Hi
Currently we block most image search sites as kids have repeatedly abused them and got past the filters. We tell pupils/staff to use picsearch.com which appears to be much more moderated but I was just wondering how good googles safe search is now for filtering nasty images?
We use smoothwall so its enabled (safe-search) for everyone and we are debating letting them use it.
Is safe-search good and if its easily beaten what terms did you use?
It works pretty well put we still block it.
Zero: remember your lovely SmoothWall will block thumbnails which are sourced from blocked sites if you turn on "deep url analysis" (not on by default I am afraid) in "per group settings".
Ultimately, safe search will display porn if someone is actively looking for it because images are generally stored as a $number_string.jpg. As a means of preventing accidental porn exposure, it's pretty good.
edit:
@ Tom
Do you have a rough guesstimate of increased load from turning that on? I know that's a "piece of string" question, but half as much again, double, more?
Last edited by pete; 23rd January 2009 at 02:29 PM.
That sounds like a really handy option. We do have some filtering in place here but the kids are always finding new safe phrases that end up with naughty links. This weeks phrase of the week is 'big jugs' - don't want to break anyone's cookery lessons or pottery classes so that's a tricky one to sort out. I do filter on the phrase "Safesearch is off" though.
I asked Phil (lead Guardian developer):Originally Posted by pete
Not as much as the content filter, more than straight url filtering. You'll be fine[13:42] <tom> how much overhead does deep-url searching tack on?
[13:42] <tom> a) a fair bit
[13:43] <tom> b) not much
[13:43] <tom> c)all
[13:49] <philip> deep URL searching would be a B
50/50 - works pretty well but depends how the students phrase things...we've had a few issues!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote