Study on
“Benchmarking of parental control tools for the online protection of children”
SIP-Bench II
SMART 2009/0047
Study...
Study on
“Benchmarking of parental control tools for the online protection of children”
SIP-Bench II
SMART 2009/0047
What ...
Wording of SIP Benchmark II
  Parental control tools and services
  Filtering tools and services
Study on
“Benchmarking ...
UsabilityEffectiveness
  Test of content of classic websites
and Web 2.0 (i.e.user generated
content)
  Testbed with
  ...
Some very first preliminary results* from the 1st test cycle
Functionalities
  More than 80 % of the tools provide parent...
Some very first preliminary results* from the 1st test cycle
Usability (scores are 0 – 6 points)
Installation process 5 % ...
Some very first preliminary results* from the 1st test cycle
  All tools work better on adult content than other harmful ...
Some very first preliminary results* from the 1st test cycle
  General blocking results
  By Age
  Overblocking 2 % (bo...
Some very first preliminary results* from the 1st test cycle
Hacking the software
  Some tools can be uninstalled or shut...
Request for co-operation with SIP-Bench II
 We are looking for support in the recruitment of users to
accomplish the test...
Thank you on behalf of the SIP BENCH II
Project Team!
Contacts
Project Manager: Silvia Pietropaolo
E-mail: s.pietropaolo@i...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Parents and online technologies: Benchmarking of parental control tools for the online protection of children (SIP-BENCH II)

599 views
533 views

Published on

Study on “Benchmarking of parental control tools for the online protection of children”
SIP-Bench II - SMART 2009/0047

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
599
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Parents and online technologies: Benchmarking of parental control tools for the online protection of children (SIP-BENCH II)

  1. 1. Study on “Benchmarking of parental control tools for the online protection of children” SIP-Bench II SMART 2009/0047 Study on “Benchmarking of parental control tools for the online protection of children” SIP-Bench II SMART 2009/0047 Safer Internet Forum Luxembourg, Oct. 21, 2010
  2. 2. Study on “Benchmarking of parental control tools for the online protection of children” SIP-Bench II SMART 2009/0047 What is SIP Benchmark? A Benchmark of parental control tools throughout Europe What’s new in SIP Benchmark II?   6-monthly test cycle   In addition to tests of software on PC also tools for game consoles and smartphones are tested   Wording   Test of effectiveness and usability of parental control tools
  3. 3. Wording of SIP Benchmark II   Parental control tools and services   Filtering tools and services Study on “Benchmarking of parental control tools for the online protection of children” SIP-Bench II SMART 2009/0047 According to the findings of the Youth Protection Roundtable none of the products available so far is able to solve the problem of harmful content alone but can support parents in the process to avoid access to it. The consortium therefore uses the term tool and service instead of solutions, i. e.
  4. 4. UsabilityEffectiveness   Test of content of classic websites and Web 2.0 (i.e.user generated content)   Testbed with   20% non harmful content   80% harmful content   adult content 40% (of total data test)   other categories of content (racism, violence, gambling) 40% (of total data test)   Test of Functionalities   Customisation of the filtering   Set-up of profiles etc.   Test of the following processes   Installation   Configuration   Usage Ref. to ISO standards Experts reviews User tests Users tests Experts reviews and
  5. 5. Some very first preliminary results* from the 1st test cycle Functionalities   More than 80 % of the tools provide parents with the possibility to create and manage more than one profile   All tools allow filtering of websites according to special types of content and to block access to the web at all   More than 90 % allow parents to customise the filtering, f. e. create or modify url lists or keyword black/white lists   65 % are able to block MSN messenger, 45 % allow blocking MSN and Skype   40 % allow to block entire protocols like IRC and FTP, more allow to block IRC /FTP applications   Some tools allow to block streaming from YouTube with a specific functionality, others do so only by adding YouTube to the black list   75 % of the tools provide parents with a basic report on users’s web activities and violations of previously settled rules * based on the test of two third of the tools
  6. 6. Some very first preliminary results* from the 1st test cycle Usability (scores are 0 – 6 points) Installation process 5 % < Ø 4 < 26 % Configuration process 10 % < Ø 4,47 < 53 % Usage of the tool 40 % < Ø 3,78 < 26 %   Part of the tools keep the installation procedure very simple to avoid mistakes of the parents but then the possibilities to customise the tool to one‘s own needs are very poor   Other tools have very extended options to configure the software but then the risk of misconfiguration and bad filtering results is very high * based on the test of two third of the tools
  7. 7. Some very first preliminary results* from the 1st test cycle   All tools work better on adult content than other harmful contents (racism, violence)   All tools are less effective for user generated content   Most software filtering features are based on black and white lists (with all well-known limits of this approach) Effectiveness * based on the test of two third of the tools
  8. 8. Some very first preliminary results* from the 1st test cycle   General blocking results   By Age   Overblocking 2 % (both age groups)   < 10: Underblocking 36 % / > 10: Underblocking 34 %   English language content   Overblocking for English language content 1,9 %   Overblocking for other languages 1,1 % (Polish) – 3,4 % (Spanish)   Underblocking for English language content 33,4 %   Underblocking for other languages 34 % (French) – 45 % (Italian)   Web 2.0 (user generated content)   Overblocking 4 %   Underblocking 40 %   Adult content   Overblocking 2,3 %   Underblocking 25,7 %   Other harmful content   Overblocking 1,3 % (Violence) – 8,2 % (Gambling)   Underblocking 36,1 % (Drugs) – 58,4 % (Selfdamage) Effectiveness * based on the test of two third of the tools
  9. 9. Some very first preliminary results* from the 1st test cycle Hacking the software   Some tools can be uninstalled or shut down without a password By-passing the software   Several tools allow to access harmful content through translation tools, proxies or IP addresses   All tools for usage on PCs can be by-passed by using a CD to by-pass the operating system installed on the computer * based on the test of two third of the tools
  10. 10. Request for co-operation with SIP-Bench II  We are looking for support in the recruitment of users to accomplish the test of the tools from the 2. testing cycle on (spring 2011) – User will get licences of the software to be tested for free. Please inform users in your country to register for participation in the test via email to jcroll@digitale-chancen.de  We provide detailed information on the effectiveness and usability of 30 parental control tools available as an online database and a comprised study report. We will send the link to the database and the PDF to interested organisations not later than Dec. 2010.
  11. 11. Thank you on behalf of the SIP BENCH II Project Team! Contacts Project Manager: Silvia Pietropaolo E-mail: s.pietropaolo@innova-europe.eu Scientific team Jérôme Valette E-mail: valette@cybion.it Jutta Croll E-mail: jcroll@digitale-chancen.de

×