Well, this should hold the kids away from their image boards. For about ten minutes. At the most. That's optimistic.
Google fires fresh salvo in war on FILTH: Chrome Supervised Users
In the never-ending quest to shield impressionable minds from some of the internet's less family-friendly content, Google has unveiled "supervised users" for Chrome on Windows, OS X, Linux, and Chrome OS. A supervised user is a special class of Chrome user account that's created and controlled by another user who acts as its " …
-
-
Wednesday 23rd October 2013 11:30 GMT jonathanb
Only if you remember to block the download pages for every single other browser out there, including all the obscure ones, and you block access to all other methods of downloading things, such as ftp and sneakernet.
Lynx for example may not be that good at displaying pictures and videos but if you can download it using chrome, you can then use it to visit mozilla.org and download firefox.
-
-
Wednesday 23rd October 2013 07:39 GMT DropBear
Seriously trying to secure something wth physical access to hardware...?
Strange, I don;t remember ever "logging in" into Chrome (well ok except the first couple of times just to see what it does) in order to use it. What if one just logs out...? Also, as mentioned, portable apps. Or possibly live CDs (let's see if dad remembered to disable CD/USB boot in the BIOS. Then let's see where the little "clear CMOS" jumper is on the mobo...)
-
Wednesday 23rd October 2013 07:56 GMT Ralph B
Alternatively
I wonder if they would they sell more Chrome-equipped boxes if they delivered only smut, rather than filter against it.
Or, maybe, instead of a "Private Browsing Tab" they implemented a "Privates Browsing Tab" that filtered out all the Interweb's non-adult content.
Not to say I want it myself, ahem, just wondering if it would be popular.
-
-
Wednesday 23rd October 2013 13:34 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Alternatively
I hear there used to be a similar option back in the days of infoseek*. Apparently, it you told it that you did want to view the objectionable content, it pretty much only served you said content whatever you typed into it.
*May have been a different search provider, my, er, friend can't remember exactly which one it was now.
-
Thursday 24th October 2013 08:56 GMT Ralph B
Re: Alternatively
If you can think of something, someone else on the Interwebs has already implemented it:
http://www.monzy.org/unsafesearch/
http://www.monzy.org/unsafesearch/images/
(Haven't tried it yet - I'm at work - but it looks like it's doing the right thing.)
-
-
-
Wednesday 23rd October 2013 15:58 GMT poopypants
Misunderstanding
"Users daring enough to work with a beta browser are encouraged to try it out and submit feedback via Google's Chromebook forums."
This is not about Chrome (the browser). This is about the controlled environment provided by Chromebooks (the computer+browserOS*).
*It's a word. Trust me.
-
Wednesday 23rd October 2013 16:38 GMT Robert Helpmann??
Re: Misunderstanding
"This is not about Chrome (the browser). This is about the controlled environment provided by Chromebooks."
Google has unveiled "supervised users" for Chrome on Windows, OS X, Linux, and Chrome OS.
Not so much.
While I tend to prattle on about layered security being the way to go, this seems to be Google taking the approach of throwing something out and see if it sticks. This idea would be better implemented as a real firewall, not some cheap knock-off.
-
-
Wednesday 23rd October 2013 16:20 GMT Anonymous Coward
This whole situation (protecting vulnerable from internet) can easily be solved at the gateway.
Yes the majority of "plebs" wouldnot know how to do this, but surely some software can be created to provide a simple "block this" website (or whitelisting) interface for the (so called) parent! FFS! It's not difficult.