From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1L3YyF-0000Jw-HF for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 16:35:03 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 49783E0487; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 16:35:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from yx-out-1718.google.com (yx-out-1718.google.com [74.125.44.158]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24676E0487 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 16:35:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by yx-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 4so471194yxp.46 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 08:35:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=3dODF1B6697o5mAMM9pkBbbeYyeuB0PFbs9u6VpK4rU=; b=a+DR04+JSt4iKozSvH6TR1rqRkDmuRX6pfEWmtdWFNWEeM7MZ5O4JVBp0YydFZQh66 hjOYtIXysgL0jLZCZvF2VOGJ3aliH/ESMKpJxAeb1uBjCjRh0ZBgJg6zmEn0GjF7VOQj N1utJpfzDAUhqoJqQqaczFMPaKygJBvJVTNc4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=GM5OJdNWWOqtK0YRpfhCDSUKww3KJvkPjK0d+R6UkwsSy/6pfSHKdA6u7C0FAITNe8 afqnu08q8ZJm4DIiZYaH99fJTBvTmF1sjD/GXP1eLnX/cxAZbdbZxGFOtGEl85uTsv6v kWv2AHXtYve4uiIDlporwn0xnNpZvE3QqFvDs= Received: by 10.142.241.10 with SMTP id o10mr350141wfh.268.1227285299593; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 08:34:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.217.2 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 08:34:59 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <5bdc1c8b0811210834t2aeea7f9s5c13ecf7e5b8e294@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 08:34:59 -0800 From: "Mark Knecht" To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Deny flash to a specific user? In-Reply-To: <20081121162218.GA19595@mirja.bruns> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <5bdc1c8b0811181729v5e92cc0fh701faab1b02bd869@mail.gmail.com> <1227067612.16932.5.camel@blackwidow.nbk> <28C5CD56-5A44-4F6A-85CC-C28CC2C2F0A3@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> <20081119150757.GD7022@beastie.linwin> <20081121162218.GA19595@mirja.bruns> X-Archives-Salt: 60920bc0-e982-4085-8e97-fa7f7e3670bd X-Archives-Hash: edac1340fd75f39cf315c0ed559739fc On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 8:22 AM, wrote: > Michael [19.Nov.2008 16:07]: > >> On 10:05 Wed 19 Nov , Qian Qiao wrote: >> ... >>> >>> In that case, isn't putting >>> >>> 127.0.0.1 ADDRESSES_TO_BE_BLOCKED >>> >>> into /etc/hosts easier? >>> >>> Or just set up a proxy. >> >> No, perhaps not, considering the fact that there are so many sites with >> pron. Maintaining such a massive hosts file is a disaster and worse still >> the solution is not fullproof. But then, FWIW such problems seldom have >> foolproof solutions. > > Well, at least there is "mvps" [1] with a nice host-file, blocking > mostly ads, banners etc., which I use myself without much trouble. > While searching for a list of porn-sites to add to that list, I stumbled > upon BadHosts [2], which includes several hosts-files, one of them > entirely for porn-sites. > > The sites listed there might get you started, but as noted by Qian Qiao > before, that list will never be complete or up-to-date. Besides, using > an anonymizer to reach one of those sites will get you there anyway. You > would have to block those, too. > > My opinion: If children are to be "protected" from that kind of content, > seting up a public computer in a livingroom might be a better way (in > conjunction with a host-file maybe for those nasty ads). But as soon as > one starts blocking sites, the question will be where to stop. > > > JP Thanks to all that have answered. I appreciate the responses greatly. Indeed the question was based around what to do with a kid that's not using his computer time appropriately. It has nothing to do with 'protecting' him via censoring or anything like that. It was more a matter of should he be playing Flash games or playing online videos of Star Craft games when he has homework to be doing. After thinking about it the decision in the end was to do nothing technical. Nothing technical is going to fix this problem other than him growing up a bit. Thanks again, Mark