Post by kas on Apr 3, 2011 6:33:46 GMT -5
WOT (Web of Trust)
(I like how they even support subdomains which helps the ratings of free forums and free sites to not be judged by a few bad apples.
I also like how you can edit your evidence incase you find more or find out you were wrong in a rating)
www.mywot.com/
McAfee SiteAdvisor
(Doesn't allow editing of comments or ratings and all sub domains are judged by the base domains. Also because of inner circle / company struggles (hint of it can be seen a few places) I prefer WOT)
www.siteadvisor.com/
1. It can tell you if you will get spammed if you give your email address to a site. SA leaves a test email address on each site, then sits back to watch what arrives in the mail.
2. It can tell you if the links on the home page will lead to malware (bad software, like viruses and trojans), either on the site itself or other domains.
3. It can tell you if the site has been reported for phishing, malware, or spamming on a limited number of other well known blacklists.
What it cannot do:
1. It can't tell you if the site has changed from good to bad or bad to good. It can't tell you if it's been hacked or if someone new owns it. It doesn't go back and recheck very often if the website owner doesn't complain and request a re-review, and even then it won't be too quick.
2. It can't tell you if the link in an email you received (rather than a page you can find from a direct link or series of links from the home page itself) is phish or will give you malware -- not until it's been reported on one of the blacklists that give it feeds.
3. It won't change its own review if the community reviewers disagree. It ignores them. You have to read their reviews, look at their reputation scores, and make your own judgment.
4. It can't tell if the site is fraudulent. It won't check to see if the site is selling pirated goods or illegal drugs, it won't check to see if the trust seals displayed are fraudulent (e.g., from the Better Business Bureau or Versign), it won't check to see if the domain registration is accurate, and it won't weight the reliability of a domain based on how recently it was registered. In fact, the more fly-by-night a domain name, the less likely SA is to pick up on fraud, because it relies on domains appearing on other blacklists.
5. If it has spamtraps to catch spamvertised domains, the spammers have clearly discovered what the email addresses are for them and just don't send their spams there. SA seems to be the last to know when a domain is spammed.
6. It can't detect malware on websites if the malware has not yet been identified. The bad guys can make small changes in a malicious program that will greatly change the signature antivirus programs use to identify it. If they are hosting the malware on a website, rather than mailing the whole copy to you in spam, they can change it as often as they want. If an antivirus program can pick up 95% of such malware, it is doing stupendously well -- but that means if you trust the program to protect you while you download things from dubious sources, you're still going to get burned one time in twenty. And most antivirus programs aren't achieving anywhere close to 95% sensitivity in that situation.
7. It can't distinguish good programs from malware if the bad guys make you pay for the malware. SA isn't handing out credit card numbers to buy this stuff. The bad guys really do have the chutzpah to make you pay for the trojans they infect your computer with.
Posted at 03/24/2011-02:59:35 PM by AlphaCentauri, Experienced Reviewer , View profile [ Reputation score: 9 / 9 ]
Norton SafeWeb
(I am going to try this as I do like to use 2 instead of one of these)
safeweb.norton.com/
safeweb.norton.com/lite
M86 SecureBrowsing
For Firefox and Internet Explorer only
www.m86security.com/securebrowsing
(I like how they even support subdomains which helps the ratings of free forums and free sites to not be judged by a few bad apples.
I also like how you can edit your evidence incase you find more or find out you were wrong in a rating)
www.mywot.com/
What are WOT’s rating components?
WOT shows the reputation of a website in terms of four components:
The first component reflects the overall trustworthiness of the site: Can it be trusted? Is it safe to use? Does it deliver what it promises? A poor rating may indicate Internet scams, identity theft risks, credit card fraud, phishing, viruses, adware or spyware. A rating of “unsatisfactory” indicates that the site may contain annoying advertisements, excessive pop-ups or content that makes your browser crash. A “poor” rating may also indicate that the site’s content is not trustworthy.
Vendor reliability tells you whether the site is safe for buying and selling or for business transactions in general. An “excellent” rating indicates superior customer service, timely delivery of products or services and overall customer satisfaction. A “poor” rating indicates a possible scam or a bad shopping experience.
Privacy tells you whether the site has a privacy policy that protects your personal identity and data. For example, does the social networking service you use give you the means to determine what is public and what remains private? Does the site have opt-in privacy options? A “poor” rating indicates concern that your data may be sold to third parties, be stored indefinitely or be turned over to law enforcement without a warrant, etc.
Child safety indicates if the site contains age-inappropriate material. This includes mature content meant for adults: Content depicting nudity, sexual content, violence, vulgar or hateful language or content that encourages dangerous or illegal activities.
WOT shows the reputation of a website in terms of four components:
| * Trustworthiness |
| * Vendor reliability |
| * Privacy |
| * Child safety |
The first component reflects the overall trustworthiness of the site: Can it be trusted? Is it safe to use? Does it deliver what it promises? A poor rating may indicate Internet scams, identity theft risks, credit card fraud, phishing, viruses, adware or spyware. A rating of “unsatisfactory” indicates that the site may contain annoying advertisements, excessive pop-ups or content that makes your browser crash. A “poor” rating may also indicate that the site’s content is not trustworthy.
Vendor reliability tells you whether the site is safe for buying and selling or for business transactions in general. An “excellent” rating indicates superior customer service, timely delivery of products or services and overall customer satisfaction. A “poor” rating indicates a possible scam or a bad shopping experience.
Privacy tells you whether the site has a privacy policy that protects your personal identity and data. For example, does the social networking service you use give you the means to determine what is public and what remains private? Does the site have opt-in privacy options? A “poor” rating indicates concern that your data may be sold to third parties, be stored indefinitely or be turned over to law enforcement without a warrant, etc.
Child safety indicates if the site contains age-inappropriate material. This includes mature content meant for adults: Content depicting nudity, sexual content, violence, vulgar or hateful language or content that encourages dangerous or illegal activities.
McAfee SiteAdvisor
(Doesn't allow editing of comments or ratings and all sub domains are judged by the base domains. Also because of inner circle / company struggles (hint of it can be seen a few places) I prefer WOT)
www.siteadvisor.com/
Apr 3, 2011 6:33:46 GMT -5 @AlphaCentauri said:
What SiteAdvisor can do:1. It can tell you if you will get spammed if you give your email address to a site. SA leaves a test email address on each site, then sits back to watch what arrives in the mail.
2. It can tell you if the links on the home page will lead to malware (bad software, like viruses and trojans), either on the site itself or other domains.
3. It can tell you if the site has been reported for phishing, malware, or spamming on a limited number of other well known blacklists.
What it cannot do:
1. It can't tell you if the site has changed from good to bad or bad to good. It can't tell you if it's been hacked or if someone new owns it. It doesn't go back and recheck very often if the website owner doesn't complain and request a re-review, and even then it won't be too quick.
2. It can't tell you if the link in an email you received (rather than a page you can find from a direct link or series of links from the home page itself) is phish or will give you malware -- not until it's been reported on one of the blacklists that give it feeds.
3. It won't change its own review if the community reviewers disagree. It ignores them. You have to read their reviews, look at their reputation scores, and make your own judgment.
4. It can't tell if the site is fraudulent. It won't check to see if the site is selling pirated goods or illegal drugs, it won't check to see if the trust seals displayed are fraudulent (e.g., from the Better Business Bureau or Versign), it won't check to see if the domain registration is accurate, and it won't weight the reliability of a domain based on how recently it was registered. In fact, the more fly-by-night a domain name, the less likely SA is to pick up on fraud, because it relies on domains appearing on other blacklists.
5. If it has spamtraps to catch spamvertised domains, the spammers have clearly discovered what the email addresses are for them and just don't send their spams there. SA seems to be the last to know when a domain is spammed.
6. It can't detect malware on websites if the malware has not yet been identified. The bad guys can make small changes in a malicious program that will greatly change the signature antivirus programs use to identify it. If they are hosting the malware on a website, rather than mailing the whole copy to you in spam, they can change it as often as they want. If an antivirus program can pick up 95% of such malware, it is doing stupendously well -- but that means if you trust the program to protect you while you download things from dubious sources, you're still going to get burned one time in twenty. And most antivirus programs aren't achieving anywhere close to 95% sensitivity in that situation.
7. It can't distinguish good programs from malware if the bad guys make you pay for the malware. SA isn't handing out credit card numbers to buy this stuff. The bad guys really do have the chutzpah to make you pay for the trojans they infect your computer with.
Posted at 03/24/2011-02:59:35 PM by AlphaCentauri, Experienced Reviewer , View profile [ Reputation score: 9 / 9 ]
Norton SafeWeb
(I am going to try this as I do like to use 2 instead of one of these)
safeweb.norton.com/
safeweb.norton.com/lite
M86 SecureBrowsing
For Firefox and Internet Explorer only
www.m86security.com/securebrowsing