Site blocking only works for non-SSL requests. If you add a site to the Site Blocking feature it is still able to connect via SSL.
Example, add .fakedomainhere.com
http://www.fakedomainhere.com is blocked
https://www.fakedomainhere.com gets through fine
When you try to add https://fakedomainhere.com it autocorrects it to http://https://fakedomainhere.com
That’s right.
Since the Site Blocking is integral to the web shield, which only monitors http traffic it won’t be monitoring https traffic so can’t apply any block you try to apply for it.
In all honesty I don’t believe that the site blocking should be use for any major blocking activity, I have always stated if you want to block sites do it at firewall level or use the HOSTS file or a HOSTS file management program. Not only are these more user friendly they are easier to maintain, if you use a HOSTS file manager, you can also let it do the management.
I still think it should be a possibility to block the connection using Network Shield which should be able to do that. Who cares if it doesn’t place the notification inside the webpage, i think users want the blocking feature (functionality) more over eyecandy…
I second this, I would like to see site blocking block the host completely, not just port 80/http traffic if possible.
In the meantime use the HOSTS file to block the domain.
+1