Author Topic: (solved)which is the best site advisor program free to use (Read 16023 times)

jraju · « **on:** November 18, 2015, 11:37:47 pm »

Hi,
Now I am using mcafee site advisor. It shows coloured code ratings for sites. The real drawback is that it shows suspicious sites as not suspicious and non suspicious sites as suspicious. For eg cnet as not suspicious but it is as for as i know.
It is not correct.
Would any one suggest the best. Some of the site advisor programmes does not show the ratings at the links, but at the top of the browser. If you want it , you have to choose the link to view. But the link opens immediately. Mcafee is the only one gives the rating at the link it self.
Would any one suggest alternatives, like mcafee, that too free,

Boggin · « **Reply #1 on:** November 19, 2015, 12:56:05 am »

Norton Security tells me when a site is dangerous, so I rely on that.

However, it can give false positives when I try to download legit programs from safe sites, but that is because it considers the program dangerous to my system rather than the site itself - for when it is the site itself, it has a big red banner with a link to leave the site.

I tend to avoid download sites like CNET and Softpedia and sometimes avoid the vendor's site as well, because a lot these days are diversifying by bundling other software with their downloads to increase their revenue.

As for that, you just have to be vigilant, but a good AV program would normally tell you when you land on a dangerous website, if my experience with Norton is anything to go by.

jraju · « **Reply #2 on:** November 19, 2015, 03:57:39 am »

Hi, Boggins,
You mean Antivirus. I mean a kind of link checker like wot,mcafee etc. Even wot does not rate cnet as harmful. It was once upon a time a good site to download.
I have panda free antivirus and it does not show any warning when i go to cnet.
Moreover, when i attempt to download something from sourceforge, softpedia, ublock blocks the site as per its policy.
I thought that ublock will only block advertisement in wanted sites, but sometimes, it denies access to it.
WOT,siteadvisor gives wrong results to cnet , as they thought that browser helper as no PUP or adware. Wot ratings are based on viewers and mcafee with their servers. But we know that some sites do inject commercial bundles with the usual downloads.
I would rate majorgeek and filehippo as those safe sites.
P.S: when i visited cnet with site advisor, it shows the dubious links as green.

Boggin · « **Reply #3 on:** November 19, 2015, 08:36:38 am »

When I've used CNET or Softpedia to download, they usually want to include an installer in the download and Norton has blocked a number of Toolkit infections in the past when I've used Softpedia.

Infections are sometimes latched onto popular websites without the webmasters knowledge - one case in particular was when a dangerous one latched onto www.pingtest.net a few years back, but the dangerous websites that Norton blocks and warns with a known dangerous website warning are different to those.

I've never used WOT and as I've said, rely upon Norton to keep me safe.

It may be that you've never landed on a dangerous site of the type that Norton blocks for Panda to pick up on, but hopefully it will pick up what may look like a drive-by when you go to a given website.

KingHawk · « **Reply #4 on:** November 19, 2015, 02:31:37 pm »

You can try Adguard and enable the "Protection against phishing and malicious websites" which comes up after installing the extension, it's using Web of Trust to check the websites and will show up when you go to the site.

Boggin · « **Reply #5 on:** November 19, 2015, 02:51:26 pm »

Karma for that suggestion.

jraju · « **Reply #6 on:** November 20, 2015, 07:16:37 am »

Hi, Boggins, could you elaborate on adguard and the points i raised as link checker. Will it show the link as coloured or it will work as ublock. I was recommended to use ublock by this forum, as it is light and effective. Pl

Boggin · « **Reply #7 on:** November 20, 2015, 08:29:39 am »

Other than what KingHawk has advised, all I know about Adguard is from https://adguard.com/en/welcome.html

I use Adblock Plus in IE 11 which is my main browser and uBlock in Firefox which I rarely use and just have as a spare browser.

As Adguard incorporates WOT then I would think the alert would be as that, but as KingHawk appears to be an user of Adguard then he'll be better placed to describe what happens if he's ended up on a dangerous site while using it.

Not all CNET sites are dangerous - it's just the bundled crap you get when downloading from one.

I'll continue to rely on my Norton to alert me if I land on a dangerous site.

jraju · « **Reply #8 on:** November 20, 2015, 08:46:01 pm »

Hi, Boggins,
I presume that you use paid version of Norton.
I expect explanation of how adguard blocks suspicious links from the user of adguard.
It is surprising that when i check the cnet with site advisor, it has not shown any link ,even green links, as it shows in genuine sites.
Is there any free version of norton? not trial version which has blocking of s.links
Pl let me also know how adguard works not as link checker, but adblock. I used adblock, but had some problems like slower browsing. I then used ublock. I want your considered view on adguard.
Now my explorer is slow, and i do not know the reason for this sudden slow.

Boggin · « **Reply #9 on:** November 21, 2015, 01:03:54 am »

Norton doesn't have a free version and I don't know how ad blocking programs work - I'm more interested that they do.

I could install Adguard but unless I land on an unsafe site, I still wouldn't know how it reacts.

As for a slow IE, that can be because of a build up of the temporary Internet file cache.

At the end of each session I use CCleaner, mainly with default settings other than unchecking the box to clear the Mini Dump files and I have IE set to delete everything on close.

While I use SuperAntiSpyware's setting to Delete Windows Temp files during its scan, this can be done by going Start - type %temp% and press enter.

If it's highly populated then click on Organize - Select all - Organize - Delete - Confirm - check the box and click on Skip.

This maintenance ensures the machine doesn't get bogged down.

Add-ons can also have an impact on the performance of IE, so you should check to see which of those you really need and resetting IE to defaults can get rid of some of the spurious ones.

Resetting IE to defaults also quite often resolves any problems with IE.

When you check all of the delete boxes, you may have to reset your home page as well as moving Google back up as the default search provider as it tends to default Bing, if that is your choice and then check the box to Prevent changes to the search provider.

I also click on the Delete history/Settings button of the General page in Internet options and change that to 100MB and drop the History down to 0 days.

MS has a Fixit for IE which you can run, but only applies to XP through to Win 8.0 and scrolling down the page will show what it is intended to fix.

https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/mats/ie_performance_and_safety

To see if it is your add-ons that is the cause then you can run IE without them by going Start - (I'm using Win 7) - All Programs - Accessories - System Tools - Internet Explorer (No Add-ons).

Clicking on the home page icon will give you your home page for normal browsing and if that improves its performance, restart IE then manually disable all add-ons, reinstating one at a time until its performance degrades again, but if you have done all of the previous, this shouldn't be necessary.

jraju · « **Reply #10 on:** November 21, 2015, 05:24:59 am »

I was a regular user of ccleaner but stopped using it once it aggressively scanned and deleted some system files.
But default settings do not damage , but i could have checked some more and would have given the cleaner green signal to delete.
I just downloaded ccleaner again and ran the tool, windows, application and registy as per default settings.
Do you mean memory dump to be unchecked. I did not find minidump menu. Pl. Thanks .
The main part IE , i have totally forgotten.
On browsing, i only use firefox, but i forgot that local,temp, roaming , appdata are all related to the location of users, which are not deleted while one delete history and cookies.
Thanks now my browser experience improved better.

Boggin · « **Reply #11 on:** November 21, 2015, 08:45:38 am »

Sorry, I should have said Memory Dumps which is below Clipboard in the System section, but I don't use the registry cleaner bit.

jraju · « **Reply #12 on:** November 22, 2015, 01:38:09 am »

Hi, May i know the reason for not using the registry. Will it aggressively delete some thing more?

Boggin · « **Reply #13 on:** November 22, 2015, 04:21:17 am »

CCleaner's registry cleaner is one of the safest and other than to remove registry residue after using Windows Uninstall, there's no real value to cleaning the registry - but when you do, uncheck the box for ActiveX Issues first because if it removes any of those then you could have problems.

As for uninstalling a program, I use IObit Uninstaller and then there's usually no residue left except for perhaps the odd empty folder after the Deep Clean scan.

jraju · « **Reply #14 on:** November 22, 2015, 06:13:54 pm »

Kudos to you Boggin,
It should be important to not to delete memory dumps, for debugging the cause of the failure of some important failures like BSOD.
This could be read from this article which is self explanatory.
This is very useful for person who diagnose the reasons to give instant solution.
http://www.howtogeek.com/196672/windows-memory-dumps-what-exactly-are-they-for/
It is better to keep them handy even if it increases in size say 1gb, out of the total size of hdd.
Subsidiary question: Even when site advisor tells some sites as green, it only gives the linked sites and the chance of clicking those site reports within the report. But in some sites, it does not show any links , even when it is a known site of links. May be that those servers are hiding their links, even for site advisor.
But i do find site advisor is searching the downloads for any suspicious items after downloading and before allowing you to use.
Now the site advisor has been renamed as web advisor in their latest version, but it is good in appearance, but lacking the old ones, about the information on the linked sites.
In still older versions, i found the red sites, green links and red links with the site advisor.
Even i remembered asking a question on this to Shane, which gave false positive for this site.
There are great souls working for humanity with larger hearts, by providing free softwares for computer problems . Those sites are also do not contain any other links or they are trying to prevent others hacking their sites and intruding with PUPs.
Panda found some PUPs in adware cleaner as something inside their installed folder. Thanks ,
and i do want to continue this discussion, as find still more dubious sites, showing as green sites but injecting harmful PUPs and adwares not in the downloads, but by visiting and clicking closing the POPups intheir site. What is your information on those

Boggin · « **Reply #15 on:** November 23, 2015, 12:14:33 am »

Can you give some more info on what Panda found and which adware cleaner are you talking about ?

These days a lot of websites are including adware as a means of increasing their revenue, but I've never understood why to download say from CNET or Softpedia you need to include an installer when Windows is more than capable of that.

If you are compiling a list of dodgy websites - fair dos, but at the forefront you should maintain safe browsing as whatever protection you are relying on will never be 100% effective.

Xas1953NC · « **Reply #16 on:** November 23, 2015, 03:58:32 am »

Hi jraju, I use WOT and Avast free AOS and find that some sites indicated as iffy by WOT are passed as ok by AOS. Avast has also jumped in and blocked access to a site that although there is no indication of its status it has something iffy attached. I also use AdBlocker Plus. On occasions where I have downloaded stuff UnChecky has unticked boxes that would haved installed toolbar crap although I still carefully look at each page on a multiple download offer of such crap. I use Freemaker video downloader and Freemaker video converter programs and found that if I use their download indicator for the latest versions it also installs adware crap which bypasses UnChecky so I download and install manually which allows me to check each stage of the install. I always choose program advanced install tab if available to stop crap slipping through.

jraju · « **Reply #17 on:** November 23, 2015, 04:49:08 am »

Hi, As1953,
Even when you install customized install of a software , and by unchecking the unwanted bundles, the software inject those things indirectly , by asking you to close your browser while injecting or giving download bar and injecting the crap ware. I have seen those things.
Regarding Boggins, Panda found some PUP, inside their folders. But i could not say what they are now. i could not get the whole log of history. If i could, i would definitely post.
I was also surprised to find those, while running the whole scan by panda. It was inside c:programfiles:adware/c:etc etc. I could not recollect .

Boggin · « **Reply #18 on:** November 23, 2015, 09:18:29 am »

But it wasn't from AdwCleaner ?

From that path it would seem that you have picked up some crap along the way.

jraju · « **Reply #19 on:** November 30, 2015, 02:04:18 am »

Hi, Found the log.
It was a quarantine folder , inside adware cleaner, which is a log file created by adware cleaner on its quarantine folder.
Thank you boggin