Which is better at protecting children online: technology or education?

Which is better at protecting children online: technology or education? This may seem like an odd question to some, but it’s one that gets asked in online safety settings.   In a 2009 Washington Post editorial, an educator opined that, “Filters stifle teaching innovations and don’t effectively keep students safe.  The best strategy for protecting students online is educating them about Internet citizenship and safety.” 

What I find interesting about this idea is that in the worlds of online privacy and online security — the technological/social problems that are the most similar to online safety – there is no such “education is better than technology” debate.  No one seriously argues that we can best address spam, hacking, privacy, or malware only with “education” – it’s a given that technology is part of the solution. Anti-spam software is part of the solution to spam, anonymizers and privacy settings are part of the solution to privacy, etc. 

That said, security professionals will tell you that technology alone cannot solve security problems, and that user education must be part of any comprehensive security solution.  If users aren’t educated in how to recognize fake e-mails with links to malicious websites, a defense-in-depth solution of anti-spam, filters, firewalls, and anti-malware software will eventually fail when something inevitably slips through and a user clicks on a malicious link and downloads malware. 

I find it hard to understand why anyone would think that the problems of online safety – exposure to inappropriate content, cyberbullying, online sexual solicitation, sexting, etc. can be addressed only with education

An “education only” approach to the problem of inappropriate online content is like inviting your child into the world’s largest magazine store where Hustler is next to Highlights, then relying on instructions on how not to look at Hustler to prevent exposure.  Wouldn’t it make a little more sense to also put Hustler in the Adults Only section?  

When seeking to protect children from sexual solicitation, of course we need to educate kids on how to stay out of shady neighborhoods – online and offline – but doesn’t make it sense to restrict the access of kids to online neighborhoods like Chatroulette, where 14 percent of users are exposers

So what’s the answer: education or technology?  Of course, the answer is both.  The “education vs. technologyonline safety debate is a false dilemma.  We shouldn’t be discussing which approach to use, but rather what’s the best way to use education and technology together effectively. Technological/social problems like security, safety and privacy need combined education and technology solutions to be most effective.  It’s long past time to move beyond the unproductive “technology vs. education” debate. 

–David Burt, CISSP, CIPP

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • MySpace

Scarifying Ads Don’t Help Parents

While I was perusing the latest issue of PC World magazine, I saw a startling full-page ad from the parental control company SpectorSoft.  “Meet Susan…a 42 year old man posing as a 15 year old girl.  ‘Susan’ and your 13 year old just made plans to meet in the park.  How did you know?  Because Spector Pro is watching,” the headline reads.  The accompanying image of a crazed sex offender is both disturbing and frightening.

 

SpectorSoft isn’t the only parental control vendor to use this advertising approach.   Taser markets a mobile phone parental control product called Protector.  The Protector website currently displays a banner ad with another image of a demented criminal and the text,  “Would you let him hang out in your kids room?”

 

I’ve never been shy about pointing out the dangers to kids on the Internetmy testimony on the topic before Congress was cited by the US Supreme Court in 2003.  Parents do need to be aware of the real risk children face when the go online.  According to some of the best available research:

These are serious statistics that rightfully concern parents, and are all good reasons for adopting safety education, safety rules, and parental controls.  But the risk of children being stalked in the offline world by predators is in reality small. In 2006, U.S. law enforcement agencies made 615 arrests for Internet-initiated sex crimes involving youth victims. (Crimes Against Children Research Center, 2006).  Of course that’s 615 cases too many, and law enforcement should be doing everything it can to track down these predators.  

But it’s still a small number compared to the millions of children being harassed and exposed to X-rated content onlineOnline safety educators and parental control companies do parents a better service by presenting parents with a realistic view of risks, and presenting realistic solutions. 

–David Burt, CISSP, CIPP

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • MySpace

Washington State Supreme Court Upholds Library Filtering Policy

I’ve been following the case  Bradburn v. North Central Regional Library District since it was filed on  Nov 11, 2006, in Washington Eastern District Court.  The case involves patrons of the North Central Regional Library e suing the library over the library’s Internet policy, which filters access for adults.  The plaintiffs seek to order the library to disable Internet filters while in use by adults in the library.

 On September 30, Judge Shea granted motions for summary judgment, but held his ruling in abeyance pending certification of questions of Washington State Constitutional law before the Washington State Supreme Court.

The Washington State Supreme Court just ruled today, full ruling here:

“We conclude that a library can, subject to the limitations set forth in this opinion, filter Internet access for all patrons, including adults, without violating article I, section 5 of the  Washington State Constitution.”

 Now, we await the federal court’s ruling…

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • MySpace

Parental Control Companies Should Delete “Stealth Monitoring”

Traditionally, Internet parental control products have been at their core either filtering products that offer specialized categories of websites for filtering,  or monitoring products that focus on creating a detailed record of Internet activity.  With the profusion of “Web 2.0” technologies, many parental controls vendors are realizing they need to improve their monitoring abilities to help parents keep tabs on what their children are doing in places like social networks.   As filtering companies learn from the monitoring products, one feature they should leave behind though is “stealth monitoring” – the ability of the software to secretly record online activities without the awareness of the end user

A number of monitoring product marketed as parental controls openly tout their ability to do this.  The website of the monitoring product IamBigBrother states:

“Do you know who your kids chatted with last night? Our software runs in stealth mode where it is not detected by the user of the computer. It captures everything from chats and instant messages to email, web sites and much more. It can even take a picture of the screen when certain words are typed!”

 Another product, IMView pitches:

“Monitoring your child’s computer activity is a personal parenting decision, therefore we have made imView completely invisible on the host machine and this allows parents to choose whether or not they are telling their children their computer activity is being monitored.”

 And PC Tattletale warns parents:

“As a parent, you have to ask yourself: “Am I really comfortable with what my child is doing online?”  For most parents the answer is – no. And it is because most parents don’t really know what their children are doing online, who they talk to, or what private information they share.  Who’s Protecting Your Child From Internet Predators, Pedophiles, Cyber Stalkers, Online Sex Offenders When You’re Not There?  Our special “Stealth Technology” — Once installed PC Tattletale will not appear in the Windows Start Menu, Desktop, Task Manager, Program Files Folders, or even the Add/Remove programs menu because PC Tattletale is TOTALLY invisible to the user.” 

The problem with stealth monitoring is this technology has a huge potential for abuse, and organizations that work with victims of domestic violence are concerned, as expressed in this article from PC World:

“These commercial surveillance packages are turning up in domestic violence cases,” says Cindy Southworth, director of technology at the Washington, D.C.-based organization National Network to End Domestic Violence (NNEDV). The group gets many calls from women who say their abusers know too much. “We advise women, if you’re researching an escape plan or trying to find a new job, don’t do it on your home PC.”

It’s hard to see what the legitimate uses are for “stealth monitoring.”  It’s perfectly legitimate in any number of circumstances to monitor your children’s Internet use, but why wouldn’t you want to tell them you’re going to be watching?  If your teen’s Internet use is so risky or out-of-control that you’re afraid to tell them they are being monitored, then why are you letting them use the Internet unsupervised or at all? 

Fortunately, newer parental control products that are combining filtering and monitoring such as Norton Online Family and McAfee Family Protection don’t appear to offer “stealth monitoring” and that’s a good sign.  I hope the rest of the parental control companies will choose to delete stealth monitoring.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • MySpace

Australia: Google and Yahoo raise doubts over planned net filters

AU – Google and Yahoo raise doubts over planned net filters: “(BBC)
Google and Yahoo have joined two Australian organisations calling for a ‘rethink’ of the country’s controversial internet filter plans. The Australian government has announced proposals to introduce a mandatory filter which would block all RC (Refused Classification) content. The groups argue that the subjects covered by RC material are too wide-ranging for a blanket ban. They also warn that the filter will not ‘effectively protect children’.

(Via QuickLinks Update.)

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • MySpace