RE: Feedback Request – Embedded Child Protection Solution for Telcos (Academic Research)

[Gary Sparkes via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>]

The only feasible way at the telco level here is TLS interception at some level, and with it being provided by the 
telco, there is no possible way to respect privacy since the telco will have 100% visibility into all traffic, 
encrypted or not. 

That'll be a lot of hardware and a lot of load, and require manual intervention/setup on each device - then the 
question comes down to filtering individual devices, because otherwise then you have to do TLS interception on the 
entire household, which would likely mean providing customized CPE that is doing it, instead.... and still requiring 
TLS interception. Often, carrier controlled CPE. 

Otherwise, you're back to individual endpoint control/software anyway.... 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mel Beckman via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org> 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2025 9:50 PM
To: nanog () lists nanog org
Cc: evabouchard38 () gmail com; nanog () lists nanog org; Mel Beckman <mel () beckman org>
Subject: Re: Feedback Request – Embedded Child Protection Solution for Telcos (Academic Research)

I concur with Stipo. Parents must be 100% in control. Telco’s should have no control, access, or visibility to such 
policy enforcement. 

Your statement that your startup is developing “real-time, embedded child-protection software for telecom operators” by 
definition directly contravenes 100% parental control. I recommend that you redesign this project to eliminate all 
telco involvement. 

You could easily do this using VPN technology, but there are already many competitors in the residential VPN space with 
child protection features, so you would need to have some significant distinctive advantages to compete. 

-Mel Beckman 

> On Jun 24, 2025, at 6:40 PM, Stipo via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org> wrote:
>
> This policy enforcement should be done on endpoints/user devices. Not 
> telco. Full stop.
>
> > On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 5:02 PM evabouchard38--- via NANOG < 
> > nanog () lists nanog org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm part of a postgraduate team at Dublin City University working 
> > with Chirp, a startup developing real-time, embedded child-protection 
> > software for telecom operators. The solution analyzes data traffic on 
> > children’s devices to block harmful content and alert parents to 
> > risks such as grooming, cyberbullying, or self-harm — all while 
> > respecting privacy and working natively within telco infrastructure.
> >
> > As part of our MSc practicum, we’re seeking feedback from telecom and 
> > network professionals on the commercial, technical, and regulatory 
> > feasibility of such an approach.
> >
> > Would you be open to completing a short, 10-minute questionnaire?
> >
> > 🔗 https://dcusurveys.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8oBhWiZMRrUh1zM
> >
> > We’d be very grateful for your insights. Happy to follow up with more 
> > technical or contextual details if helpful.
> >
> > Thanks in advance for your time!
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Eva Bouchard
> > _______________________________________________
> > NANOG mailing list
> >
> > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/5
> > PIWG4IPNMNO3US4EB2672K4SEGOTPK3/
> _______________________________________________
> NANOG mailing list
> https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/YH
> 6XG677WHTJBZCCY3RRK42F547WJXUU/
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/J5F5MKNF67OTOESEEDY4JL6WM3KMAIUL/
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/M3TV5ZPOIV2URX6R5PSU45TYF4W55VYK/