Youth Filtering & Monitoring

Online Privacy, Filtering/Monitoring Hardware and Software

 

A question that often comes up in all our presentations with parents is, “What about parental filtering and monitoring hardware and software solutions?” First, and most importantly, the best solution to help cope with some of the negative challenges mentioned in this e-book is always parental communication and participation. The best filter and monitor in the world is a child’s brain, which is why teaching good digital literacy is so important. The challenge is that sometimes a youth’s brain has not fully matured enough to deal with the issues mentioned in this book. Filtering and monitoring hardware and software can act as an adjunct to parental communication and participation, but never as a replacement. Also, just because we can monitor, should we? This is something we will speak to at the end of this chapter.

 

Depending on the age and risk factors, we believe that youth have no right to privacy from their parents online until such time as they can prove they are being good onlife citizens. Once they have demonstrated good onlife citizenship over a reasonable amount of time, then the filtering and monitoring should be removed from their devices because they have earned that right. We also believe that even when you delete all monitoring and filtering software, if you own the phone, you still have the right to conduct what we call the “24-hour spot check” on the phone with your child present. In this strategy, you provide your child with a heads-up notice that within the next 24 hours, the two of you will sit down to go through the phone together. If you find something that causes concern, have a discussion with your teen, as there may be a reasonable explanation you hadn’t considered. If they continue to participate in less-than-desirable behaviour online, they need to understand that, as the parent who owns the phone, you will reinstall the monitoring software.

 

Remember, mobile technology is not a right—it’s a privilege. If your child abuses that privilege, they need to understand that there will be consequences, enforced immediately by you as the parent, unless there is a reasonable explanation.

 

Some child safety advocates may not agree with us, and we respect their opinion. However, our experience has shown us that filtering, monitoring, and parental overwatch—when used appropriately and reasonably—can help reduce some of the risks associated with the onlife world.

 

Some say using filtering and monitoring software encourages parents to spy on their children. But there is a clear difference between spying and monitoring. Spying happens without knowledge; monitoring happens with informed participation. As fellow onlife advocate Richard Guerry shared with us:

 

“Monitoring is like walking past your teen’s closed bedroom door and hearing something that causes concern. Other than in exigent circumstances, we don’t just barge in—we knock, wait for the invite, enter the room, and discuss what we heard. Spying is like standing outside the same door, looking through the keyhole without their knowledge.”

 

We do not promote spying, but rather informed monitoring—there is a difference. Another important principle is using monitoring and filtering tools to create teachable moments, rather than to punish.

 

Remember, adolescent brains are not fully developed, so they are going to make mistakes in the onlife world. When reasonable and appropriate, use those mistakes as learning opportunities. Filtering and monitoring can help facilitate this. Also, because the parent has signed the terms of service for internet access in the home, the Internet Service Provider (ISP) is registering the parent’s information—not the child’s. Monitoring software also helps protect the parent’s digital dossier.

 

Parent Tip

 

If your monitoring enlightens you about the fact that your young teen is accessing online pornography, rather than punishing them use this fact as an opportunity to have a discussion about the difference between healthy human sexuality, pornography, and hypersexuality. Topics that we will be speaking to later in this web book.

 

 

A Child’s Right to Privacy Online

 

It is important for everyone to know that we are strong supporters of personal privacy. We speak to youth internationally on this topic because we believe we are slowly surrendering our actual rights to personal privacy—both to the government and private industry—in exchange for the convenience of technology, the internet, and social media. We also teach these same students how to minimize their digital dossiers and maximize their online privacy. However, we do not support those who misrepresent privacy laws, acts, or agreements in an attempt to dissuade parents from taking reasonable steps to parent their children in the online world.

 

Our stance on monitoring and filtering is sometimes challenged by those who cite Article 16 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), which states:

 

“No child shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his or her honour and reputation.”

 

When we first read Article 16, we understood how some could extrapolate its intent to include parents when it comes to a child’s privacy rights—especially regarding online monitoring. We, too, were concerned at first, based on how Article 16 reads.

 

Being a police officer, Darren decided to conduct academic and legal research into the UNCRC (UNICEF CRC Portfolios), and more specifically, Article 16. In his research, Darren discovered a book titled “The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: An Analysis of Treaty Provisions and Implications of U.S. Ratification” by Todres, Wojcik, and Revaz (2006). Read it here

 

This book is frequently cited as a definitive academic work for understanding the meaning and application of all articles in the UNCRC. One reason it’s so well-respected is due to the qualifications of its three authors:

 

• Jonathan Todres is an Acting Assistant Professor at New York University School of Law and an Adjunct Professor at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, where he teaches courses on children’s rights and health law. He also serves in multiple leadership roles within the American Bar Association’s Section of International Law.

 

• Mark E. Wojcik is a Professor of Law and Director of the Global Legal Studies Program at The John Marshall Law School in Chicago, where he teaches public international and human rights law.

 

• Cris R. Revaz is Of Counsel at King and Spalding LLP in Washington, D.C., and serves on several nonprofit boards focused on child rights and protection.

 

As you can see, these three authors are North American legal authorities on children’s rights and other human rights issues addressed in the UNCRC.

 

Their book revealed that Article 16 originated from a 1986 proposal by the U.S. delegation to a UN working group focused on political rights and freedoms—specifically the right to privacy, freedom of expression, and peaceful assembly. Canada signed the UNCRC in 1990 and ratified it in 1991. In fact, the spirit of the UNCRC helped shape Canada’s Youth Criminal Justice Act.

 

We also learned that one concern raised during the drafting of Article 16 was that it could impair the parent-child relationship:

 

“Delegations expressed concern that the child’s right to privacy might impair the parent/child relationship, and therefore cause repercussions on the family.”(Todres, Wojcik, and Revaz, pg. 193, 2006)

 

To address these concerns, Article 5 of the UNCRC was created. It states:

 

“States Parties shall respect the responsibilities, rights, and duties of parents...to provide, in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child, appropriate direction and guidance in the exercise by the child of the rights recognized in the present Convention.”

 

After reading the full chapter dedicated to Article 16, it became clear that the spirit of the article was to protect children’s privacy specifically from state and corporate interests—not from their parents. In fact, the authors emphasized:

 

“The Convention was drafted, and is intended, to place obligations on states parties and not to be enforced by the state against the parent.”(Todres, Wojcik, and Revaz, pg. 199, 2006)

 

They go on to clarify that:

 

• Articles 15 and 16 were meant to protect children from abusive governmental actions.

 

• The Convention emphasizes the primacy of the family in a child’s life.

 

• The civil and political rights proposed by the U.S. were not intended to override parental guidance.

 

• All rights are to be exercised in consideration of the evolving capacities of the child.

   

   

In our view, Article 5 supports the rights of parents, which can include reasonable and appropriate monitoring. As we’ve stated, monitoring on its own isn’t effective. It should be used in combination with parental communication and participation. Once a child demonstrates consistent good digital citizenship, parents should remove monitoring software because the child has earned that privacy—an approach that fits well with the principle of evolving capacities.

 

Those who claim Article 16 gives children legal authority over parents when it comes to online monitoring are, in our opinion, misinterpreting the article. While other parenting concerns like “helicopter parenting” are valid topics for discussion, Article 16 is not a legal reason to oppose parental monitoring

 

 

What About the “You Are Violating My Privacy” or “It’s My Diary” Arguments?

 

As mentioned, we’ve stated for years that our kids have no inherent right to privacy from their parents or legal caregivers when it comes to their onlife world—but they can earn that right by demonstrating good digital citizenship and maturity over time. When we share this message with parents and caregivers, we’re often asked, “What do we say to our kids when they push back and argue that we’re violating their privacy or claim, ‘It’s my diary,’ especially when it comes to monitoring their online activity?”

Here are some of our thoughts:

 

#1) The Privacy Argument

 

As already mentioned, there is no privacy law in Canada that gives children the legal right to privacy from their parents or legal caregivers. There are some limited exceptions, such as communications with a doctor or lawyer, but nothing that applies broadly to their online activities.

 

In our experience, youth often use the word “invasion” to try to emotionally pressure a parent into avoiding conflict when enforcing reasonable parental overwatch. This tactic often works because many parents naturally want to avoid arguments with their children—something we call “being your child’s best friend, rather than being their best parent.”

 

Remember: being your child’s best friend can sometimes enable less-than-desirable online behaviour. Enabling can result in dangerous or damaging consequences.

 

#2) The “It’s My Diary” Argument

 

Diaries are traditionally written to be read by one person only—the author. Once something is posted online, however, regardless of the platform’s privacy settings, it is no longer private. It becomes public, permanent, searchable, exploitable, copyable, shareable—and potentially even monetizable by others.

 

When youth post online, they are not writing in a digital diary; they are building a digital dossier that others may access. There’s a huge difference between a private diary and a globally connected digital platform.

 

#3) The Legal and Financial Reality

 

Until your child owns their own device and pays for their own internet access, their online activity is a legal liability risk for you—the parent or caregiver.

 

If your child engages in criminal activity online—such as threats, cyberbullying, or the non-consensual distribution of an intimate image—the police will serve a warrant to the person whose IP address is registered with the Internet Service Provider. That means you, not your child, are on the legal hook. By proxy, your privacy and online history could also become part of a criminal investigation.

 

Additionally, if your child violates the ISP’s terms of service (for example, by posting prohibited content), your entire household may lose internet access. This could be extremely disruptive, especially for parents who work remotely, manage finances online, or rely on home internet access for essential tasks.

 

As soon as we allow our children to access the internet, we increase our responsibilities as parents to mentor, monitor, and act as digital “sheepdogs” for our children until they are mature enough to earn their right to privacy—or until they move out.

 

Being a parent means doing hard things—even when our children don’t like it. Will your child appreciate you taking “reasonable” monitoring steps? Nope. Oh well, that’s parenting. Sometimes we must do and say things our kids aren’t going to like.

 

That said, it’s very important to explain your reasons for monitoring. Saying “because I said so” or “I’m the parent, and you’re not” without providing any context is not recommended—especially when teaching digital literacy. Will you still get pushback? Yes. Welcome to parenthood. But at least you’ve done your due diligence in explaining the why.

​

Recommended Privacy and Filtering Software

 

Before we get into specific tools, we want to highlight a great quote from Chelsea Brown of Digital Mom Talk, which captures an important shift in thinking for many parents:

“Parents think they need to control their children, and that’s actually a misconception. We have this myth because security tools were not designed to be parental controls. They were advanced security settings and some marketer came in and said, ‘We’re going to make these parental controls.’

 

So, for parents, we tell them you need to shift from controlling your child to focusing on controlling the device. Because if you try to control your child through the device, you’re going to end up with the ‘tech battle,’ which is where you lay down the law, set some rules, give them the device—and they’re eventually going to screw up. And when they do, your response is naturally to take away the device. That’s sometimes needed, but then after a while, parents give the device back without teaching proper use. And then the cycle repeats, and you’re going to be in this constant battle.

 

We do not promote a product unless we’ve tested it ourselves. The products on this list have passed our evaluation, which is why we feel confident recommending them in this e-book. Since these tools will be used on your child’s device, we also ensured that, to the best of our knowledge, these companies are not collecting your child’s personal information and selling it to third parties like Google or Facebook.

 

Protection in the Home

 

For computers, laptops, gaming consoles, tablets/iPads, and cellphones, we recommend the following hardware:

 

#1: Gryphon Router

 

What we like about this product is that it's an actual router, capable of covering up to 3,000 square feet. It combines:

 

• Malware and virus protection

 

• Port protection against external attacks

 

• Pornography filtering

 

• Robust parental controls

 

It’s a plug-and-play solution, controlled through a free admin mobile app. Gryphon lets you create user-specific folders so that you can tailor the filtering and time limits to each child. It also provides content filtering, usage history, and screen time limits. Any Wi-Fi-enabled device must go through the Gryphon router to access the internet.

 

Gryphon also includes a mobile app called “Homebound” that can be installed on your child’s device. When they leave home and connect to another Wi-Fi network, the app routes their traffic through the Gryphon system—giving you the same parental protections and tools outside the home.

 

• Price: Approx. $209.00 USD for the standard Gryphon; the Gryphon Guardian (ideal for smaller homes) is about $99.00 USD. 

 

Update – May 2021:Gryphon has released a newer model, the Gryphon AX, which supports the new Wi-Fi 6 standard. It’s about 40% faster than the older version and offers approximately 25% greater coverage. Both the router app and the Homebound app have been improved with more features and easier usability.

 

 

​

Protection Outside the Home

​

Many youth today use mobile devices like smartphones. So, how do you maintain filtering and monitoring once they leave the house? Gryphon offer mobile solutions, though they may not be as feature-rich as dedicated apps. Here are a few more we recommend:

 

#1: Bark (iPhone & Android)

 

Currently available only in the United States, Bark states:

 

“Bark helps families manage and protect their children’s online lives.”

 

It monitors 30+ popular apps, including email and text messaging. It also offers screen time management and web filtering tools.

 

Bark can partially monitor Snapchat—though, due to Snapchat’s design, insights are limited.

It’s reactive, meaning you only receive notifications after something concerning has already been sent.

 

• Price: $49.00 to $99.00 USD per year, depending on the plan. Monthly pricing available.

   

  🔗 Visit Bark

 

#2: SafeToNet (iPhone & Android)

 

Also currently U.S.-only, SafeToNet is a proactive monitoring solution.

 

It uses a smart keyboard that detects risk in real-time, offering live feedback and emotional support while your child types. It blocks harmful content before it's sent and helps identify signs of low self-esteem, dark thoughts, or peer pressure.

 

The parent dashboard offers digital wellness indicators, behaviour trends, and guidance for intervention.

 

Designed primarily for children under 15, though we believe it is best suited for youth under 13.

• Price: Currently free to download with in-app purchase options.

   

  🔗 Visit SafeToNet

 

#3: Boomerang (Primarily Android and Galaxy)

 

Boomerang works across Apple and Android, but we found it most effective for Galaxy/Android.

 

It’s a full-featured app offering strong parental controls and content filtering.

• Price: Free to download, with in-app purchases

   

  🔗 Visit Boomerang

 

Boomerang also offers a free kid-safe web browser called SPIN, which blocks access to harmful content (e.g., porn, gambling, hate speech, violence). It also prevents private browsing and enforces YouTube’s restricted mode.

 

🔗 SPIN Browser for Android & iOS🛠️ How to make SPIN the default browser on iOS 14 

 

 

#4: Kinzoo (All Devices)

 

While not a filtering or monitoring tool, Kinzoo is one of the safest and most private messaging platforms for pre-teens and teens. It’s fully scaffolded by parents and doesn’t collect personal information for advertising purposes—unlike apps like Facebook Messenger Kids or WhatsApp.

 

Think of Kinzoo as “training wheels” for safe communication.

 

• Price: Free to download with parent-controlled in-app purchases

   

   https://youtu.be/Pe2l84GsjXQ

 

 

Parent Tip:Parents often ask, “What would you choose?” Our answer: It depends on your family’s specific needs, values, and budget. There is no “one-size-fits-all” solution. For personalized recommendations, you can book a free consultation via our website:🌐 www.thewhitehatter.ca

 

As social media and internet safety expert Anne Collier once said:

 

“While tools ranging from content filters, routers, firewalls, and anti-malware have their place, they are not a substitute for the lifelong process provided by critical thinking. The best technological filter is not the one that runs on a device, but rather the software that runs in our heads.”

 

So true!

 

Parent Tip:

 

Be aware that not all software and hardware solutions work well together. For example, if you use NetSanity, it may not be compatible with Bark. Always check compatibility with the manufacturer before combining tools.

 

Just Because We Can Monitor, Should We?

 

Caveat:

​

In this section, we’re specifically discussing monitoring software—not filtering software.

 

• Filtering software prevents youth from accessing specific websites, apps, or content. It might also set restrictions like screen time limits or bedtime curfews.

 

• Monitoring software allows parents and caregivers to view what youth are doing online—this can include reading messages, accessing browser history, or reviewing images and videos.

 

Filtering is about prevention. Monitoring is about visibility into your child’s digital behavior, regardless of their access.

 

We’ve long said that youth do not have a right to privacy from their parents or caregivers in their onlife world—but they can earn that right through consistent displays of digital maturity. Importantly, in Canada and the United States, there is no law or legal precedent preventing a parent or legal guardian from monitoring their child’s online activities.

 

However, legality isn’t the only consideration. Even if it’s legal, should parents and caregivers do it?

​

 

When Monitoring Makes Sense: Under 13 Years Old

 

For youth under 13, we believe monitoring is essential. In fact, a 2021 Canadian research study found that children in this age group:

 

“…see parents as an important part of their privacy infrastructure because parents help them steer clear of online pitfalls.”

🔗 Read the full study

 

This research also noted:

 

“At this life stage, sharing the same online spaces with parents can facilitate privacy and autonomy because parents can help children learn how to make their own choices. They do this by teaching their children how to assert boundaries around their online lives so their children can actively manage invasive behaviour on the part of ill-intentioned online actors.”

“In this case, privacy and autonomy are not so much about being ‘left alone.’ Instead, they are cultivated through respectful and supportive social relationships with parents.”

 

This is why children under 13 rarely push back against reasonable parental monitoring. In fact, many value it.

 

When Resistance Begins: Ages 13–17

 

The dynamic shifts with teens. Youth between 13 and 17 are entering a stage of self-discovery and autonomy, and it's normal for them to seek independence. This age group is more likely to push back against monitoring.

 

Again, the same 2021 Canadian research states:

 

“This requires a certain amount of privacy from the family, so teens can interact with peers and experiment with different—and new—roles. From this perspective, privacy is not about control over personal information nor solely about being ‘left alone’; it is about being able to assert appropriate boundaries between a young person’s various social roles and relationships. Privacy is violated when these boundaries are breached.”

 

This developmental need is why over-monitoring teens can backfire. It may damage trust and reduce the likelihood that your child will come to you if something does go wrong online.

​

 

Protection Through Monitoring vs. Education and Participation

 

A 2020 MediaSmarts Canada report found that many parents feel the need to constantly monitor their child online, regardless of age, simply because they’re afraid.

🔗 View the report

 

This fear is understandable. Media stories often focus on the dangers of technology and social media. But it’s important to remember that:

 

• There are dangers offline too.

 

• Youth who are vulnerable offline are more likely to encounter multiple risks online.

  🔗 Supporting research

 

Through our work with over 500,000 teens across North America, we know there are far more positive, creative, and educational things that youth are doing online than there are negative. These positives simply don’t get the same media attention.

 

This is why we advocate for digital literacy education and parental participation over pure surveillance. Parents who communicate with and actively participate in their child’s onlife world are much more likely to raise teens who stay safe online.🔗 Supporting study

​

​

The Role of Risk in Building Digital Resilience

 

Some excellent research from the UK further reinforces this message:

“Exposure to risk seems to play an essential role in the development and manifestation of online resilience. Although many parents worry about risk, some risky experiences give young people the chance to develop ways of coping that can minimize or prevent experiences of harm in the future.”🔗 Read the study

 

If we think of coping as a form of digital literacy, this explains why digitally literate youth may encounter more risks—but also handle them better than their less literate peers.

 

The same 2021 Canadian research mentioned earlier adds:

 

“However, our qualitative research suggests that when parents do respect their teens’ privacy and trust them to exercise their autonomy in a mature way, teens have the space they need to use networked media in creative ways and come to parents for help when they need it.”

​

 

The Challenge of Obsolete Monitoring Tools

 

A growing concern is that as Apple and Google strengthen their privacy guidelines, many third-party parental monitoring apps may soon stop working altogether.

 

One such case is NetSanity. It was a well-established, award-winning monitoring solution for Apple and Android devices. We used to recommend it. But today, it’s out of business. The company hasn’t released an official reason, but many speculate that Apple’s stricter privacy protections made the app non-functional, which affected funding and viability.

 

We recently spoke with a respected software representative who shared:

 

“Apple and Google have killed this space for the most part. Their guidelines have become so strict.”

 

This individual—and we agree—believes that many third-party parental monitoring tools will become obsolete in the near future.

 

Moving Forward: Tools That Teach vs. Tools That Spy

 

Parents who rely solely on third-party monitoring tools without combining them with communication, participation, and education will be at a significant disadvantage. That’s why we recommend age-appropriate tech products like:

 

• Pinwheel Phone

 

• Gryphon Router (with the Homebound app)

 

These tools provide filtering, structure, and safety without depending on a third-party app that may soon be incompatible with future software updates or platform policies.

​

 

So What Are Our Recommendations?

 

Based on high-quality, peer-reviewed academic research and our own empirical experience working with youth and parents, here are our recommendations regarding the use of parental monitoring tools:

 

For youth aged 13 and under

 

Parents should be actively engaged in their child’s onlife world through:

 

• Parental communication

 

• Parental participation

 

• Digital literacy education

 

• Reasonable use of parental filtering and monitoring tools

 

At this age, children are still developing foundational cognitive, emotional, and ethical reasoning skills. Monitoring—used alongside mentorship—can help shape their online behaviour in healthy, safe, and constructive ways.

 

For youth over the age of 13

 

As your child matures and demonstrates responsible digital literacy:

 

• Monitoring should be phased out gradually, not abruptly.

 

• Continued onlife parental communication and participation are essential.

 

This incremental shift respects your child’s developmental need for autonomy while still preserving the parent’s protective role. Privacy is earned—not automatically granted.

 

 

For youth who are vulnerable or at-risk offline or online

 

Regardless of age, if your child is showing signs of vulnerability (e.g., mental health struggles, risky online behaviour, or manipulation by others), then monitoring is a reasonable and supported strategy.

 

Parents must assess the risk-to-resilience ratio and act in the child’s best interest—even if that means temporarily limiting privacy to ensure safety.

 

The future of third-party monitoring apps

 

There is a growing risk that many popular monitoring apps will become obsolete over the next few years due to changes in privacy guidelines by Apple, Google, and other tech companies.

 

This is why we emphasize digital literacy education, parental engagement, and the selection of age-appropriate tech products—not just apps.

​

 

Final Thoughts

 

Using parental monitoring software or hardware in isolation—without pairing it with open communication, active participation, and digital literacy education—will not work in keeping youth safer online.

 

Ultimately, the decision to use monitoring tools is a personal parenting choice. It should be tailored to your child’s age, maturity, digital habits, and risk profile. Every decision comes with trade-offs, risks, and consequences. No approach is without challenge.

 

What matters most is a balanced and thoughtful approach to risk management. Monitoring may sometimes be appropriate. In other cases, it may do more harm than good. Knowing the difference—and adapting accordingly—is key to supporting your child’s development of digital resilience, a life skill they will need well into adulthood.

 

We hope this chapter has provided valuable insight to help inform your decision-making process.

 

But remember:

 

Just because we can use parental monitoring software and hardware, doesn’t mean we should—in all cases.

 

Parent Tip

Here’s a fantastic resource for parents and caregivers from our friends at InternetMatters.org, with step-by-step guides on how to set up parental controls for Apple, Android, and other devices to help minimize online risks: