sigma

You're being too hard on LGFL. Its a Netsweeper problem not theirs as I also get the same categorisation for both. I've put in a recategorisation request for both, which should fix it for both of us. I find I'm doing this "all the time", for all different sites that should be falling into blocked categories automatically. (If you scroll down to the bottom on the left of spyce.ai, it even has an "essay grader" for teachers!)

We also use Netsweeper, and have been through the same loop and keep going through the same loop. I don't think that Netsweeper is particularly good at managing blocking Pornography. We get so many false positives that have to be checked, yet our ISP's (Not LGFL) "out of the box" configuration does allow access to pornography, even though it's category blocked. The latest DfE Policy Paper I can find is: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/generative-artificial-intelligence-in-education/generative-artificial-intelligence-ai-in-education#opportunities-for-the-education-sector The bit we are mindful of is: Protecting data, pupils and staff Generative AI: stores and learns from the data it is given – any data entered should not be identifiable can create believable content, including more credible scam emails requesting payment – people interact with generative AI differently and the content may seem more authoritative and believable Schools and colleges should: protect personal and special category data in accordance with data protection legislation not allow or cause intellectual property, including pupils’ work, to be used to train generative AI models, without appropriate consent or exemption to copyright review and strengthen their cyber security by referring to the cyber standards – generative AI could increase the sophistication and credibility of attacks ensure that children and young people are not accessing or creating harmful or inappropriate content online, including through generative AI - keeping children safe in education provides schools and colleges with information on: what they need to do to protect pupils and students online how they can limit children’s exposure to risks from the school’s or college’s IT system refer to the filtering and monitoring standard to make sure they have the appropriate systems in place Which leads back to: KCSIE, and the four areas of risk: content: being exposed to illegal, inappropriate, or harmful content, for example: pornography, fake news, racism, misogyny, self-harm, suicide, anti-Semitism, radicalisation, and extremism. contact: being subjected to harmful online interaction with other users; for example: peer to peer pressure, commercial advertising and adults posing as children or young adults with the intention to groom or exploit them for sexual, criminal, financial or other purposes. conduct: online behaviour that increases the likelihood of, or causes, harm; for example, making, sending and receiving explicit images (e.g. consensual and non- consensual sharing of nudes and semi-nudes and/or pornography, sharing other explicit images and online bullying, and commerce: risks such as online gambling, inappropriate advertising, phishing and or financial scams. Just because its generative AI (new and shiny), it doesn’t mean the statutory guidance doesn’t apply with regards to both blocking and over-blocking. Netsweeper classified this as porn last week. It had me wondering if its location aware? Oddly, the mag was featured on HIGNFY this week.

My Dad used to complain about “bread and scrape” when my Mum didn’t put enough butter on. My parents had their formative years during “the war” and it shaped the rest of their lives.

What does a Dalek do with an incomplete data set? EXTRPOLATE! Thanks to @SuperLeggera

Not sure what version you might be running, but you should be able to find your version's documentation here: https://helpdesk.netsweeper.com/docs/main_page/Content/index.html

So, I get a more acceptable Heinz ad at school. (No ads at home!). Netsweeper, but given that we have: doubleclick.net pagead2.googlesyndication.com tpc.googlesyndication.com googleadservices.com google-analytics.com googletagmanager.com pagead2.googlesyndication.com etc blocked - partly category and partly url. We don't have Chromebooks so don't have to allow for them. I reckon, but I can't test as there are still people using the computers but I would be looking closely at: ade.googlesyndication.com urls ? It is turning into a bit of a whack-a-mole exercise. (I'm having an Ad Blocking binge at the moment).

These are in Impero format, so will need converting to the blocking tool of your choice: *id.blooket.com*sign* *id.blooket.com*forgot* *id.blooket.com*login* *dashboard.blooket.com/blooks* *dashboard.blooket.com/host* *dashboard.blooket.com/signup* *dashboard.blooket.com/login*

No because: "You" can't enforce 2FA for personal users. "You" wouldn't be able to see if any data had been accessed unlawfully as you would have no audit access. Data may be stored outside of UK, EU, USA. There's another thread about these issues (different context). Any data/information uploaded to Dropbox would likely be outside your backup regime. I don't think (maybe wrong) that it supports SSL inspection, and unlike Microsoft which will report "bad things" separately, it would need a filtering inspection exclusion, so could fail Filtering and Monitoring standards without SLT signoff. Dropbox doesn't exactly have a glowing reputation for security, with numerous data breaches over the years.

It’s unexpectedly really good. I’ve resisted the urge to binge, so not reached the end yet…

Thought I'd find out. https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/biometrics-and-surveillance-camera-commissioner/about Surveillance Camera Code of Practice: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/619b7b50e90e07044a559c9b/Surveillance_Camera_CoP_Accessible_PDF.pdf Self Assessment Tool: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/surveillance-camera-code-of-practice-self-assessment-tool

I’m not clear exactly what the report author thinks that the “Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner” would be enforcing?

Might this still be one of the the very first versions that they used when they moved from Lightspeed to Netsweeper (whenever that was)?

We too have 4.2.17.17 which in "properties" informs me that its "Copyright © 2018 Netsweeper Inc."

Is anyone else seeing spurious duplicate records either in their "new" reports or when querying the "new" reporting database? I'm trying to figure out if it's just us or more widespread. Thx.

I don't know about the ages of your pupils, but I'd have something in there about cloud services being age appropriate - along the lines of any cloud services that say that the minimum age is 18 won't be available for younger pupils or whatever your appropriate age cut-off is.

Would it be a big hassle if you asked SBB to give you a different IP?

I presume you already have googletagmanager.com blocked? What filter are you using?

We’ve had the offensive usernames, and trapped them with Impero. The comments about staff on various platforms can’t be made on school devices, but of course, that doesn’t stop them.

I have a hard enough time keeping up with English teen slang and euphamisms!

Not exactly. "My Netsweeper expert", confirms an inadvertent definition in a whitelist. Also backed up by Google’s own documentation. The original change was made to accommodate Chromebooks last April. We don't have Chromebooks. It doesn't seem right, that the provider should force settings on us that are detrimental to our users in a manner that we can't easily mitigate for a technology we don't use, without doing all our own customisation. This is the supplier that "still" in its support notes says if a customer does not want a keyword that they think should be blocked advises in its support documentation that you allow the word. This is dangerous advice since if you allow they word "gay", as with any allow list matching bypasses filtering, so "gay porn" would then bypass filtering completely. https://www.schoolsbroadband.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/how-to-block-and-unblock-websites.pdf

I thought that was me! Schools Broadband don't really do filtering or reporting per se. For example, all Google image search thumbnails are whitelisted, so you are at the mercy of Google "Safesearch" where the American sensibilities, particularly with regard to weapons are not quite the same as ours. This overrides all/any category blocks you may have set. The "New" filtering "World-Leading" Daily Report is bust. It drops records, including for safeguarding category blocks. It creates reports of violations such as keyword violations where they don't exist etc. We can't fulfil our KCSIE obligations on false or missing data. (And its .pdf only). The "New" Hub filtering online reporting is bust - most of the filters (such as selecting or excluding a category), don't work, and its unbelievably slow to process any quantity - say a day's worth of data. You can't for example view all the blocked Pornography incidents for today or whenever. None of this is reflected in the Service Dashboard, which suggests everything is fine, even though its been confirmed these are "not working as expected". It's been over 3 weeks, is still "being considered" by Product Management with no updates, no indication when or if its going to be fixed as there is apparently a backlog of issues/requests. Lastly, "IF", SBB communicated and kept us informed when we raise problems, their management replied to emails, their ticketing system worked properly, tickets were responded to in a timely and accurate manner, (Support tickets should not be having birthdays), I would have no reasons whatsoever to be even thinking of mentioning any of this in public at all.

I've always found Genee's support to be helpful.

Scone, as in "gone". (Cream first).

IMHO (I know many will disagree), Pigs in Blankets are overrated. I have a slice of gammon and several slices of sausagemeat with my turkey.

Filtering issue?