June 3, 2009 5:47 PM PDT

McAfee's new family shield

by Seth Rosenblatt
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 31 comments

Updated June 5 at 3:48 p.m. Pacific Time: Users can now download the trial of McAfee Family Protection.

Correction: The 30-day trial for McAfee Family Protection is not yet available for users. I will update this post when it does become available.

On the heels of Symantec's OnlineFamily.Norton, released earlier this year, security stalwart McAfee is jumping into the family protection game with a new home-oriented protection program. Called McAfee Family Protection, the program will offer many familiar tools to parents in the hopes of fostering conversation while protecting children from harm.

McAfee Family Protection protects children based on multiple levels of technology.

(Credit: McAfee)

McAfee Family Protection will offer blocking, monitoring, and parental notifications for most computer-based activities. The program will allow for up to 10 users on three different machines, utilizing several layers of algorithms to monitor behavior. Parents can outright block or merely monitor Web sites, social-networking behavior, and instant messaging including Facebook IM and multiprotocol chat clients, according to Javed Hasan, vice president of McAfee Product Management.

In addition to blanket blocks for subject matter and specific Web site blocks, parents can customize rules so that they can block all of YouTube, or just YouTube videos that have specific tags. Web sites protected by secure protocol, https, can also be blocked. They can also set up roadblocks that prevent specific applications from opening, such as peer-to-peer clients or media players, and parents can receive brief SMS notifications alongside more-detailed e-mail reports.

The program will also be able to restrict computer usage based on cumulative time used or by time of day. It uses a server-based clock, so tampering with the local system-based clock shouldn't affect this feature.

McAfee says that Family Protection uses about 20MB of RAM when idle and can run on systems with as little as 128MB of RAM. A three-computer license for up to 10 users is available for $39.99.

Seth peers into the deep, dark corners of software so that you don't have to. He has yet to suffer a single nightmare about OS/2. You can follow him on Twitter.
Recent posts from The Download Blog
'Driver' races out of history and onto iPhones
Yelp for Android now uploading photos
Today only: Get a free DVD ripper
Put Task Manager in Windows' notification area
Tax prep preview: Which DIY app is right for you?
Rock and roll! The Muppets' Animal stars in iPhone game
TweetDeck deal brings a Sherlock Holmes look
The 17 best iPhone games of 2009
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (31 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by monkeyfun14 June 3, 2009 6:05 PM PDT
Anyone actually use these type of programs? I think Symantec and McAfee are chasing a non existent market.
Reply to this comment
by menon.nrk June 7, 2009 12:09 AM PDT
With AVG and Awast, home users are freely protected. They should be encouraged.
by RLJSlick June 7, 2009 7:50 AM PDT
Man I totally agree, I have for years telling people to stay away for these yearly cost update software packages, and point them to software like Avast and Comodo!
by Lerianis3 June 8, 2009 7:04 PM PDT
Avast, AVG and Comodo are junk. Personally, I will stick with my Norton Internet Security, which has NEVER failed me. It used to miss some of the 'codec viruses', but I got smarter and stopped downloading them and started searching the pages for the DIRECT links to the .mpg's and .avi's I wanted to view.
by mjconver June 3, 2009 7:11 PM PDT
There's a market. Kids 2-10 aren't generally smart enough to disable the services. Boys 11 and up, and girls 13 and up will figure out
Reply to this comment
by uptheironsrafi June 4, 2009 4:04 AM PDT
@mjconver:
Do you honestly think girls these days are less smart than boys? I have many girl friends who can use the PC better than most boys I know.
by Pon666 June 6, 2009 1:05 AM PDT
Hey Rafi! Fancy seeing you here. And mate, most girls are incapable of properly using the computer. That's a fact.
by wojx June 6, 2009 6:10 AM PDT
LOL. You know it's true.
by Lerianis3 June 8, 2009 7:08 PM PDT
Guess again. I left my cousin with a laptop with this software on it.... she was able to get rid of the software in three minutes, just by doing a search for "disable family protection software" in Google! She was 4!
It's just time to realize that you cannot protect children from sex, violence, etc. and to not even try. Just tell them on NUMEROUS OCCASIONS that some of the things that they see only are okay in fantasy but not in reality.... though you shouldn't say that about 99% of the sexual things that they see online.
by jeremy_l_smith270 June 3, 2009 7:50 PM PDT
Does this software address the issue of using a proxy server?
Reply to this comment
by June 4, 2009 4:11 AM PDT
My comment is not about this article. Is it just me or does the author's name disappear from the articles every Thursday/Friday. I've tried Firefox, IE, and Chrome, with the same results on all.
Reply to this comment
by ArsFragica June 4, 2009 9:24 AM PDT
McAfee is outdated. NOD32 is better, if not the best.
Reply to this comment
by gofalcons June 4, 2009 11:26 AM PDT
they arent talking about which av scanner is better......read the article.....not to mention nod32 may be awesome against one virus and terrible against another, which is why no av is totally safe, its all up to the common sense of the user to not get infected.
by Lerianis3 June 8, 2009 7:11 PM PDT
McAfee is outdated, that is true. It automaticallly deletes viruses, and by doing that they have deleted quite a few legitimate programs on my machine.... which started to **** me off while I was testing their beta software and I finally uninstalled it and sent them an e-mail stating "Sorry, I cannot test this software anymore... it is deleting too many of my legit files, and that is not acceptable in the slightest."
by AlanHub June 4, 2009 10:37 AM PDT
Censoring suicide or anoerixia? thats just putting a bandaid on a much larger problem.
Reply to this comment
by Charles_Bronson June 6, 2009 9:25 AM PDT
Well suicide videos or something like that I could understand. But anorexia. . . I don't get it.
by srosenblatt June 4, 2009 11:47 AM PDT
I would much rather have parents involved in teaching their children how to use the Internet and social networking than not, and these programs seem to do that in a way that the hands-off approach of blacklists and keyloggers of the late 90s/early 00s don't.

Just as an example, one friend of mine's daughter, who is two, has figured out how to order PPV shows on their cable box. Are you really arguing that children don't need supervision, or at least guidance, in how they deal with the flood of online information?
Reply to this comment
by TechnoMan475392 June 6, 2009 7:16 PM PDT
Sure they need guidance, but it needs to be openly communicated. Flat out blocking terms will make kids want to access them more than normal. They can go to friends' houses to watch porn and search for "anorexia" whilst watching unrestricted. Setting clear boundaries that are firm and negotiable is always preferable.
by Lerianis3 June 8, 2009 7:14 PM PDT
by TechnoMan475392 June 6, 2009 7:16 PM PDT
Sure they need guidance, but it needs to be openly communicated. Flat out blocking terms will make kids want to access them more than normal. They can go to friends' houses to watch porn and search for "anorexia" whilst watching unrestricted. Setting clear boundaries that are firm and negotiable is always preferable.
___________________________

The best thing that could be done is to realize that porn is not harmful to children and that children are sexual creatures who have the right to engage in sexual encounters with anyone they wish. If you want to protect them from pregnancy, STD's and other 'nasty' things related to sex..... birth control, proper sex education (and COMPREHENSIVE, LEAVING NOTHING OUT SEX EDUCATION AT THE AGE OF 2 is what I am talking about), and a few other things are the way to prevent those things.

It's time to realize that children are not as stupid as people would like to make them out to be, and stop trying to 'protect' them from things that you think are 'icky' or 'not for children', which is you putting your OWN judgments on things like you are always right.
by parleycross June 4, 2009 4:30 PM PDT
I use Safe Eyes v5 and the McAfee screenshot shown in the article looks virtually identical to the Safe Eyes interface.
Has McAfee taken over Safe Eyes or just using their technology.
Safe Eyes is available now.
My kids nag me mercilessly to turn off Safe Eyes if they can't access something they want to watch. It is hard to stop them nagging you into submission.
Reply to this comment
by tsrman June 8, 2009 11:38 AM PDT
Yeah, McAfee appears to be licensing the tech from SafeEyes. But charging ten bucks less!
by MongooseProXC June 4, 2009 6:23 PM PDT
I must say, McAfee is the only antivirus that I have ever used that caught more than just a tracking cookie. Works for me!
Reply to this comment
by parleycross June 5, 2009 5:52 PM PDT
Why have you not mentioned in your article that this software is basically just a copy of Safe Eyes with new colours ?
Reply to this comment
by Charles_Bronson June 6, 2009 9:34 AM PDT
I was actually pretty happy with McAfee for the past year until I realized a few days ago that I can't actually disable it without uninstalling. I never had a reason to shut it down until recently and I felt as if I was a small child being punished. I'd tell McAfee to go away via task manager. But sure enough, within a minute or two it was running again. Remove it from the startup, but upon resetting the computer guess who's back in the startup? Maybe a better analogy is that McAfee is a small disobedient child. No! Bad! That's a bad McAfee! I said go to your room, and I meant it!

I'm really glad the year of service is almost up because I find this extremely annoying. I'm referring to Security Center, but still. If this is the way their products work then they're definitely not for me.
Reply to this comment
by jpap93 June 7, 2009 9:02 AM PDT
Man, go to Configure and then disable.
by Charles_Bronson June 8, 2009 10:55 PM PDT
@ jpap93

I don't want it disabled. I want it off. As in no longer running and using resources.
by tsrman June 8, 2009 11:36 AM PDT
This product works like a charm. Not only is it stopping just about every attempt of my 13-year-to bypass controls (by using search engines as a way to get around particular site blocks), it also allows me to stop my kids from using secret email addresses that I don't know about. Worth every penny. Any parent should have something like this on their PC...otherwise, you've left the door to the porn shop wide open. Thumbs up, McAfee!!!!!
Reply to this comment
by livinglife_inyou June 8, 2009 11:41 AM PDT
i do not use McAfee i do not like McAfee is a bad Program it do not work any Program i like avast
Reply to this comment
by fjk300 June 8, 2009 5:11 PM PDT
I love to work with AVG
Reply to this comment
by livinglife_inyou June 8, 2009 10:44 PM PDT
i love avast you can not tune off avast or the on access scanner you need a password i run avast, IObit Security 360, Spyware Terminator,MalwarebytesAnti-Malware,windowsdefender.
Reply to this comment
by guvenlik-sistemleri July 15, 2009 10:27 AM PDT
Thanks for putting up the information.

<a href="http://www.guvenliksistemleri.info">güvenlik sistemleri</a>
Reply to this comment
(31 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next

Search Download Blog posts

About The Download Blog

Download.com editors cover the world of downloadable software and beyond.

Add this feed to your online news reader

The Download Blog topics