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/5PIWG4IP...
NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/YH6XG677...