filteringtech
Members-
Posts
93 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Reputation
163 ExcellentAbout filteringtech

Personal Information
-
Biography
Interested in all matters safeguarding and filtering
-
tlu.dl.delivery.mp.microsoft.com
filteringtech replied to Sonic007's topic in Internet Related/Filtering/Firewall
Doh! It's the *.microsoft.com that does it. Honestly, I cant see why it would be blocked in the standard setup. -
tlu.dl.delivery.mp.microsoft.com
filteringtech replied to Sonic007's topic in Internet Related/Filtering/Firewall
What seemed odd to me was that when I did a Trace Request, for us the Policy Server showed it was allowed by an "allow" in the Global Shared list, that when I looked in the Global Shared list doesn't exist! Will be interesting to see if that still exists after tonight's maintenance. -
tlu.dl.delivery.mp.microsoft.com
filteringtech replied to Sonic007's topic in Internet Related/Filtering/Firewall
You are Schools Broadband? You have the "standard lists" applied? Decryption? Should go stright throught. Try a Trace Request and a Category lookup. I wonder if you notice the same as me? -
I'm old school too. We're not paid to be Microsoft's beta testers. Once the updates are proven stable, they they go in.
-
Found some odd entries in our Netsweeper logs going through an "admin" proxy from an external IP. Nothing unexplained should be going through through that proxy from an external IP, never mind an attempt to access porn. Reported it to my line manager. The following day realised these changes had been made in Netsweeper around the same time. No phone call, no ticket update, no email and currently still no explanation to provide to our DSL as would be the case for a "genuine" attempt to access a safeguarding category. This was a direct hit, not an accident from a poorly crafted search request. One of the IP addys in the above matched the IP addy in the playboy.com log entries. Still wondering why. If it were a testing activity, we would have expected to be advised prior to the activity, and why try to access porn? Curiously, this doesn't appear in the standard "Safeguarding Report" that SB generate. That's another support ticket I suppose. Would Schools Broadband care to comment?
-
My testing today is showing that if I make a change to a Shared List, eventually it goes through, though this is taking over 30mins which is still rubbish. If I make a change to a Local List, it never updates Policy Server: Policy3, so doesn't take effect. I presume there is more chance of Schools Broadband reading this here than on a ticket.
-
For a problem that we reported in a support ticket on 4th October (that other schools may have reported earlier), and one of your support staff confirmed in the same ticket on 12th October, an event report on the Status Portal was raised on 19th October (stating that the problem started on 18th October). There are no further details provided other than confirming you have involved Netsweeper and no problem owner and that your Netsweeper service has a status of "degraded". For those of us who are on our knees because any Netsweeper changes that we make one day, do not seem to take effect until the next day - disrupting teaching and learning and our legal safeguarding obligations (KCSIE), can we have an update on this "Top Priority" issue please?
-
Twitter under fire over CSAM
filteringtech replied to sigma's topic in Internet Related/Filtering/Firewall
That's horiffic. Must have been difficult to deal with and really upsetting for everyone in school involved. Thanks for sharing.
