School Filtering - Pornography False Postitives.

[sigma]

I check the porn blocks daily. This academic year we get blocks daily and every single one is an FP.

 

I have concerns about the younger pupils being presented with a porn warning when they have done a sensible search.

 

This is the FP from yesterday:

 

[synaesthesia]

Unfortunately out of the evils we face, false positives are the lesser. The best thing I could suggest would be renaming categories, so pornography could be explicit adult content.

[Koldov]

We get a lot but unfortunately I haven't had time to investigate yet whether the user has:

 

Searched for the image

Clicked on a link to the image

Just had the image blocked in an general image search

 

None of the images are 'bad' but we seem to have 2 main culprits 'Deviant Art' and 'Shutterstock ' both blocked obviously, but it still alerts us that they've tried to access adult content/pornography/nudity, because I guess there are those sort of images on those sites...?

 

To confirm I haven't been too worried as we are alerted because they have been blocked, but I guess the issue is, when you get so many a day, at some point you might miss something.

 

[synaesthesia]

It's worth giving a wonderful thumbs up to whatever absolute plum decided to host psychology resources on tumblr. Next yeah I expect to see A-Level Biology resources, practice papers etc on Pornhub.

[DavR]

We get a lot but unfortunately I haven't had time to investigate yet whether the user has:

 

Searched for the image

Clicked on a link to the image

Just had the image blocked in an general image search

 

None of the images are 'bad' but we seem to have 2 main culprits 'Deviant Art' and 'Shutterstock ' both blocked obviously, but it still alerts us that they've tried to access adult content/pornography/nudity, because I guess there are those sort of images on those sites...?

 

To confirm I haven't been too worried as we are alerted because they have been blocked, but I guess the issue is, when you get so many a day, at some point you might miss something.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]71589[/ATTACH]

 

 

Ah, same filtering solution as us, that one.

 

I run reports on the filtering every Monday, for our Safeguarding Team. I usually then evaluate any porn hits to see if they're genuine or not - almost always they're not, or like Shutterstock, they're sites that could potentially host porn, but it is not their primary purpose.

 

Interestingly, for a while, we were getting porn hits that were genuine, BUT, we really didn't believe the person in question had attempted to access those sites. This belief was reinforced by the fact that the same obscure porn sites kept flagging up for different users. I think it's something to do with how certain hosting site IP addresses are evaluated (it's always DNS, right?) but I couldn't quite get my head round the theory I was offered. Luckily, this has calmed down now, because it was getting impossible to know whether to reprimand people for their history or not....

[sigma]

There's too much in the "Adult Mixed Content" that gets returned by Safe Search to evaluate in complete detail because it fits the pattern of "search for an image of a Coca Cola tin and get an appropriate image returned from a site that also sells alcohol", so it gets an alcohol block, which is an FP in my book, and images that do not match what was searched for.

 

I do check, alcohol, porn, drugs, weapons and web proxies in detail daily, and anything else that is out of the regular pattern that I've not been warned about.

 

During the last year there has been a noticable increase in interest in weapons - guns and knives.

 

Anyway, todays blocks (FP's) for porn are:

 

 

and