The idea is to allow the Administrators to be able to perform the changes while at the same time simplifying the interface. In general, for security purposes, it is recommended not to give Administrative rights to every account on the system. If you were to have kids at home, and they were using an account with administrative rights, any infection which might get thru would be able to affect the whole system. This wouldn't be the case for non-administrative accounts as they would not have write access to system folders.
At the same time, users of accounts with administrative rights could find a way to uninstall the security program all together thus removing the parental control feature and antivirus all together.
Regardless of the above, you could place a post under Feature Requests, if you have not done so yet.
On current time - without settings for that.
But against "which/whom" - you want to protect "Browsing Protection settings"?
-> People, who comes and able to re-edit your settings under your machine?
Here meanings: that machine/account should be with password (system-account). So.. able to use your account - just you.
Or be "careful" with access by other people (because they able to simply create more harmful actions with system.... during access).
Here meanings: that for kids.. better to use "restricted account".
If it's not a variant..... so with adminstrator-account.. kids able to do: uninstalling any software, installed another browser (such as any alternative browsers or blink-core-browsers with wrong/or outdated design; or something like Tor) and etc.
-> Malicious actions... which goes to turn off Browsing Protections settings or re-change it?
Here meanings: that if... someone created current malware... it should be detected by F-Secure (as design) or should be detected... when for F-Secure Labs start be known current situation as "sample" - which already will be detected and created improve-logic-steps for prevent future variants.
-> Something else (with meanings.. that modern systems should be with prompt by UAC during try to edit settings; or prevented as unwanted modification for system or registry by any proactive technologies)?
When i have used other AV Suites, like Kaspersky and Bitdefender, they have an option to password protecting parental control and program settings itself. This is another thing to lacks, in FS. I have to create other accounts in Windows for prevent modifications of my settings, it is real? No options to prevent modification to other users of my PC? I don't want to create multiple accounts! With other suites, this is possible, only create a password protection for edit my settings, to prevent other users modifications.
Yes, it's known situation and practice about "protection" by password for settings.
But anyway - who should to change your settings? If anyone can to be with access with your machine/system/account... maybe they can to install or create more harmful steps, than just "change settings for F-Secure".
For example, if you give access to your friends (work with you machine/system under you account) -> they not able to re-change settings under Bitdefender installation. But maybe they able to re-change your DNS-setting?! Bitdefender will be ignore this. But it's can be more harmful as result.
http://community.f-secure.com/t5/Feature-Requests/idb-p/Idea_Exchange - basically.. here should be same feature-requests. You able to vote or add comments. Maybe F-Secure people... will be with "re-check" about current "missing" features.. and will talk about "need that or not".
But here need to know... against "which variants" you want to protect settings. Not just "prevent changes" - but who and how to do this changes (malicious should be detected as malicious; kids maybe more safe under restricted account.. or should be with trust by you; other people, who able to use your machine/system/account always potential risk).
So, if it's mean... that you have one user-account.. yes here just "global" list for user account.
On current time it's able to use "content blocker" and able to create separate list of "allowed websites and denied" (and edit current list) for each accounts (under system).
Anyway... if I correctly understand... your example with next view:
-> you have system, you have account and F-Secure installation.
-> Browsing protection goes to be configured as you want.
But as addition you want to block/prevent visit social network just by your parents (when they use your machine/system and under your user-account).
If yes.. here two potins:
-> yes... it's not able to protect against changes by trusted people (which able to use your user-account, which have access to create modification under system and F-Secure settings).
-> you not able to "configure" it such as "block for your parents" - but allow for you.
You just able to "each time" allow it for you and remove from "allow" list after using.
With that variant - your parents will be with experience, when social network "blocked" - but they able to allow it (such as "administrator"-rights under your user-accounts) as you can also.
Maybe latest same was here - http://community.f-secure.com/t5/Home-Security/Password-for-Browsing-Protection/td-p/60999 (such as... here have answer by F-Secure team).
It's maybe not really nice situation, but basically here can be logic-points with current situation:
-> anyway - better to use various accounts (what if something can be broken under you account by random; not F-Secure Settings.. something another. It's can be anything and does not matter.. if F-Secure settings was with password-protection).
-> maybe you able to "create" normal "trust"-words for parents such as "does not re-change" settings... if you also want to prevent some sites (not just for parents - because with one user account - one list of deny/allow sites).
-> I not really use "parental control" too much. So.. I not really block it a lot of. But have another experience... very helpful for another users... that they can to "allow it". Such as if here "false-positive" blocking by F-Secure Parental Control... they able to visit page. And if they not sure... that here false-positive... they "close page".
Yes, F-Secure have some of things... which usually should be there - if we talk about it after experience with another security-software.
But basically.. not all of them.. really important or required too much often.
Anyway with F-Secure can be some other features, which missing now. It's can be more important and more interesting. But it's missing now. With that meanings - better to add something certainly "cool" and "greatest", than features.. which can be "questionable' about "reason for use".
Anyway... F-Secure design (as I can to understand it) too much connected with platform-design.
Such as F-Secure good-designed software by high-skilled engineers and them too much worry about any "troubles" with integrated. It's mean any features should be related with:
- Platform (OS) guideline;
- Company (F-Secure) design, value and etc.;
- Security level as high-level of protection and security-status;
- Perfomance (such as - able to work with any machines without too much slowdown and etc. F-Secure indeed have good results with that with normal meanings about this... which more important for users, than "external" tests);
- "Easy to use" should be really "easy to use" (and it's not about any "auto-mode" - which not really "easy to use", also if it not designed good);
Such as "less steps", "less worries for users".... more protection by default.
UI should be "usability" by good design/view. and etc.
Such as.. now not all love "colors, buttons, feel" under F-Secure. but in fact.. I think it's can be with good "usability"-result. Such as... related with common meanings.... related with previous "points" (include platform-connected). and etc.
Maybe F-Secure people want to add any features.... but they not sure.. yet..
That here can be without troubles, which create something not nice or break some of "previous points".
Also.. my experience with password-protection for settings by security-software... comes with "each access - need to add password".
I more often want to "speedy" re-edit settings/list or re-check something around settings, than want to "protect" settings by password.
Now with F-Secure I should to open two windows (three) by some clicks, UAC-prompt.... and close all of that.
With password protection - also all of that steps, but also to add password (usually security-software does not create tips about CAPS LOCK or something - so it's can be not so speedy to add) -> and with some of security-companies... I also should to "accept" changes again by password. :) Too much long.. if I want just speedy to re-edit settings (list of deny/allow website) or during any access to UI.........
But basically.. I sure.. that password-protection can be helpful for many users and can be helpful with some of situations.
Without questions. It's probably like that.
Just can to create addition :) that with any recommendations about Parental Control as "system/feature/mechanism/design" usually (or always) comes with first point: "restricted account" (such as separate account).
Any "Kid's Corners" same with that meanings.
Or can be situations.... such as ... house, where can be closed doors, but without other three walls :)
"and closed door" not really helpful already. and more dangerous, than "house with four walls.. and opened doors, which able to use just trusted people".
This topic has been closed due to inactivity. If you would like to discuss this topic further, please start a new post.
You can reference this topic in your post by adding this link:
Visit the Community
Check our Forums or How-to & FAQs for advice or answers
View User Guides
Refer to our getting started guides and product manuals
Talk to our Support agents and get answers to your questions