Nope. You mix up parental control and phishing protection. Parental control works as it should (just check yourself at www.playboy.com (or www.gayboy.com, depending on your preferences )).this is a serious flaw which in effect renders parental control completely useless.
Missed it. Than it's our bug, we should block dangerous pages event if sensitivity level is disabled.I do have sensitivity disabled. A better option would be for the advanced option to ask for password before proceeding to the blocked website.
The children are protected from unsafe (for children) content. Parental control(led sites) has/have no workaround (except using an 'unknown' browser or simply renaming the executable).As said though, if parental controls are activated then that option should be removed after all its the children your normally trying to protect from these types of sites i just thought of another feature that could be added to parental controls but, might be going over the top after all this is ment to be an adblocker.
That works already. What does not work yet (but was pretty usefull for multi-user systems) is the final blocking of malicious sites (i.e. no Proceed Anyway available at all, or way better Venkys ideaIf you use Parental Control than even if you proceed you'll see Parental Control's Access Denied page.
to ask for password before proceeding to the blocked website.
Nope, it does not depend on sensitivity level (mine was 'age 10', still could proceed to malicious site) whereas proceeding to 'unsafe' site asked for password.Missed it. Than it's our bug, we should block dangerous pages event if sensitivity level is disabled.