This is a little off topic, but it is a trivial task to keep a text file of sites that you want to make sure are or are not there and either grep -v them out of there or cat them into it. I do this to each update automatically with a cron job that updates the blacklists once a week and removes/adds anything special that I want. My thought is that the blacklists are a good generic place to start, they will have to be edited to some extent depending on your individual needs.
Just my .02 Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nik Barron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Stefan Furtmayr'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Squidguard Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 3:06 AM Subject: RE: Blocking free webspace providers? > > > It's a bit unfair to ask someone to spend time sorting out > > > a blocklist that works for them into something that works for everyone > else, IMHO... > > > > i can't force anybody to do that, so why is just asking forbidden? > > What would the world be without standards? > > The goal of the current thread is to have lists reusable by > > many people, isn't it? > > Well, to a point, but the way I read it was that the list in question was > provided "as is". So asking isn't forbidden at all, but you shouldn't be > surprised if nothing happens :-) > > > that's not the problem (btw: would you like to make the > > scripts available to the public?). > > Certainly, they're nothing spectacular though. I'll tidy them up and stick > em online. > > > The point is i don't want to create a whitlelist for e.g. > > geocites.com just because there *could* be porn on it. > > And there are many free webspace providers out there... but most > > porn/violence sites have multiple own domains. > > Yep, I must admit that in many ways I'm fairly fortunate as in a commercial > environment there's more scope for non-technical measures to reinforce the > blocking. I'm very much looking for the 80% soution with 20% effort... > > > > We block webmail during work hours, there's no business > > > need for it. We have > > > > maybe, but a school may be the the only source of web access > > for some of the not-so-rich kids. > > Certainly, I was just saying why some people want to block webmail in > response to your original question. An alternative would be to provide > normal email access for the kids, if that's feasible (and it's nice to see > that you're considering the needs of the kids in this regard). > > > For the virus thing: a recent virus scanner or another os > > than Windows are much better solutions > > I totally agree; we get plenty of virus-laden emails from traditional > sources! > > > So why don't create "webspace/crap" and "webmail" categories? > > This way the user also better knows why some URL is blocked. > > I think one of the first things that would be a good idea is to agree some > sort of common framework for categorisation of sites, along the lines that > you suggest (actually my blocklist has a separate "notbusiness" group that > correlates closely to "crap" :-). That way it would be easier for people to > pick and choose. > > Nick Barron, Group IT Security Officer > Pennant Software Services Ltd -- Registered in England No. 3772667 > PGP: A94C 4190 026E 3E02 6D50 C8FA 8620 3091 FF34 533D > >
