Sunbeltblog comments
bye bye google,
hello yahoo
I think the concept is nice, because most people will happily click off yahoo or google into god knows what because as we all know, [Insert search engine name here] is our friend.
However, one gets the feeling that it will give some people a false sense of security.... "If I do not see a red shield next to the website, then it must be safe"
Siteadvisor does give green reviews to sites which are not safe some of the times, and others it has not reviewed "popular" sites that are being used to deliver scams/malware.
Baz, you're right. It's certainly not a panacea...
alex -- what is up with that little dude in the baseball hat on the IE screenshots?
Chris, that's one of the executives here, it was done by IT years ago and is still there...
Hi Alex
What you could do is buy out or merge with the "interclue->Developers.
Then put all the bad sites you have in it.Then you will have a better site Adviser than MAcfee.
I'm still testing it and i told them this,Product would be great if it would Warn you about a bad site.
Really it will give you A few alot of options about do you really want to go on the site.........
Theres really only about 2 guys in on this add-on Tool" for Fire-Fox or IE.
Mark
Alex
I can tell you this i would say From all the forums i go to there's Thousands
of users that will never use the Yahoo Search engine.No-way most won't even go on Cnet because of thier Pop-ups and you can take that to the Bank.........
Mark
Did you help to start SiteAdvisor, Alex?
Did you help to start SiteAdvisor, Alex?
No, just friendly with the founders.
‼ lovely...
While I am no fan of McAfee, Site Advisor is a good product. If they can control the false-positives, this should be of great benefit to Yahoo Search users.
One quick thing, Alex. I believe Google's StopBadware has had false positives. Recently, they tagged Surfthechannel.com as reportedly having malware issues. The site, asked for clarification and was told that the flag was based on "reports" of malware. The incident was (fairly) quickly resolved, and the flag on the site was lifted within a day or so.
Still, it stings, a little, to have a flag put on a site based on allegations, and without proof of any actual violations, and before direct contact from Google or Stop Badware.
If there were actual violations, then the flag shouldn't have been removed that quickly, IMO.
Alex,
you mentioned...
"The major issue I see is false positives, which SiteAdvisor has had problems with in the past"
For the past couple of weeks the FP has reached its limits, active malware sites are flagged as safe 
, Sent a list of wrongly rated sites to the concerned ppl and no action taken after almost a week.
I don’t hate Site advisor but the recent ratings really hurts the overall reputation of the product. Hope to see they buck up and perform their task.
And by the way is NguyenHoang's comment spam??
Yeah, I know, false negatives are a real problem, I've noticed it as well.
And yes, that's spam, but I kept it in place because it's harmless (points to a dead link) and I was thinking of doing some research on it (like at the domain, IP, etc., it's interesting).
Its good to see that SiteAdvisor staff has started to respond to the recent FN's. Recently they have properly rated a few sites (but not all ) and its also nice to see that they have used Sunbelt's spyware definition links in the siteadvisor staff comments section to justify their ratings.
Thanks to McAfee for upholding true Anti-Malware community’s spirit.
Commenting by HaloScan
