we replaced a couple of those when we took over a network once. The company, bullguard or whatever was pretty good to deal with. I didnt like the management software that was required for the units, java based, but it was old. The feature set was pretty slick though. FYI fortigate gives a decent trade in discount on watchguards
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Jordan Gregory <[email protected] > wrote: > I have had great luck with watchguard. Their basic security suite for all > of their firewalls includes comprehensive web proxying and all for a > fraction of the cost of fortigate. > > Hit me up off list if you want more info. > > Full disclosure: we resell watchguard, so I'm biased :) > > On Feb 22, 2017 10:31 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Expensive >> but Fortigate is excellent for this, the school can also set up a youtube >> content account to tie into the policies to control what youtube content is >> available and whats not >> Expensive though as it scales >> no ip proxy bypass, no dns control bypass, locally installed certificates >> and you can mtm inspect ssl. Its pretty hard to get around a well >> configured fortigate >> >> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Any kid with any smarts at all can do direct ip to proxy with no >>> effort. If they want to keep the kids out of the porn, then the system >>> must be airgapped. No real world internet connection. Perhaps go do >>> google searches and cache all the stuff they would be likely to need for >>> class room assignments, then break the connection and tell them it is on >>> the computer... go find it. >>> >>> *From:* Ken Hohhof >>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 22, 2017 9:11 AM >>> *To:* [email protected] >>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Recommended DNS for content filtering K-12 >>> >>> >>> No such thing. >>> >>> >>> >>> So ask (1) who is requiring this or (2) who is paying for this? Then >>> ask, what is their approved solution that they are willing to approve >>> and/or pay for? >>> >>> >>> >>> If this is genuinely not being pushed by some government mandate, I >>> would question DNS as being too simplistic. Just recently the TV news here >>> had a story about parents show were shocked, shocked to discover their kids >>> school-issued computers allowed them to use Google Hangouts, which the kids >>> were using for inappropriate messages. The idea that you can block all >>> inappropriate content by a simple method like what DNS servers you use, >>> seems naïve to me. So, should the DNS servers let you go to Wikipedia, or >>> not? CNN is dishonest media, should that be blocked? What about RT? Or, >>> for an example of what happens when you try to censor the Internet by >>> blocking IP addresses, look at the news stories about Cogent blocking >>> Cloudflare IP addresses associated with Pirate Bay but also causing >>> collateral damage to other sites sharing those IPs. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Gino Villarini >>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 22, 2017 9:44 AM >>> *To:* [email protected] >>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Recommended DNS for content filtering K-12 >>> >>> >>> >>> What is the recommended DNS for airtight content filtering for Schools? >>> Specially Porn block >>> >>> >>> >>> *Gino Villarini* >>> >>> President >>> >>> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968 >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team >> as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >> > -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
