<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Internet in the Home</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/</link>
	<description>Chief Information Officer for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 02:09:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Cable &#124; LDS Media Talk</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/comment-page-2/#comment-2105</link>
		<dc:creator>Cable &#124; LDS Media Talk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Aug 2008 05:22:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/#comment-2105</guid>
		<description>[...] on the Internet is a blight. In this post I asked for feedback on what people are doing in their homes to educate and protect. The [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] on the Internet is a blight. In this post I asked for feedback on what people are doing in their homes to educate and protect. The [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: somebody</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/comment-page-2/#comment-1738</link>
		<dc:creator>somebody</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Feb 2008 12:00:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/#comment-1738</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m surprised so little has been said about covenant eyes.
I&#039;ve had serious problems with porn for a long time, and am quite technically inclined too. I can&#039;t hack in to OSX&#039;s internals, so perhaps I&#039;m not as savvy as others, but for me Covenant Eyes has been a spiritual life-saver. Every single bit of incoming traffic seems to be monitored and recorded. While it doesn&#039;t block anything, the fact that my accountability partners will see my log is enough to motivate me to stay away from anything questionable.

My biggest problem now is my mobile phone, with it&#039;s high speed data connection and full web browser. I&#039;d really like to know how to corrupt the browser so that it doesn&#039;t work, but hacking Symbian OS is way above my level of technical expertise...

I think more attention needs to be paid to these mobile devices. They are MUCH harder to control and much harder to live without. Filtering and monitoring software for mobile platforms is a golden opportunity for developers right now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m surprised so little has been said about covenant eyes.<br />
I&#8217;ve had serious problems with porn for a long time, and am quite technically inclined too. I can&#8217;t hack in to OSX&#8217;s internals, so perhaps I&#8217;m not as savvy as others, but for me Covenant Eyes has been a spiritual life-saver. Every single bit of incoming traffic seems to be monitored and recorded. While it doesn&#8217;t block anything, the fact that my accountability partners will see my log is enough to motivate me to stay away from anything questionable.</p>
<p>My biggest problem now is my mobile phone, with it&#8217;s high speed data connection and full web browser. I&#8217;d really like to know how to corrupt the browser so that it doesn&#8217;t work, but hacking Symbian OS is way above my level of technical expertise&#8230;</p>
<p>I think more attention needs to be paid to these mobile devices. They are MUCH harder to control and much harder to live without. Filtering and monitoring software for mobile platforms is a golden opportunity for developers right now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JENIUS</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/comment-page-2/#comment-1411</link>
		<dc:creator>JENIUS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2007 01:13:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/#comment-1411</guid>
		<description>hmmmm..... I think all the solutions could be bypassed via proxy server and/or online web page translator. so you would have to block any translator that could translate a web page,  and somehow block proxy servers. In case you don&#039;t belive me, hear this: I&#039;m 12, and I have gotten past my SCHOOL&#039;S WEB PROTECTOR to play my favorite arcade games.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hmmmm&#8230;.. I think all the solutions could be bypassed via proxy server and/or online web page translator. so you would have to block any translator that could translate a web page,  and somehow block proxy servers. In case you don&#8217;t belive me, hear this: I&#8217;m 12, and I have gotten past my SCHOOL&#8217;S WEB PROTECTOR to play my favorite arcade games.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Maulik Mistry</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/comment-page-2/#comment-1400</link>
		<dc:creator>Maulik Mistry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Oct 2007 21:37:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/#comment-1400</guid>
		<description>Using DansGuardian and Squid Web cache proxy does cost a little time in configuration, which may be out of the ability of some, but I have found that it does a robust job of filtering.  I can specifically weed out inappropriate material within any page, block sites altogether, match through regular expressions, only allow listed sites, check through &quot;grey&quot; listed sites, etc. so that much of it can be customized to suit your desire/needs.  It can even &quot;score&quot; pages that you request so that certain words add a specific to the score and words like &quot;cancer&quot; subtract from the score.  Thereby, pages with a certain score can be set to be blocked.  We probably could set up a good configuration for Latter-day Saints and make installers for Windows, Linux, and OS X.

DansGuardian&#039;s ability stems from reading the pages before they get to you rather than updating a list of sites that becomes outdated.  It can use those too nonetheless for a speed increase.  Getting around it can be made challenging also if one allows for a box to sit in front of their connection that they do not have user/pass access to.  Although, understood in a home that physical access can void this security.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Using DansGuardian and Squid Web cache proxy does cost a little time in configuration, which may be out of the ability of some, but I have found that it does a robust job of filtering.  I can specifically weed out inappropriate material within any page, block sites altogether, match through regular expressions, only allow listed sites, check through &#8220;grey&#8221; listed sites, etc. so that much of it can be customized to suit your desire/needs.  It can even &#8220;score&#8221; pages that you request so that certain words add a specific to the score and words like &#8220;cancer&#8221; subtract from the score.  Thereby, pages with a certain score can be set to be blocked.  We probably could set up a good configuration for Latter-day Saints and make installers for Windows, Linux, and OS X.</p>
<p>DansGuardian&#8217;s ability stems from reading the pages before they get to you rather than updating a list of sites that becomes outdated.  It can use those too nonetheless for a speed increase.  Getting around it can be made challenging also if one allows for a box to sit in front of their connection that they do not have user/pass access to.  Although, understood in a home that physical access can void this security.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Earl</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/comment-page-2/#comment-1368</link>
		<dc:creator>The Earl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2007 23:36:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/#comment-1368</guid>
		<description>I think it is short sighted to use blocking. All it takes is a good google cache, and you have problems. Try blocking google...

It comes down to dealing with the problem when it happens. If you aren&#039;t aware of what is going on with your computer, then it doesn&#039;t matter what sort of filtering  you are doing.

This is the way I have seen most enterprises work this issue as well. Some DO block known bad web sites, but this is secondary to their primary security. If you thought of it like viri, you try to block know holes, but you run sniffers and scanners to make sure you find out about new threats as they happen. One of my employers filtered out webmail systems to prevent unknown files from entering their network.

There are good Linux based proxy and firewall solutions. I would think that an appliance PC would not be a difficult solution for most.

I would also recommend turning off access when it is unlikely that supervision is available. My child is still to young to walk, but I will probably start blocking all internet access from 11pm to 7am soon anyway, as there really isn&#039;t a reason for anyone in my house to be playing around then anyway.

You dont really need to log the pictures and files that come across your wire, just the reference to them. That isn&#039;t as hard as it seems, especially if you put a box between you and the outside world.

The nice thing about a log is that there is no reason to ever turn it off. If there is a big hole in the log while your spouse is on the computer, you need to ask them some questions. This works even for non-technical people, as long as they can view the logs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it is short sighted to use blocking. All it takes is a good google cache, and you have problems. Try blocking google&#8230;</p>
<p>It comes down to dealing with the problem when it happens. If you aren&#8217;t aware of what is going on with your computer, then it doesn&#8217;t matter what sort of filtering  you are doing.</p>
<p>This is the way I have seen most enterprises work this issue as well. Some DO block known bad web sites, but this is secondary to their primary security. If you thought of it like viri, you try to block know holes, but you run sniffers and scanners to make sure you find out about new threats as they happen. One of my employers filtered out webmail systems to prevent unknown files from entering their network.</p>
<p>There are good Linux based proxy and firewall solutions. I would think that an appliance PC would not be a difficult solution for most.</p>
<p>I would also recommend turning off access when it is unlikely that supervision is available. My child is still to young to walk, but I will probably start blocking all internet access from 11pm to 7am soon anyway, as there really isn&#8217;t a reason for anyone in my house to be playing around then anyway.</p>
<p>You dont really need to log the pictures and files that come across your wire, just the reference to them. That isn&#8217;t as hard as it seems, especially if you put a box between you and the outside world.</p>
<p>The nice thing about a log is that there is no reason to ever turn it off. If there is a big hole in the log while your spouse is on the computer, you need to ask them some questions. This works even for non-technical people, as long as they can view the logs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/comment-page-2/#comment-1340</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 04:40:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/#comment-1340</guid>
		<description>Thought I would add my own two cents to some already great posts...

I too used to try and find the &quot;right&quot; kind of filter for secure access, setting up user accounts, whitelisting, blacklisting, etc...  In the end I have non-admin accounts for the kids, multiple computers in the home, main PC in an open area, and the rest are laptops (Wife&#039;s MacBook, and my work laptop) although our children are all under the age of 11 and homeschooled, they still know they need to ask for permission and Mom/Dad have to check websites before they visit them. So far it has worked... we are very open with them.  My wife has had sexual predators in her past and it has almost forced us to talk to our kids about their bodies.  We too try to teach them correct principles and then have them govern themselves.  I/filters can&#039;t be there for them 100% of the time, but the Holy Ghost can if they are governing themselves appropriately.  Which is the same for all us.

This is where it gets interesting... I run the IT departement at a software developement company.  We we&#039;re having problems with our filtering technology that was causing business interuptions.  After speaking with the President his response was, &quot;Turn the filters off, they (the employees) can govern themselves.&quot;  I agreed with him and our net access is wide open to this day.  We have thought about piping people through a proxy such as Microsoft&#039;s ISA server, but mostly from &quot;who&#039;s stealing all the bandwidth?&quot; question.

To filter or not to filter... that is the question.  My honest heart felt answer is no one knows you or your kids better than you and of course our Heavenly parents. This decision, as most, must always be decided upon with the help of the Holy Ghost.  If you do decide to filter there are some great tools available to accomplish the task. Otherwise, happy surfing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thought I would add my own two cents to some already great posts&#8230;</p>
<p>I too used to try and find the &#8220;right&#8221; kind of filter for secure access, setting up user accounts, whitelisting, blacklisting, etc&#8230;  In the end I have non-admin accounts for the kids, multiple computers in the home, main PC in an open area, and the rest are laptops (Wife&#8217;s MacBook, and my work laptop) although our children are all under the age of 11 and homeschooled, they still know they need to ask for permission and Mom/Dad have to check websites before they visit them. So far it has worked&#8230; we are very open with them.  My wife has had sexual predators in her past and it has almost forced us to talk to our kids about their bodies.  We too try to teach them correct principles and then have them govern themselves.  I/filters can&#8217;t be there for them 100% of the time, but the Holy Ghost can if they are governing themselves appropriately.  Which is the same for all us.</p>
<p>This is where it gets interesting&#8230; I run the IT departement at a software developement company.  We we&#8217;re having problems with our filtering technology that was causing business interuptions.  After speaking with the President his response was, &#8220;Turn the filters off, they (the employees) can govern themselves.&#8221;  I agreed with him and our net access is wide open to this day.  We have thought about piping people through a proxy such as Microsoft&#8217;s ISA server, but mostly from &#8220;who&#8217;s stealing all the bandwidth?&#8221; question.</p>
<p>To filter or not to filter&#8230; that is the question.  My honest heart felt answer is no one knows you or your kids better than you and of course our Heavenly parents. This decision, as most, must always be decided upon with the help of the Holy Ghost.  If you do decide to filter there are some great tools available to accomplish the task. Otherwise, happy surfing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/comment-page-2/#comment-1319</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2007 17:45:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/#comment-1319</guid>
		<description>I have been struggling with an addiction to pornography, almost completely from the internet,  for 8 years. I have used filters that have not worked. There are ways around them. I learned spanish on my mission and almos every filter I&#039;ve encountered will not block out a spanish website with the same type of material. The better ones probably can do that now, but I don&#039;t know. The problem is that these filters are being created by clean minded people, monolingual people. I think that as a preventative measure, they work great. Buy one if you want to keep your kids from accidentally finding pornography. However, if you think your kids won&#039;t find a way around the filter if they really want to, you&#039;re wrong. They can even find a way to go to sites that appear to be fine. They could also have innappropriate material e-mailed to them. They could e-mail themselves and you would never know. There are millions of ways of getting around filters. They only prevent someone from seeing pornography if they don&#039;t want to see pornography. Anyone that wants to find it, will find it, whether or not a filter is installed. I know from my own experience and from the experience of other adddicts</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have been struggling with an addiction to pornography, almost completely from the internet,  for 8 years. I have used filters that have not worked. There are ways around them. I learned spanish on my mission and almos every filter I&#8217;ve encountered will not block out a spanish website with the same type of material. The better ones probably can do that now, but I don&#8217;t know. The problem is that these filters are being created by clean minded people, monolingual people. I think that as a preventative measure, they work great. Buy one if you want to keep your kids from accidentally finding pornography. However, if you think your kids won&#8217;t find a way around the filter if they really want to, you&#8217;re wrong. They can even find a way to go to sites that appear to be fine. They could also have innappropriate material e-mailed to them. They could e-mail themselves and you would never know. There are millions of ways of getting around filters. They only prevent someone from seeing pornography if they don&#8217;t want to see pornography. Anyone that wants to find it, will find it, whether or not a filter is installed. I know from my own experience and from the experience of other adddicts</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Lee Vann</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/comment-page-2/#comment-1269</link>
		<dc:creator>James Lee Vann</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Aug 2007 17:26:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/#comment-1269</guid>
		<description>Woow, I don&#039;t have children yet, but I like the suggestion of an integrated router, maybe I&#039;ll get to work inventing one...  Actually, I like Vista&#039;s built in tools, as well as K9 as a free solution for XP (Though it&#039;s default settings go way over board and it has a habit of blocking more than it should);  but I have to say that education is paramount to a parents success in keeping their children away form porn.  There must be open communication between parents and children!  

If your kids are going through the trouble of hacking your setup just to avoid filtering and parental oversight, you have a serious trust issue, and your kid is probobly already got some problems that need addressed... (I&#039;m not saying it&#039;s your fault, but you must take an active role in remedying it!)

Education, communication, and a simple implemntation of a sensible filtering solution should be proficient.  Just ry not to block the entire Internet, it&#039;s such a useful tool, and essential to proper education in todays enviroment.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Woow, I don&#8217;t have children yet, but I like the suggestion of an integrated router, maybe I&#8217;ll get to work inventing one&#8230;  Actually, I like Vista&#8217;s built in tools, as well as K9 as a free solution for XP (Though it&#8217;s default settings go way over board and it has a habit of blocking more than it should);  but I have to say that education is paramount to a parents success in keeping their children away form porn.  There must be open communication between parents and children!  </p>
<p>If your kids are going through the trouble of hacking your setup just to avoid filtering and parental oversight, you have a serious trust issue, and your kid is probobly already got some problems that need addressed&#8230; (I&#8217;m not saying it&#8217;s your fault, but you must take an active role in remedying it!)</p>
<p>Education, communication, and a simple implemntation of a sensible filtering solution should be proficient.  Just ry not to block the entire Internet, it&#8217;s such a useful tool, and essential to proper education in todays enviroment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michelle</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/comment-page-2/#comment-1264</link>
		<dc:creator>Michelle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Aug 2007 22:14:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/#comment-1264</guid>
		<description>We also put our computer in the central area of the home. The computer is password-protected and they can only use it with Mom&#039;s OK.

My concern, though, is that as my children grow older, they could end up at a friend&#039;s house unsupervised. So along the way, we are trying to teach them the principles to help them keep themselves safe and clean.

We had a bishop who used to say: &quot;We want to put them in an armored car, but we can&#039;t; we need to help them put on the armor of God.&quot; I love that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We also put our computer in the central area of the home. The computer is password-protected and they can only use it with Mom&#8217;s OK.</p>
<p>My concern, though, is that as my children grow older, they could end up at a friend&#8217;s house unsupervised. So along the way, we are trying to teach them the principles to help them keep themselves safe and clean.</p>
<p>We had a bishop who used to say: &#8220;We want to put them in an armored car, but we can&#8217;t; we need to help them put on the armor of God.&#8221; I love that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas Lerman</title>
		<link>http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/comment-page-2/#comment-1263</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas Lerman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2007 16:53:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ldscio.org/2007/07/16/internet-in-the-home/#comment-1263</guid>
		<description>I am not really sure where to post this question, but will hope to get some kind of response. I signed up as a PAF utility developer a few years ago and have a friend that wants to do this as well. However, I do not remember where or how this was done. Can you provide me with this information?

As I understand it, PAF has no support and no fixes or enhancements will be made. I know that several companies are creating PAF look-a-likes. What are the chances of getting the source code or it going into public domain?

&lt;em&gt;[Joel: I&#039;ve forwarded your question the Family History folks who work with developers. Thanks.]&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am not really sure where to post this question, but will hope to get some kind of response. I signed up as a PAF utility developer a few years ago and have a friend that wants to do this as well. However, I do not remember where or how this was done. Can you provide me with this information?</p>
<p>As I understand it, PAF has no support and no fixes or enhancements will be made. I know that several companies are creating PAF look-a-likes. What are the chances of getting the source code or it going into public domain?</p>
<p><em>[Joel: I've forwarded your question the Family History folks who work with developers. Thanks.]</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
