Is anyone else finding some eSafety software is trivially rendered useless by typos?

[pete]

We've had a few incidents recently where SoftwareA has missed some pretty major and obvious problems simply because our kids' spelling sometimes leaves a bit to be desired.

 

Thankfully, SoftwareB can handle typos, records a bit more context around an event and evaluates that, flipping up an alert.

 

SoftwareA, however, is lauded as an eSafety marvel with lots of checks, whereas SoftwareB is more of a general network web filter tool.

 

Am I being unreasonable in thinking that if I'd built SoftwareA, I'd make sure that it picks up common typos (especially given the serious nature of the incidents)?

[fiza]

If you are using the software and it has flaws I think you should name it. Others may be using the software and unaware that it is missing incidents.