sigma

I have had success with Option 2 in this link in the past. Specifically the fix commands. https://h30434.www3.hp.com/t5/Desktop-Hardware-and-Upgrade-Questions/Error-code-0xc0000098/td-p/9430066

I took it as "Building Schools for the Future?

TBH, many of our teachers are unable/unwilling(?) to use the tools they are provided with to see if their class are using their devices for learning, configuring luxury cars or any other distraction. The bottom line is "cold hard cash", or lack of.

"Shadow IT" is well and truly in ascendance again!

I wouldn't accept anything like this into "production" without: a) Adequate documentation. b) Some definition of accountability around the app and its data governance. c) Some GDPR sign off (if appropriate). d) Evidence it has been "properly tested". I hope somebody costed this/had a budget before they started.

We also discuss issues and events related to filtering and monitoring that occurred during the year since the last review as part of this year's review. We found some proper fails this year. Ignoring other details, one was a member of staff letting some pupils user their staff account as the pupils were blocked from a couple of sites they wanted to play on. This sort of thing doesn't just fall out of standard reports/alerts, though was discovered through analysing log data so that somebody could visit the room. We find Manga and Anime continue to be challenging to filter without over-blocking.

https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/claude-chats-publicly-

Whilst I completely agree, my DSL doesn't have the technical wherewithall to do this, moreso when they are teaching, in meetings with agencies etc

I confess I'm actually "shocked", if after all this time, there are schools are not running decryption (or something equivalent), and frankly, knowing (unfortunately), what is hosted on some domains probably considered essential that cannot be identified without decryption, I'm chilled to the core. Although knowing what is being searched for including deliberate typos, random space, slang and other techniques is a safeguarding issue, the priority is surely regularly taking a deep dive into "what was and can be found", but shouldn’t be, and nearly as important, "what's blocked and shouldn't be".

Personally, I don't think that showing that some specific url subdomains are blocked does anything but lull a false sense of security. That is all the test tool does. At least one school ISP blocks the urls anyway, so you will always pass regardless of whether you filtering is actually up to scratch or not anyway. EG if testfiltering.pornhub.com is blocked, The tool will tell you you have porn filtering in place regardless of whether you actually do, or not. https://testfiltering.com/faq/ See "Information for filter providers" The best you can hope for by running the tool is to show whether your filtering is likely switched on or not. I note it has been upgraded a little since I last looked at it.

https://nysfocus.com/2026/07/14/new-york-humanoid-robot-teacher-salamanca-school-district Further comment from the author:

Perhaps I could rephrase that to iOS and "Schools Broadband". We have LGfl's Netsweeper and don't have any problems with that version of iOS.

So, Do you allow them? Do you filter or monitor them in any way? The issue I'm trying to address is - how would we know if a pupil was exchanging emails with any person that they are not supposed to be having contact with "via their school email account"? Advice welcome - particularly applicably to Microsoft cloudy exchange.

Maybe you need to press Lightspeed (or your ISP), to get https://omniwebkit.com/tools/url-shortener (and others?) recategorised as url shorteners? Even so, that’s only going to work provided they support full decryption, and you have it enabled for your iPad traffic.

I guess it depends on your filter product, and if you get it from your ISP, what they do to preconfigure. If you can’t get a url block to work how about “google.com/logos’ as a keyword or adding the year as I did?