Comments on websites
Bad website rated Green
la 29. joulukuuta 2007 16:42:00 — DannyKlyricsfreak.com sometimes leads to an adbrite page. I found this out when I went to visit it a few minutes ago and NOD32 came up with:
SWF/TrojanDownloader.Gida.A trojan
Please people, start rating this site red. Adbrite is rated red, but Lyricsfreak should be rated that too.
Your correct.
ke 2. tammikuuta 2008 09:11:33 — anandnavWell lyricsfreak.com has always been suspicious since long time now and I have even used it sometime back and had a lot of PC hang problems.
I have rated it in red.
Thanks for bringing this issue into consideration.
Regards,
Anand.
Rating will infect your pc
ti 25. maaliskuuta 2008 13:59:17 — BaldMmm...
If you want to rate it, your computer will be infected.
Yea, I just rated it red. As
ti 25. maaliskuuta 2008 20:02:23 — RobYea, I just rated it red. As long as you are using Firefox with adblock, you should be alright but not all people have that kind of setup and they shouldn't really have to either.
hm
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 23:35:11 — kr8towhen u click my ranking does that count as overall ranking?
RE: hm
ke 16. huhtikuuta 2008 18:25:43 — stavrosIt counts as overall of all users voted
Leaving a comment is a new possibility
to 17. huhtikuuta 2008 06:37:16 — Esa S.WOT version 3 and the scorecard gives you now a possibility to leave feedback without visiting a page. We have received requests on making it possible to give feedback without landing on a dangerous site, and now you can do it. I made an example by copying DannyK's finding:
http://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/lyricsfreak.com
I see that Rob has also added his. You need to be a registered member to leave a comment, but anyone can view the scorecard pages. It is still imporatant to rate the site because comments do not directly influence the rating.
Heya
to 17. huhtikuuta 2008 15:43:22 — icepick66I don't see how you can change the rating on that page?
Clicking on the bars does not seem to do anything
You can only leave a comment, and the WOT plugin only lists mywot.com.
Re: Heya
to 17. huhtikuuta 2008 15:53:23 — SamiYou can rate websites using the add-on, which always shows you the rating for the current site.
Well rating malicious site
to 17. huhtikuuta 2008 15:59:40 — lordpakeWell rating malicious site would require visiting said malicious site, thus exposing one's computer to possible danger. I can see the dilemma in that :)
Basically at current state WOT is not suited for rating sites that for example have exploits in place. Because, as Esa said previously, comments do not directly effect site's rating.
Re: Well rating malicious site
to 17. huhtikuuta 2008 16:29:56 — SamiYes, we know. I suppose it would be possible to let you rate sites on the scorecard in future, but we haven't really discussed this.
On the other hand, forcing you to actually visit a site before rating it makes it more likely that you confirm your suspicions instead of rating based on hearsay alone. It also helps in preventing users from accidentally rating the wrong site. For example, it's way more unlikely that you'll give a good rating to a typosquatter when using the add-on.
Some notes.
pe 18. huhtikuuta 2008 02:21:20 — Alex TracerQ: How to safely visit dangerous site?
A: 1) Use safe browser. Usually this means: "do not use Internet Explorer". Try fresh versions of FireFox, Opera or Safary.
2) Disable JavaScript in your browser.
3) Use antivirus that supports browser-integration.
Q: What about lyricsfreak.com?
I'm not sure but I think this site was hacked recently. "Black" hackers usually do such things to get more computers for their botnets. My own site was infected few times in the same way until I recasted site's security policy.
@Alex Tracer
pe 18. huhtikuuta 2008 11:34:33 — lordpakeIn context of my previous post here I do find your post rather irresponsible. Regular home user has no SAFE way of visiting malicious site. And by malicious I mean sites that have exploits in place. What you suggested are simply means of narrowing the window of vulnerability. Not forgetting up-to-date Java, Flash, QuickTime, Windows etc.
Better leave visiting active exploit sites to security professionals and to those advanced users who have solid understanding of what they are doing.
Another way to rate malicious sites.
ma 16. kesäkuuta 2008 20:44:52 — BaldThere is also another way to rate a malicious site is using Adblock Plus, and I think there are very much people using it. You can just add the following filter:
*This will block everything. Just add the filter, rate the site, go away from the site and remove the filter.
"As long as you are using
la 7. kesäkuuta 2008 14:56:00 — phantazm"As long as you are using Firefox with adblock, you should be alright..."
I'll recommend NoScript as well
(only available for FireFox)
into the lion's den...
ma 9. kesäkuuta 2008 19:08:53 — woovaAlex' suggestion to disable javascript isn't feasible. The WOT scorecard rating relies on javascript. Disable javascript and you'll receive an error msg when trying to send a rating (and the comment text field will be unavailable to you)
-=-
"Sorry, this page does not work correctly without JavaScript. Please enable JavaScript on your browser."
The myWOT staff might consider adding a "report an unsafe site for review / verification" contact form to the website "support" menu (displayed only to logged-in members) and / or an additional flyout within the context menu of the browser plugin, similarly labeled "report an unsafe site for review / verification".
Verification?
The point is that some sites may merit "special handling" or may seem especially malicious (to the reporter, er, testifier), seeming to merit immediate "red flagging". A staff-verified rating (heavy weighting, definitive 'confidence') would expedite the rating process.
Another situation related to "special handling" and verification:
Consider what will transpire when a testifier reports on the "domain"
badsite.tld:8081/goboom.htm
He probably doesn't realize that the link he followed led to content which is being served from a non-standard port. He places a rating, submits a comment...
...and anyone reading the scorecard who attempts to "verify"
that badsite.tld is indeed bad, finds only innocuous content when they visit -- because the the "baddie" site owner is maintaining a "front", by also serving content from
badsite.tld:80
Into the cats den..?
ti 10. kesäkuuta 2008 14:48:45 — phantazmI agree that it is not a good idea to disable javascript. Then again allowing javascript in all directions is not safe either. That's why I like NoScript, as it allows you to allow one site, and still dissallowing others. Some cats are indeed lions, some cats are just kittens. Therefore a differentiated response is optimal.
However, NoScript is only for FireFox.
And perhaps too complicated for newbies...
hiya
ti 10. kesäkuuta 2008 20:39:25 — woovaThis thread opened with:
"lyricsfreak dawt com sometimes leads to an adbrite page"
Attention to the SOMETIMES factor spurred my "into the lion's den" remark.
Lion's den, slippery slope, can-o-worms... however you label it, verification will be problematic when content is being randomly / conditionally displayed at a given URL.
If you get any of that trogan-ware ..then??
ti 24. kesäkuuta 2008 13:59:08 — ParridoxIf you get hit by any trogan download viewer or other means of there virus-ware.You can then no longer trust your Operating System too be stable an clean, You or i would if it was me,Do a online scan if able to get one,Turn off my System restore so that the virus can not hide on my PC, or called jump around,not being caught by my Anti-virus or Spyware killer i use.When it is all clean, after the scans of them,i will turn on my System Restore again.I do not turn it onto full 12 % or what it is able too use.I set it at 3 too 5 % of space to use.The extra backing up will not help anything.I was reading in some tech news somewhere's.
I use as a anti-virus: ( BitDefenderFreeEdition v10 - Built 247
http://www.BitDefender.com
Spyware killer i use an trust: http://www.SuperAntiSpyware.com
P.S. Both of these programs are FREE editions !
I hate anything that takes away from clean health of my PC. Thank you .!
Heres what I use...
ti 24. kesäkuuta 2008 17:05:39 — Yatti420I dont have a specific browser for visiting potentially bad stuff.. I do have lots of layers though to protect me..
My Standard Windows Setup...
Router>Comp..
Firefox2\3 (always clearing pvt data etc - with phishing etc protection enabled)
HostsMan (MVPS list)
PeerGuardian 2 (various lists for p2p\trojans etc)
Spybot Search & Destroy (SDHelper enabled)
Clamwin Antivirus..
Stinger Standalone Antivirus
Custom Removal Tool for USB viruses I pick up at school constantly..
IE7 Pro for adblocking in IE etc.. (with WOT synched)
...
I have various initial posts on the tools i use etc.. Way back in the forums..
Peace
---------
Jared Gray
Visiting bad sites.
la 28. kesäkuuta 2008 00:58:44 — logicmanMy best advice is - don't!
If you want to investigate a site, use a spare PC set up for just that purpose.
Other than that, I strongly recommend SandboxIE - it will 'sandbox' not just IE, but any program.
If you run your favourite browser in a sandbox, when you delete the sandbox file,
you delete everything that was downloaded or modified during your browsing session -
bookmarks, cookies, viruses, trojans - the lot.
Study up on how to use SandboxIE before you download it.
btw, it's free. Just a 5 second 'nag' screen after each computer re-start.
Or you could pay.
http://www.sandboxie.com/
http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/sandboxie.com?ref=safe&client_ver=FF_26...
Stay safe, people.
I have used PeerGuardian2,
to 3. heinäkuuta 2008 04:24:35 — MissMimiI have used PeerGuardian2, it seems good to me when I, but it kept on crashing. I don't like instable programs.
Someone told me about WinASo, and told me to check it out. It's a really good program; You should check it out. It is a registry optimizer, and it does more. Works wonders.
http://www.winaso.com/
The problem is, to get all the options, you need to buy it. The free downloads are for evaluation purposes.
I also use McAfee (which has borwser integration), and the oh-so-famous Ad-Aware.
I recommend getting different programs that focuses on different areas.
And I barely go to lyrics sites. So I'm good there =]
Yeah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
la 9. elokuuta 2008 22:00:38 — Robot369lyricsfreak.com is know rated red.
I think I was a little too curious...
su 10. elokuuta 2008 18:42:55 — CuriousI have downloaded some lyrics to see if my Avira antivirus will take effect, and it allways were saying "your computer is infected with spyware... click here to clean it" I don`t have the Avira Premium so it can not clean against spywares but I have Glary Utilities and he has the Spyware and adware remover so my Mac is clean now.
I think that this needs to be revisited...
ke 13. elokuuta 2008 19:56:31 — JoATMoNAnd this is one of the reasons why I am unsure about allowing just anybody to rate sites. Who is moderating the sites or contacting webmasters to see if the site has been hacked or redirected without the owners knowledge?
This site has the same scripts running on it as MYWOT.com does...so are you going to give WOT a red rating as well?!?!?!
Shouldn't there be a group of mods or admins or security teams that can verify sites that people are unsure of and report CORRECT information here? This site just seems to have been hacked at the wrong time and an overzealous WOT user demanded that EVERYONE rate it as red instead of actually doing the proper research.
Telling others to visit the site isn't helping...Contacting the Webmaster will. Either he contacts you saying that the problem is fixed, or he doesn't contact you, which most likely means that the site IS malicious. Besides...why are you DOWNLOADING lyrics? Shouldn't you just copy and paste them from the page onto notepad?
If a site has been hacked,
ke 13. elokuuta 2008 19:58:46 — RobIf a site has been hacked, the site is still dangerous and people need to be warned of this.
If you don't want to rate via site...
ke 3. syyskuuta 2008 14:23:08 — Toptiger5If you don't want to go to the site to rate, write http://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/SITENAMEGOESHERE
The truth
pe 5. syyskuuta 2008 21:56:49 — Saul_LuqueWhy can't some people be mature and give it a rating it deserves
lyricsfreak.com
la 6. syyskuuta 2008 08:33:19 — andre9I like this website. I did not find any malware or problems with it.
It's the ad network they use ...
la 6. syyskuuta 2008 13:06:00 — lordpakeThey use AdBrite, afaik that specific network has been involved in serving malicious ads for some time now. Another example is Clicksor. These two are enough to make me use both NoScript and AdBlock and encourage others to to so also, to get rid of every ad. I realize this hurts legitimate website owners/ad networks, however in this case few bad apples do indeed ruin the entire harvest!
And not everyone always gets the same ads, so if one person got infected by visiitng the next might not ...
Now whether to rate site red or green or yellow because of their ad network is one question. Another is, why does the site continue to use such an ad network, which continues to support advertizers with malicious intent/ads which can possibly compromise computers?
"Men make good pets."
good point
la 6. syyskuuta 2008 17:10:20 — andre9thanks lordpake, am changing my rating as we speak, thx