then mis-typing a popular destination.
I don't know how Ad-ware gets started. In my case, it was a family member seeking, finding, and visiting sites (that should not have been visited) on purpose. I do recall searching for seeming innocent topics (horses, shots--i.e. polio, measles, etc.) and having hits on bizarre obscene sites. Those innappropriate sites have not come up as hits since about 3-5 years after the offending party left my home. My children and I use the internet daily, too. Remember when parents use to say, "Go look it up in the dictionary."? Well, I say, "Let's look that up online." We don't have those hits that I wouldn't want my family to see. Maybe it has to do with changes in search engines & some self-monitoring by companies involved? I'm not going to test it to find out! <g>
Community Administrator
#29
scion wrote:I don't know how Ad-ware gets started. In my case, it was a family member seeking, finding, and visiting sites (that should not have been visited) on purpose.
That's certainly a good way to get it started. But do you think that family member deliberately clicked on a message asking them to install an application that would pop-up ads? Probably not. It may have been an ad saying "your computer is infected - click here to clean". Or it may have simply silently installed itself though one of the browser's venerabilities much like a tick attaches itself to a passing dog.

While visiting porn sites is a factor, simply because you don't visit them doesn't mean you are immune to further problems.

In fact, I'd suggest the nature of malware has changed. While before it was intended to get more ads in your face, they've shifted to using your computer silently in the background to hide illegal activity or to secretly steal your information. In other words, before an infected PC was obvious by it's actions. Today, it tends to be much more subtle about it's actions. Because the longer it takes you to notice, the longer they have use of your computer.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
Community Moderators
#30
One's choice of operating system, web browser, and email client can have considerable impact on vulnerability to ad-ware and other bad content.

Operating system: It is important that an operating system be designed from the ground up to have a clear and hard distinction between system and user functions. With a system that properly enforces the user vs. system line, and with proper setup of individual user accounts, you can't have one non-supervisor user installing something that adversely impacts other users or actual system functions. In the interest of trying to avoid starting an OS war, I'll leave it there and not mention names.

Web browser: A web browser should incorporate popup blocking and selective image blocking as standard features. A couple of years ago, people in my ward were talking in fifth-Sunday meetings about popup storms taking over their machine, popping up bad images faster than they could close them. I responded that if they were having that problem, they were using the wrong web browser. The browser I use takes security very seriously, is available free of charge for many different operating systems, and is even open source. (I modify the source to fix a bug that is important to me but is too minor for most people for the fix to be put in the main code base.) There are many extensions available, including one that blocks Flash content until I click on the clearly marked block on screen.

Email client: An email client should never automatically download images or execute any form of program received in an email message. With a graphical email client, it is important to disable automatic loading of preview or thumbnail images. Any automatic image downloading makes it trivial for a spammer to verify your email address as 'live'. My personal preference is the decades-old /bin/mail text-only email program. While that program is probably too primitive for many to tolerate, it does make it trivial to find out exactly where the 'Click here' link would take a victim of a phishing message that claims to be from a bank, electronic payment site, or auction site.

Another good practice is a personal page of links to favorite sites, and to have that page show up as your default 'home page'. Otherwise, it's easy to go to a bad site by having the fingers of one hand slightly off the home-row target. (Did that once.)
Community Moderators
#31
RussellHltn wrote:Can I ask why? From a technical standpoint, I don't see how that enhances security.

If it's a self-control or temptation issue, then that's a different matter. If it's the latter, then that's OK. I'm more curious about the technical and security issue.

A filter could prevent downloading of adware, for example my parents use the MSN Explorer and MSN's filter at the strictest level which prevents any ad from being displayed and also prevents any execution of javascript that hasn't been previously marked as safe by the superuser. So besides the overhead of approving sites and approving requests for sites to be added to the list it is quite nice. Aslo as mentioned before it does prevent execution of those security holes.
- David
Community Moderators
#32
rmrichesjr wrote:Operating system: It is important that an operating system be designed from the ground up to have a clear and hard distinction between system and user functions. With a system that properly enforces the user vs. system line, and with proper setup of individual user accounts, you can't have one non-supervisor user installing something that adversely impacts other users or actual system functions. In the interest of trying to avoid starting an OS war, I'll leave it there and not mention names.

Good point any normal user should be a user with limited privileges (ie Not an Admin for Windows or someone with root privileges for Mac and Linux) One way I do this in my family is have a server box that stores everyone's accounts and their privileges in a central location. That way I don't have to set up each computer individually.
rmrichesjr wrote:Web browser: A web browser should incorporate popup blocking and selective image blocking as standard features. A couple of years ago, people in my ward were talking in fifth-Sunday meetings about popup storms taking over their machine, popping up bad images faster than they could close them. I responded that if they were having that problem, they were using the wrong web browser. The browser I use takes security very seriously, is available free of charge for many different operating systems, and is even open source. (I modify the source to fix a bug that is important to me but is too minor for most people for the fix to be put in the main code base.) There are many extensions available, including one that blocks Flash content until I click on the clearly marked block on screen.

Also the browser should have some type of phishing detection to prevent those accidental misspellings that lead to a phished website. It should also warn you of security certificate problems.
Also a web browser should have the ability to view a list of the javascript code errors on a page. (This is more for developing but could be used to see if the site is trying to exploit browser flaws)
rmrichesjr wrote:Email client: An email client should never automatically download images or execute any form of program received in an email message. With a graphical email client, it is important to disable automatic loading of preview or thumbnail images. Any automatic image downloading makes it trivial for a spammer to verify your email address as 'live'. My personal preference is the decades-old /bin/mail text-only email program. While that program is probably too primitive for many to tolerate, it does make it trivial to find out exactly where the 'Click here' link would take a victim of a phishing message that claims to be from a bank, electronic payment site, or auction site.

Good point, most GUI mail programs do that now so make sure you have the latest versions.
rmrichesjr wrote:Another good practice is a personal page of links to favorite sites, and to have that page show up as your default 'home page'. Otherwise, it's easy to go to a bad site by having the fingers of one hand slightly off the home-row target. (Did that once.)

Or just have your list of favorites to the left of the browser for quick clicking.
- David
Member
#33
RussellHltn wrote:Can I ask why? From a technical standpoint, I don't see how that enhances security.

If it's a self-control or temptation issue, then that's a different matter. If it's the latter, then that's OK. I'm more curious about the technical and security issue.





Sure - thanks for asking! Because the Brethren have asked us to! This is a quote from the Church's pornography addiction booklet, "Let Virtue Garnish Thy Thoughts" (see http://www.lds.org/topics/pdf/LetVirtue ... oughts.pdf) [INDENT][align=left]"Those who promote pornography are aggressive in their search for new users, especially on the Internet. They frequently employ deceptive practices. You may sometimes encounter pornographic materials unintentionally. If that happens to you, get away from it immediately. Resist this darkness."[/align]
[/INDENT]



Also found on LDS.org are 10 ways to combat pornography in the home. Here are the first two:[INDENT]
  1. Place computers in high-traffic areas of the home. Kitchens, family rooms, and studies usually have the most traffic. Because these rooms usually don’t have doors, they are typically less secluded than bedrooms. Position computer monitors so the screen faces out for public view.
  2. Install a filtering program, and learn its features and how to use it. Good filtering programs allow you to view a history of which sites (including chat rooms) have been visited and when, as well as a record of incoming and outgoing e-mails. Information on filtering programs can be found on Internet sites such as www.internetfilterreview.com.
(see http://www.providentliving.org/content/ ... -1,00.html and http://lds.org/portal/site/LDSOrg/menui ... 004d82620a____)
[/INDENT]
I currently serve as a counselor in a mission presidency, and my wife is as chaste as they come. Nevertheless, experience has shown that purveyors of pornography are indeed clever, and it is easy to stumble onto undesirable sites. An internet filter helps tremendously - it's well worth the $40 per year.
Member
#34
bcpalmer60 wrote:experience has shown that purveyors of pornography are indeed clever, and it is easy to stumble onto undesirable sites. An internet filter helps tremendously - it's well worth the $40 per year.
I agree. Here is an article about the tricks they play, http://internet-filter-review.toptenrev ... -play.html. It is on a site that reviews internet filters. Not all filters are reviewed but most of the big ones are.
Community Administrator
#35
bcpalmer60 wrote:Because the Brethren have asked us to! This is a quote from the Church's pornography addiction booklet, "Let Virtue Garnish Thy Thoughts" (see http://www.lds.org/topics/pdf/LetVirtue ... oughts.pdf)
Sorry, I don't see the quote (or the pamphlet) backing the statement that "we have been asked". Nothing wrong with doing so. :cool: But I also stay alert for "commandment creep" because that's what happened to Pharisees and Sadducees and I don't think human nature has changed that much since then.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
Community Moderators
#36
bhofmann wrote:I agree. Here is an article about the tricks they play, http://internet-filter-review.toptenrev ... -play.html. It is on a site that reviews internet filters. Not all filters are reviewed but most of the big ones are.
There's a lot of interesting stuff on that page. The bad guys are definitely resourceful in their evil efforts.

At the risk of being a bit repetitive and possibly politically incorrect, I feel it is important to mention that one of the more effective filtering programs isn't even called a "filtering program" and is a combination of a secure operating system, a secure browser, and a secure email client. With a properly administered secure operating system and secure browser, and with a little user education, most of the threats described in the article (looping/spawning, mousetrapping, startup file alteration, many/most trojan horses, spyware, dialers, email spoofing/phishing) don't have much of a chance. Risk of bad stuff of any kind on a computer is drastically reduced just by using an operating system that has zero known viruses in the wild. Those using an operating system that is likely to be cracked before it can even download the first set of security patches are starting out several steps behind the bad guys. If anyone in my ward or elsewhere wants my help to make their home safer by switching to secure software, I'm eager to help.
New Member
#37
RussellHltn wrote:
bcpalmer wrote:
I wouldn't consider having a computer without some sort of Internet Filtering program - even after all our kids leave the nest in a few years.
Can I ask why? From a technical standpoint, I don't see how that enhances security.

If it's a self-control or temptation issue, then that's a different matter. If it's the latter, then that's OK. I'm more curious about the technical and security issue.
I would remove the "if" from the statement above about self-control/temptation. We can probably assume that a good percentage of the adult members with whom we associate is currently entangled. We can probably assume that some folks in this forum are entangled. You could tell these good folks that all they need to do is practice self-control. But I tell you that the proper use of an Internet filter IS self control, just as is the proper use of technology in other aspects of our lives.

We can point fingers at people whom we think lack self-control, or we can all install filters, forget that smut exists, and move on with our lives.

</snark>
Member
#38

Internet Filter Review 2007

bhofmann wrote:We have had this question come up and we usually teach the members how to go out and decide for themselves. There are several sites that rate filtering software, like http://internet-filter-review.toptenreviews.com/, which are fairly comprehensive and helpful in making decisions.

As having been one of the first volunteers on the project with http://internet-filter-review.toptenreviews.com/ , I can state that they very thoroughly test each of their listed filter programs and rate them appropriately. Many of the filter companies listed have sent them copies of the software in hopes that they would test it and rate it for their potential customers. The testing and rating is fully subjective to that software's performance.
-- Learn from the past. Prepare for the future. Live in the present. -- President Thomas S. Monson
Community Administrator
#39
garylm wrote:But I tell you that the proper use of an Internet filter IS self control, just as is the proper use of technology in other aspects of our lives.
Sorry, I didn't mean to come across as belittling anyone who chooses to use Internet filters. I only wanted to distinguish between human security issues from technical security issues. When someone says "x" will make you more secure, I want to know why. Part of it is to learn and part of it is to expose any falsehoods.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
New Member
#40
rmrichesjr wrote:If anyone in my ward or elsewhere wants my help to make their home safer by switching to secure software, I'm eager to help.
Perhaps we can cook up a solution here for an inexpensive home server, with a recommended hardware list, Kickstart installer, and how-to guide.

Some smarty-pants will read this and tell us not to waste our time, that his company will be coming out with a "Mormon ITX" box this fall.
New Member
#41
RussellHltn wrote:Sorry
I'm sorry too. I re-read the post that you referred to, and it pegged my snarky meter. So I nuked it.
Senior Member
#42
Let me just warn everyone here that this discussion is beginning to wander from the purpose of these forums. We are not here to persuade anyone for or against internet filters, internet browsers, operating systems, etc.

I think it best to leave this discussion where it is at, and agree that we've all shared some opinions and all been edified by the discussion. Thanks.
Community Moderators
#43
In keeping with Mike's suggestion. I have created a new thread to talk about possible server specs for protecting and filtering. It is in [thread=515]Server Specs[/thread].
- David
Community Moderators
#44
garylm wrote:Perhaps we can cook up a solution here for an inexpensive home server, with a recommended hardware list, Kickstart installer, and how-to guide.

Some smarty-pants will read this and tell us not to waste our time, that his company will be coming out with a "Mormon ITX" box this fall.
I hadn't been thinking about a separate ITX "server" box, just encouraging people to install a more secure browser and/or OS on their present hardware. An ITX "server" box does sound like an interesting idea, though.

If you're serious about that idea, maybe we should start a separate thread. The first step would be to define scope and requirements. I kind-of suspect requirements will end up varying so drastically that a single solution will be unworkable. A few issues that come to mind are server as router vs. separate router, server as web proxy vs. something else, server as NFS and/or Samba server or not, TV tuner to act as DVR vs. not, print server vs. not, etc.
Member
#45

We have been asked...

RussellHltn wrote:Sorry, I don't see the quote (or the pamphlet) backing the statement that "we have been asked". Nothing wrong with doing so. :cool: But I also stay alert for "commandment creep" because that's what happened to Pharisees and Sadducees and I don't think human nature has changed that much since then.

I agree with RussellHltn that we need to be on the watch for 'commandment creep'. We are also not to be commanded in all things. I also agree with the moderator that we need to tone down this discussion - I too appreciate the discussion that resulted!

I realize that I didn't give sufficient quotes for "we have been asked", so share these quotes from recent Conference talks:

Dallin H. Oaks, “Pornography,” Ensign, May 2005, 87
“We must also act to protect those we love. Parents install alarms to warn if their household is threatened by smoke or carbon monoxide. We should also install protections against spiritual threats, protections like filters on Internet connections and locating access so others can see what is being viewed. And we should build the spiritual strength of our families by loving relationships, family prayer, and scripture study.”

M. Russell Ballard, “Let Our Voices Be Heard,” Ensign, Nov 2003, 16
“5. We need to use Internet filters and TV programming locks to prevent our children from “chancing upon” things they should not see.
6. We need to have TVs and computers in a much-used common room in the home, not in a bedroom or a private place.”


Some might read these quotes and decide that it only applies to those who have children, and they might be right. Others will see in them only suggestions. I personally want to install filtering to protect even just my wife and I.
Community Administrator
#46
bcpalmer60 wrote: Dallin H. Oaks, “Pornography,” Ensign, May 2005, 87

M. Russell Ballard, “Let Our Voices Be Heard,” Ensign, Nov 2003, 16
Request for citation satisfied. :)
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
#47
This is a FREE way to block by category at the DNS level. Check out http://www.opendns.com
"What have I done for someone today?" Thomas Monson
New Member
#48

Comprehensive Content Filtering Solution

This is a copy of a letter sent to Joel Dehlin, Chief Information Officer for the Church:

[font=&quot]I work it IT/Dept of Natural Resources for the State of Utah. I realize the following letter is a bit long, but I think/hope you’ll find it worthwhile.[/font]

[font=&quot]For many years, I have had a project burning in me that I am determined to make a reality, even if it takes me 30 years (which it just might). My prayer is that the Lord is already inspiring the brethren to take action on this problem. My vision is that of a comprehensive open-source content filtering program (hopefully spear-headed by the church). I have invested a great deal of thought, prayer and research into this project and will try to explain why no existing product or single-approach solution is or will/be sufficient to protect the saints from the pornography plague (anticipated and planned by god, mind you, for specific reasons) that is upon our youth and adults alike.[/font]


[font=&quot]In the end, the answer to the pornography problem needs to be the same as has been for every addictive and dangerous substance and behavior; a religiously educated (righteous) population, combined with effective and righteous government regulation. It has been these two factors which have made America one of the healthiest and most productive nations on earth for at least the last 70 years. Yet I believe the erosion of those two criteria are setting the stage for the decline and fall of our great nation. I sadly believe (and I hope I'm wrong on this one), that the American populace has been sexually numbed to a point that internet pornography will never be effectively regulated, (because of the new “sexual free-speech” argument), despite the fact that (more righteous) previous generations fairly-effectively regulated other potentially harmful media in the past such as magazine sales, television, cable, and cinema (compared to many other countries, at least). America’s watchmen have let down their guard and it is now everyman for himself. [/font]

[font=&quot]Internet saturation in the United States is in many regions as high as 90%, however in many third world countries it is lower than 5%, and I believe the Lord will inspire (if not the Church, some other organization) so that the Saints in emerging third world countries populated largely by the House of Israel may avoid the “devastating scourge” which will accompany this spiritual plague enveloping developed nations (see D&C 45:31).[/font]

[font=&quot]I think an acquaintance of mine serving as a missionary president in Arizona a few years ago summed up what the Spirit’s been whispering to me, in a letter to us:[/font]
[INDENT] “Pornography has again reared its ugly head with one of our missionaries. I supported the change in allowing missionaries to email when it was changed last year. Now, I wish the Church would ban it again. Porn causes more problems than nearly all other forms of disobedience. It is so degrading to the missionaries and it destroys their spirituality for weeks at a time. It takes up huge hunks of our interview time and threatens the relationships I have with some of the offenders. They are so embarrassed by their weakness they lose their ability to make effective goals and they're often too embarrassed to discuss it with me after the third or fourth failure. I'm convinced it is THE plague that will and is sweeping the earth prior to the Second Coming. Nothing approaches its insidious nature and pervasive appeal to men and women of all ages. The failure rate is so high among young men I believe it threatens the entire missionary effort of the Church. We need effective prevention and treatment mechanisms and we need to start with the 8-11 year olds. I'm afraid 12 is way too late.”
[/INDENT] [font=&quot]An effective solution is presently obtainable, and although we cannot control the government’s decision to regulate, I believe the Church can be a Noah’s Ark on this one. I sincerely hope you might put some thought and prayer into this, and contact me if you don’t capture the vision of this needed multi-tiered content filtering solution.[/font]



[font=&quot]In order to be effective the project must meet the following guidelines.[/font]

[font=&quot]1- It must be just one part of a larger overall solution which includes prevention, protection and rehabilitation. [/font]
[font=&quot]2- It must utilize both static and dynamic filtering technologies[/font]
[font=&quot]3- It must be open-source and/or sponsored and supported by a large user-community. [/font]
[font=&quot]4- It must be designed/available and/or integrated into all four internet/network interface levels.[/font]
[font=&quot]5- It must be sponsored and pushed by the church and/or similar influential organizations. [/font]

[font=&quot]Let me detail the above outline:[/font]

[font=&quot]1- It must be just one part of a larger overall solution which includes prevention, protection and rehabilitation. [/font]

[font=&quot]The overall solution to pornography, like any addictive or socially damaging substance, includes prevention, protection, and rehabilitation. The example is often used- "the warning signs at the top of the cliff, the safety railing at the edge of the cliff, and the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff". This software solution deals exclusively with the "protection" (or protective railing) aspect of this equation, and is THE only part of the overall solution that the church has not yet heavily invested in. (Teaching/warning members of the danger before exposure, protecting them from exposure with filtering software, and rehabilitating them with bishops, Family Services and Addiction Recovery Programs after exposure.)[/font]

[font=&quot]2- It must utilize both static and dynamic filtering technologies[/font]

[font=&quot]As one who has done a great deal of research and testing of content filters, it is obvious that they all have their strengths and weakness. Neither solution alone is adequate. Because so many new websites are being created daily, a dynamic filtering service is the only way to address new and growing threats. On the other hand, dynamic filtering technologies are notorious at over-blocking, and cause enough nuisance to the user experience that many do not want to use them. Additionally, dynamic technologies cannot block objectionable sites which contain no searchable text or utilize flash player text cloaking and the like. To avoid these problems, a combination of dynamic with static filtering technology must be used, where each site after dynamic scanning is also checked against a categorized database of websites.[/font]

[font=&quot]3- It must be open-source and/or sponsored and supported by a large user community. [/font]

[font=&quot]There are two reasons why the project must be open-source and sponsored by a large community. First of all, the web-site category database will always be greatly lacking, unless a large user community can (and are urged to) constantly "submit" new and corrected categories for emerging and miscategorized websites. Secondly, one of the biggest deterrents for individuals using content filtering products is cost. From both personal and professional experience, it is obvious that this factor will always keep the number of people protected, relatively low. Also, by making the solution open-source, one draws on the time and expertise of a large community of volunteers to help innovate and develop the product. It also provides a robust code-base for filtering companies to improve upon as they develop even better filter solutions. And most importantly it will provide a comprehensive, open website categorization database, for companies, governments, and organizations to share, copy and improve upon for their own purposes.[/font]

[font=&quot]4- It must be designed/available at all four internet interface levels.[/font]

[font=&quot]These four levels are the WAN interface (ISP/Large Network filtering), the LAN interface (modems & router filtering), the Client (PC filtering programs), the Browser (client and mobile browser filtering). No one solution is adequate for every (or even the majority of) situations. WAN interface filtering appliances are by far the most effective, but users are at the mercy of their ISP or network administrator for solutions, and children’s' phones and laptops used at hot-spots are unprotected. LAN interface solutions are the next best solution, since many households have too many devises for client protection alone or have internet access through other devices like a Play-Station or Wii. Client programs are the only viable solution to protect laptops being used at hot-spots, but are easily circumvented with use of devise bootable operating systems and the like. However, for a family needing only a means to prevent accidental pornographic exposure, they are more than adequate and far better than nothing. Browser plug-ins can be integrated to offer easy user-interface tools to submit categorizations and can be used by those wishing to protect a machine they do not have privileges to install software on. It is also the best solution for many personal mobile devises.[/font]

[font=&quot]5- It must be sponsored and pushed by the church or similar influential organizations. [/font]

[font=&quot]In order to achieve the level of user-saturation needed to preserve the moral fabric of the saints and (at least) the intermountain area of the United States, the project must be actively pushed by the church or some influential organization. Without this, the divine decree to protect the rising generation from the next stage of moral decline and sexual permissiveness (which has already begun in our nation), will never be able to be fully accomplished. Parents need to be constantly reminded that having an unprotected internet connection in your home is similar to bringing printed pornography into your home and then telling your children just “not to look”. Would any good parent subscribe to the Play Boy channel on their cable TV? Most parents simply do not realize that an unprotected internet connection is no different. Parents need to be educated from a trusted source on the dangers and the available solutions. And most importantly, they must have these at little to no cost, or the ones who may need and even want it most may not be able to get it.[/font]


[font=&quot]I suggest the best way to begin would be with the purchase of an existing company (or at least their source code) which specializes in a few of the needed tiers. And then develop the resources needed to follow the lead of other companies who have implemented other pieces of the needed full solution. In reality companies such as ContentProtect (based here in Salt Lake City) would provide a more than ample launch pad, but simply do not have the capitol, resources or motivation to implement the needed full solution.[/font]
[font=&quot]
Various companies and organizations have utilized individual aspects of this needed solution, but none have or can present the comprehensive solution. Some examples include applications used by national firewalls such as those used by China, S. Korea, Saudi Arabia, etc. User communities such as those created by OpenDNS.org, etc. Software companies such as Content-Protect, 8e6 Technologies, Secure Computing, Blue Coat, etc. Open-source projects (which already form the code-base for many of these products) such as Dan’s Guardian, Squid Guard, Squid-Cache, etc. And finally, a bit of political lobbying to governments for a long term solutions such as done by cp80.org, etc. However, most, if not all, of these organizations specialize mainly in targeting things other than pornography, such as spam, viruses, anti-government information, phishing schemes, etc. The fact is, that all of the large companies involved are largely marketing to an already sexually desensitized consumer base. And the ones which target pornography exclusively (as mentioned above) simply do not have the capitol, resources or motivation to implement the needed full solution. Other than the Lord’s Church, I don’t know of any other organization on earth (except for the countries of China, Saudi Arabia, etc.) capable and willing to build this Ark. It is my prayer that you might give my idea some meditation, and pray about whether such a solution might worthy of suggesting to those over you. I truly believe the brethren are deeply concerned about this issue and hungry for tech-savvy individuals to help offer solutions. I can’t tell you the forcefulness of the spiritual experiences which have shown me the different aspects of the needed solution and prompted me to write this letter.[/font]
Community Administrator
#49
Frankly, I think the best option would be for it to be headed by an anti-pornography group (perhaps one the church belongs to) rather then headed by the church itself.

If it was headed by the Church, it would likely be shunned by non-members. If headed by an anti-pornography group, it would enjoy wider use and support then the church members alone could give it.

It would also give members a chance to work with others who share our values rather then be "inward looking".
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
Member
#50
I would not trust any Internet filter regardless of what organization it came from or how extensive it claimed to be.

In my home, ALL websites will be blocked. My kids will need to come to me for each website they need to access and I will either approve or disapprove it. Trusting anyone else other than yourself to filter the Internet is, in my humble opinion, a mistake.

Brad O.
Senior Member
#51
There are some people who work in the IT business who are working with WANs, WAN optimization, etc., as the letter proposes already, maybe it's not open source, but Blue Coat Systems does take into account the dynamic nature of the Internet. They offer the K9 Web Filter for free, and while I would otherwise say beware of freebies, because someone at BYU said most of the time web filters offered for free don't work at all, this one does, I have not hit one bad site inadvertently because of it, it is that good. A white paper on the company website shows proof of concept on that.

So it can be done, and yes, the antipornography groups should take up the baton on this one. The Church has way too many other fish to fry to be involved with it, other than teaching that pornography is harmful and wrong. And the industry has been working with antipornography groups as well. Also, many filtering software companies are adding antispyware, antiphishing protection, etc., to their list of features.
New Member
#52

RE: Responses

To RussellHltn:
Frankly, I think the best option would be for it to be headed by an anti-pornography group (perhaps one the church belongs to) rather then headed by the church itself.
A popular way to go is for the funding corporation to run a non-profit organization which manages the open-source project. Such as Sun Microsystem's funding and managing of the OpenOffice suite. Without a large organization to fund the project however, I highly doubt an effective project will ever be able to be implemented.
If it was headed by the Church, it would likely be shunned by non-members.
I'd have to disagree here... It would only be shunned by people with qualms against the church (or people suspicious of the church). On the contrary, I think it would be an incredible missionary tool. If the seventh day adventist church or what not ran a project like this, I would give them serious respect for their priorities and efforts, and I think most good hearted people would do the same. But there will always be nay-sayers.

Brad O.
In my home, ALL websites will be blocked.
This is a option in all good software filtering programs, and would certainly be an option in this comprehensive solution as well. It is a good way to go in some homes, but just inst practical in many other instances. But remember this inst a comprehensive answer either...

JamesAnderson
and yes, the antipornography groups should take up the baton on this one.
James, I've been waiting for that to happen for nearly 10 years and I'll wait for another 20... I'm afraid its not going to happen. Keep living the pipe dream. I hope it comes true. No anti-pornography group has the 10-40 million needed to create the comprehensive solution that will work. Which already is considerable cheaper than what the Catholic church has spent in law-suit against sexual misconduct allegations of their clergy. The Church has also spent several million in this category, and the problem is not going to go away as long as millions of homes have pornographic "magazines" sitting behind the monitors of their home computers.

In the end whats going to happen... is God's will. And I'm patiently waiting to see what that is.