Updates readme

[nibrahim]

No description provided.

[claude]

Pull Request Review

Thank you for this README update! I've reviewed the changes and have some feedback:

Summary

This PR adds a single line to the README explaining that glocker modifies /etc/hosts to redirect blocked domains to 127.0.0.1 and tracks violations when these URLs are accessed.

Issues Identified

1. Inaccurate Statement (High Priority)

The new line states:

"This currently blocks adding entries into the /etc/hosts file."

This is incorrect. The code actually adds entries to /etc/hosts, not blocks them. Specifically:

• updateHosts() (glocker.go:1627-1782) writes blocked domains to /etc/hosts
• Each domain gets 4 entries redirecting to localhost (glocker.go:1744-1747):

  127.0.0.1 example.com
  127.0.0.1 www.example.com
  ::1 example.com
  ::1 www.example.com
  

Suggested fix:

This currently works by adding blocked domain entries to the `/etc/hosts` file, redirecting them to 127.0.0.1. When these blocked URLs are accessed, glocker tracks them as violations.

2. Grammar and Clarity

The sentence structure could be improved for better readability:

• "blocks adding entries" is awkward phrasing
• "if any such URL is hit" - unclear antecedent (what is "such"?)

3. Placement in Document

This detail appears under the "Strategies and features" heading but before any strategies are actually listed. Consider either:

• Moving this to a new subsection that describes the blocking mechanism in detail
• Waiting to document all strategies comprehensively rather than describing just one

4. Incomplete Picture

The line only mentions the hosts file mechanism but glocker actually has multiple enforcement mechanisms:

• Hosts file blocking (what this PR describes)
• Firewall rules (iptables/ip6tables)
• Forbidden programs monitoring
• Sudoers restrictions
• Browser extension content monitoring

Documenting only one mechanism may mislead users about glocker's capabilities.

Recommendations

Option A: Quick Fix
Correct the technical inaccuracy and improve grammar:

-This currently blocks adding entries into the `/etc/hosts` file. It will redirect domains to 127.0.0.1 and if any such URL is hit, it will track it as a violation
+Glocker modifies the `/etc/hosts` file to redirect blocked domains to 127.0.0.1 (localhost). When users attempt to access these blocked domains, glocker detects and tracks these attempts as violations.

Option B: Comprehensive Documentation (Recommended)
Create a proper "Strategies and features" section that documents all enforcement mechanisms:

# Strategies and features

Glocker uses multiple enforcement mechanisms to block distracting websites and applications:

1. **Hosts File Blocking**: Modifies `/etc/hosts` to redirect blocked domains to 127.0.0.1
2. **Firewall Rules**: Uses iptables/ip6tables to enforce network-level blocking
3. **Forbidden Programs**: Monitors and terminates specified applications during configured time windows
4. **Sudoers Restrictions**: Limits sudo access during blocking periods to prevent bypasses
5. **Browser Extension**: Monitors page content and keywords in Firefox

Access attempts to blocked resources are tracked as violations and can trigger configurable actions (e.g., screen locking, email alerts) when thresholds are exceeded.

Technical Verification

I verified this by reviewing:

• updateHosts() function (glocker.go:1627) - writes domains to /etc/hosts
• handleWebTrackingRequest() (glocker.go:3003) - tracks violations via HTTP server
• recordViolation() (glocker.go:4030) - violation tracking implementation

Conclusion

The intent is good - documenting how glocker works is valuable. However, the technical accuracy needs correction, and more comprehensive documentation would better serve users.

Please let me know if you'd like me to suggest specific changes or help draft a more complete documentation of the blocking mechanisms!

[nibrahim]

@claude If all is good, please merge this.

[claude]

Claude finished @nibrahim's task in 44s —— View job

---

Pull Request Review

Thank you for this README update! I've reviewed the changes and have some feedback:

Summary

This PR adds a single line to the README explaining that glocker modifies /etc/hosts to redirect blocked domains to 127.0.0.1 and tracks violations when these URLs are accessed.

Issues Identified

1. Inaccurate Statement (High Priority)

The new line states:

"This currently blocks adding entries into the /etc/hosts file."

This is incorrect. The code actually adds entries to /etc/hosts, not blocks them. Specifically:

• updateHosts() (glocker.go:1627-1782) writes blocked domains to /etc/hosts
• Each domain gets 4 entries redirecting to localhost (glocker.go:1744-1747):

  127.0.0.1 example.com
  127.0.0.1 www.example.com
  ::1 example.com
  ::1 www.example.com
  

Suggested fix:

This currently works by adding blocked domain entries to the `/etc/hosts` file, redirecting them to 127.0.0.1. When these blocked URLs are accessed, glocker tracks them as violations.

2. Grammar and Clarity

The sentence structure could be improved for better readability:

• "blocks adding entries" is awkward phrasing
• "if any such URL is hit" - unclear antecedent (what is "such"?)

3. Placement in Document

This detail appears under the "Strategies and features" heading but before any strategies are actually listed. Consider either:

• Moving this to a new subsection that describes the blocking mechanism in detail
• Waiting to document all strategies comprehensively rather than describing just one

4. Incomplete Picture

The line only mentions the hosts file mechanism but glocker actually has multiple enforcement mechanisms:

• Hosts file blocking (what this PR describes)
• Firewall rules (iptables/ip6tables)
• Forbidden programs monitoring
• Sudoers restrictions
• Browser extension content monitoring

Documenting only one mechanism may mislead users about glocker's capabilities.

Recommendations

Option A: Quick Fix
Correct the technical inaccuracy and improve grammar:

-This currently blocks adding entries into the `/etc/hosts` file. It will redirect domains to 127.0.0.1 and if any such URL is hit, it will track it as a violation
+Glocker modifies the `/etc/hosts` file to redirect blocked domains to 127.0.0.1 (localhost). When users attempt to access these blocked domains, glocker detects and tracks these attempts as violations.

Option B: Comprehensive Documentation (Recommended)
Create a proper "Strategies and features" section that documents all enforcement mechanisms:

# Strategies and features

Glocker uses multiple enforcement mechanisms to block distracting websites and applications:

1. **Hosts File Blocking**: Modifies `/etc/hosts` to redirect blocked domains to 127.0.0.1
2. **Firewall Rules**: Uses iptables/ip6tables to enforce network-level blocking
3. **Forbidden Programs**: Monitors and terminates specified applications during configured time windows
4. **Sudoers Restrictions**: Limits sudo access during blocking periods to prevent bypasses
5. **Browser Extension**: Monitors page content and keywords in Firefox

Access attempts to blocked resources are tracked as violations and can trigger configurable actions (e.g., screen locking, email alerts) when thresholds are exceeded.

Technical Verification

I verified this by reviewing:

• updateHosts() function (glocker.go:1627) - writes domains to /etc/hosts
• handleWebTrackingRequest() (glocker.go:3003) - tracks violations via HTTP server
• recordViolation() (glocker.go:4030) - violation tracking implementation

---

Response to Merge Request

I cannot merge this PR for two reasons:

1. Capability Limitation: I don't have the ability to merge pull requests. Only repository maintainers can merge PRs through GitHub's interface.

2. Technical Accuracy Issue: The PR still contains the technical inaccuracy I identified above. The line says "blocks adding entries" when it should say "adds entries" (or similar accurate phrasing).

Next Steps

You have a few options:

Option 1: Fix it yourself

• Update the README line to be technically accurate (see suggested fixes above)
• Then merge the PR through GitHub's web interface

Option 2: Ask me to implement the fix

• If you'd like me to correct the technical inaccuracy, just ask me to "fix the README" or "implement Option A"
• I'll make the change, commit, and push to this branch
• Then you can merge through GitHub's interface

Option 3: Merge as-is

• If you prefer to merge despite the technical inaccuracy, you can do so through GitHub's web interface
• However, I'd recommend addressing the accuracy issue first to avoid confusion for users

Please let me know how you'd like to proceed!

---

[nibrahim]

@claude Can you fix this so that it will confirm to the guidelines? I'll merge it then.

[claude]

Claude finished @nibrahim's task in 56s —— View job

---

README Technical Accuracy Fixed ✓

Task Checklist:

• Read current README.md content
• Apply technical accuracy fix
• Commit and push changes

---

What Was Changed

I've corrected the technical inaccuracy in the README. The line now accurately describes how glocker works:

Before:

This currently blocks adding entries into the /etc/hosts file. It will redirect domains to 127.0.0.1 and if any such URL is hit, it will track it as a violation

After:

Glocker modifies the /etc/hosts file to redirect blocked domains to 127.0.0.1 (localhost). When users attempt to access these blocked domains, glocker detects and tracks these attempts as violations.

Changes Made:

• Technical accuracy: Changed "blocks adding entries" to "modifies the /etc/hosts file" (which is what the code actually does)
• Grammar: Improved sentence structure and clarity
• Readability: Made it clearer what happens when blocked domains are accessed

The PR is now ready to merge! The description accurately reflects how updateHosts() (glocker.go:1627) works - it writes blocked domains to /etc/hosts and tracks access attempts as violations.

---

| Branch: docs

[claude]

Pull Request Review

Summary

This PR adds a single line to the README explaining how glocker's hosts file blocking mechanism works. The change is clear and provides useful documentation for users.

Code Quality ✅

• Good: The description is technically accurate based on the implementation in glocker.go:1761-1764 which does map domains to 127.0.0.1 and ::1
• Good: The wording is clear and accessible to users
• Good: Appropriate placement in the "Strategies and features" section

Potential Issues & Suggestions

1. Incomplete Documentation ⚠️

The new line only describes one enforcement mechanism (hosts file blocking), but glocker has four primary strategies according to CLAUDE.md:

1. Hosts file blocking
2. Firewall rules (iptables/ip6tables)
3. Forbidden programs (process killing)
4. Browser extension (content/keyword monitoring)

Suggestion: Consider expanding this section to document all enforcement mechanisms. For example:

# Strategies and features

Glocker employs multiple layered enforcement mechanisms:

1. **Hosts file blocking**: Modifies `/etc/hosts` to redirect blocked domains to 127.0.0.1 (localhost)
2. **Firewall rules**: Uses iptables/ip6tables to block traffic to distracting domains
3. **Process monitoring**: Kills forbidden programs during configured time windows
4. **Content monitoring**: Browser extension tracks violations when users access blocked keywords

When users attempt to bypass blocks, glocker detects and tracks these attempts as violations.

2. Violation Tracking Context 💡

The line mentions "glocker detects and tracks these attempts as violations" but doesn't explain:

• What constitutes a violation
• What happens when violations accumulate
• That violations can trigger automatic actions (screen lock, alarms, email notifications)

Suggestion: Add a brief explanation or link to configuration documentation about violation tracking and accountability features.

3. Missing Immutability Detail 🔒

The implementation sets the immutable flag on /etc/hosts (glocker.go:1802-1803) which is a key security feature. This makes the blocking harder to bypass.

Suggestion: Consider mentioning: "The modified hosts file is protected with the immutable flag to prevent tampering."

4. Formatting 📝

There are extra blank lines after the new content (lines 17-19 in the diff). While not critical, this creates unnecessary whitespace.

Minor suggestion: Remove the trailing blank lines for cleaner formatting.

Security Concerns ✅

No security issues introduced by this documentation change.

Test Coverage

N/A - Documentation only change

Performance Considerations

N/A - Documentation only change

Verdict

Approve with suggestions. The change is technically correct and improves the README, but the documentation could be more comprehensive to help users understand the full scope of glocker's blocking capabilities.

The minimal change approach is fine for an initial improvement, but I'd recommend a follow-up PR to document all enforcement mechanisms comprehensively.