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

Youtube and ADS - Sometimes they are not blocked

Coming from UTM, I never had issue on youtube ADS. Since v15 if you listen to a playlist or you watch multiple videos inside youtube website, ads appear sometimes.

In my web filter policy, of course, ADS are blocked (I hate them).

Anyone is experiencing this issue/behaviour?

Thanks



This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents
  • Hi All,

    Configure a Web Policy to block "Advertisement" category and enable HTTP & HTTPS scanning. Configure a DROP rule for UDP 443 service and make sure to place it on TOP. YouTube ADS are successfully blocked and during instances of incorrect web categorization, take the steps as suggested by Aditya Patel in his previous post. Refer the screenshots below:

         

    Thanks

  • Sachin,

    I am already using this configuration (apart the UDP 443 blocking rule) which is catched by the default rule at the bottom.

    I will check the config and post back again.

    Thanks

  •  

    I tested your config. Still ADS are not blocked on youtube video. XG is not able to catch the same ADS like McAfee engine on UTM.

    Some ADS are blocked, but not all of them.

    Let me know if ylou need logs.

    Thanks

  • I will definitely need logs and screenshot. Please DM me. If there are any certain ADS link that is wrongly categorized, which is the reason why ADS are not blocked then, I request all to raise a reassessment request and submit the URL.

    Thanks

  • Hi sachin, this is not directed at you since you are doing the best you can do and other people decide the product efficiency (webfilting in this case). While I agree that we should help sophos by raising a reassessment request if we see something categorized incrorrectly, I think Luk has a larger point in general. Every beta release, we hear that Sophos is fixing and incorporating the features requested by most partners and users.

    By raising the ineffectiveness of XG filtering compared to the UTM filtering, he is just pointing out the shortcomings of the in house webfilter in certain configurations. Since you guys are our direct communication line to the higher ups/ concerned parties within sophos organization, we are trying for you to relay the message that some users are sending negative feedback on the webcategorization database... that is all. 

    While most admins can submit a bad categorization request, it is not feasible in every case where someone bought the XG as set it and forget it from a reseller that has to constantly explain to them why ad blocking is not working as advertised.

    Hope you understand

    Regards

    Bill 

Reply
  • Hi sachin, this is not directed at you since you are doing the best you can do and other people decide the product efficiency (webfilting in this case). While I agree that we should help sophos by raising a reassessment request if we see something categorized incrorrectly, I think Luk has a larger point in general. Every beta release, we hear that Sophos is fixing and incorporating the features requested by most partners and users.

    By raising the ineffectiveness of XG filtering compared to the UTM filtering, he is just pointing out the shortcomings of the in house webfilter in certain configurations. Since you guys are our direct communication line to the higher ups/ concerned parties within sophos organization, we are trying for you to relay the message that some users are sending negative feedback on the webcategorization database... that is all. 

    While most admins can submit a bad categorization request, it is not feasible in every case where someone bought the XG as set it and forget it from a reseller that has to constantly explain to them why ad blocking is not working as advertised.

    Hope you understand

    Regards

    Bill 

Children
No Data