Thread Info
  • State Verified Answer
  • +1 person also asked this people also asked this
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 43 replies
  • Answers 3 answers
  • Subscribers 50 subscribers
  • Views 126239 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Suggested
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Bad URL Categorization

LINCK

Hi Sophos

Customers of XG Firewalls are reporting a bad url clasification, for example, this sites are detected as Porn/Sexuality/Nudity in other Sophos products but the clasification in XG firewall is bad.

Support say me that "Send a URL Request" but the troubble is that these URLs are Porn.

Please check.

Regards

 

Linck Tello Flores

INNOVARE




[locked by: Sure Win at 12:59 PM (GMT -8) on 13 Feb 2018]
Parents
  • 0

    I'm testing web-filtering efficacy on an XG210 appliance at the moment and I'm alarmed how badly uncategorised and miscategorised some of the URLs are, beyond sexually explicit content. I work in education and I've created a test policy for our Wifi network and with restrictions quite a few categories e.g. marijuana, legal highs, militancy and extremism...all the sort of things one might expect and found examples such as the following very quickly:

    www.stormfront.org is categorised in the as 'blogs and forums' when it's clearly a white-supremacist site (albeit a forum!)

    www.growweedeasy.com is listed as 'General business'

    www.dutch-passion.com is listed as 'Financial Services'(!) when it's promoting growth of cannabis

    And I've yet to find a legal highs sites that actually is filtered (I'm sure there are some) but all the top hits in Google appear to be available.

    I've been comparing the categorisations with the Forcepoint solution we use on our LAN and its database is far more accurate and comprehensive.

    Also Sophos, it would be really useful to be able to recategorise sites instead of just creating rules to drop them, for the benefit of reporting. 

Reply
  • 0

    I'm testing web-filtering efficacy on an XG210 appliance at the moment and I'm alarmed how badly uncategorised and miscategorised some of the URLs are, beyond sexually explicit content. I work in education and I've created a test policy for our Wifi network and with restrictions quite a few categories e.g. marijuana, legal highs, militancy and extremism...all the sort of things one might expect and found examples such as the following very quickly:

    www.stormfront.org is categorised in the as 'blogs and forums' when it's clearly a white-supremacist site (albeit a forum!)

    www.growweedeasy.com is listed as 'General business'

    www.dutch-passion.com is listed as 'Financial Services'(!) when it's promoting growth of cannabis

    And I've yet to find a legal highs sites that actually is filtered (I'm sure there are some) but all the top hits in Google appear to be available.

    I've been comparing the categorisations with the Forcepoint solution we use on our LAN and its database is far more accurate and comprehensive.

    Also Sophos, it would be really useful to be able to recategorise sites instead of just creating rules to drop them, for the benefit of reporting. 

Children