McAfee Site Advisor

General discussion, compatibility and contributed extensions.

Moderators: FranklinDM, Lootyhoof

Locked
NewMoon1

McAfee Site Advisor

Post by NewMoon1 » 2012-12-07, 10:41

Any idea how this can be installed in Pale Moon (newest version)?

steviem1
Keeps coming back
Keeps coming back
Posts: 813
Joined: 2012-03-24, 09:42
Location: Spain

Re: McAfee Site Advisor

Post by steviem1 » 2012-12-07, 18:29

The Plug in should install into Firefox according to my search findings, although it is clear there are incommpatibility problems in later Fx versions. Presumably you have tried to download into Pale Moon without success? Unfortunately another problem is that not all Plugins and add-on's designed for Fx will work in Pale Moon. Have you used Mcafee Site advisor successfully in an earlier version of Pale Moon and did the problem occur when you upgraded to the latest release?

User avatar
satrow
Forum staff
Forum staff
Posts: 1802
Joined: 2011-09-08, 11:27

Re: McAfee Site Advisor

Post by satrow » 2012-12-07, 18:43

Frankly, I wouldn't bother with it, last time I checked it out, the most recent reports there were ~6 months old.

NewMoon1

Re: McAfee Site Advisor

Post by NewMoon1 » 2012-12-07, 19:07

I never before tried to install it in Pale Moon.
By maybe someone knows a trick?

steviem1
Keeps coming back
Keeps coming back
Posts: 813
Joined: 2012-03-24, 09:42
Location: Spain

Re: McAfee Site Advisor

Post by steviem1 » 2012-12-07, 19:23

Further research finds many poor reviews for MSA including this very negative report on excessive memory consumption: http://techdows.com/2012/02/mcafee-site ... ozila.html. Advise trying to find an alternative and one that is fully compatible with PM.

dark_moon

Re: McAfee Site Advisor

Post by dark_moon » 2012-12-07, 19:55

Pale Moon and also Firefox have a blocklist for malware sites.

But if this not enough for you, check the addon WOT. This is the same like the site advisor from McAfee

NewMoon1

Re: McAfee Site Advisor

Post by NewMoon1 » 2012-12-07, 20:46

WOT is, however, politically abused to "warn" about websites with alternative views and information about certain kinds of alternative medicine.
Websites that are in no way "dangerous", except that they contain information and opinions that "Big Brother" doesn't want us to know...
There are many examples, such as websites about homeopathy.
It does warn about dangerous sites, too, that is true, but has also become a tool for opinion control...

User avatar
Moonchild
Pale Moon guru
Pale Moon guru
Posts: 26180
Joined: 2011-08-28, 17:27
Location: 58°2'16"N 14°58'31"E
Contact:

Re: McAfee Site Advisor

Post by Moonchild » 2012-12-07, 20:50

I have to agree with newmoon1 - WOT tends to be biased and have false positives or bad reputations on many politically sensitive subjects.

Pale moon already uses safebrowsing built-in (Google safebrowsing service by default) - any known attack sites and phishing sites (updated constantly) will already give you a clear warning. As far as i know they are quite vigilant in keeping their service updated and neutral.
"There will be times when the position you advocate, no matter how well framed and supported, will not be accepted by the public simply because you are who you are." -- Merrill Rose
Image

sIDcORK
Fanatic
Fanatic
Posts: 231
Joined: 2012-07-17, 22:27
Location: UK

Re: McAfee Site Advisor

Post by sIDcORK » 2012-12-08, 13:12

If you use NoScript it gives you easy access to SiteAdvisor and some other stuff too. Here's the page for this place http://noscript.net/about/palemoon.org;palemoon.org

User avatar
satrow
Forum staff
Forum staff
Posts: 1802
Joined: 2011-09-08, 11:27

Re: McAfee Site Advisor

Post by satrow » 2012-12-08, 19:01

If you follow up the details on the SiteAdvisor page for Pale Moon from that NoScript page, you get:
When we tested the files you can download on this site for security risks, this is what we found.
Sort by result: Safe Caution Warning Unknown
Verdict Name Details
palemoon-11.0-installer.exe
palemoon-11.0-x64-installer.exe
PaleMoonDDEfix.zip
pm36x-edits.7z
pm4x-edits.7z
Which, as I said earlier, makes it kind of outdated (read: useless).

User avatar
Apollo702
Fanatic
Fanatic
Posts: 142
Joined: 2012-08-06, 10:04
Location: Far from civlization

Re: McAfee Site Advisor

Post by Apollo702 » 2012-12-10, 07:48

If you use NoScript it gives you easy access to SiteAdvisor and some other stuff too. Here's the page for this place http://noscript.net/about/palemoon.org;palemoon.org
Here is how I advise approaching it: Run both NoScript and Ghostery. For NS you middle click on scripts and get ratings from several services.

As people indicated the WOT ratings are the most strict and often times the most biased. However, they tend to do a better job of spotting trackers. Most of the other services only indicate actual viruses( my use of the word virus encompasses all forms of malware.) I would advise reading the ratings and also getting used to many of the regular commentators views.

Mcafee is more professional- but surprisingly loose. It only tests for viruses and rarely indicates privacy concerns. It also no longer shows user reviews. Another danger from using it is you risk being on the run in South America with the authorities hot on your trail.

Webmaster Tips and HpHosts Report are more technical and better for finding out who actually owns things.

Safe Browsing Diagnostic is much like MCafee in that it reports viruses and it ignores tracking. That sure would be ** ahem** interesting if Google reported anyone for tracking...

What I then recommend is combining that with Ghostery's recommendations to help make your decisions. None of these services are infallible but when put together you can usually get a good feel for what is running on pages. Sometimes with all of this it still is difficult to figure out what some things are and my general policy is better safe than sorry. If it is too mysterious I wait until I have some idea of what it is there for.


User avatar
Moonchild
Pale Moon guru
Pale Moon guru
Posts: 26180
Joined: 2011-08-28, 17:27
Location: 58°2'16"N 14°58'31"E
Contact:

Re: McAfee Site Advisor

Post by Moonchild » 2012-12-10, 09:12

Here's how I approach things (and in this order):
  1. I use my brain. If something looks suspicious, it likely is. If something doesn't look suspicious, I don't let my guard down.
    Web forgeries and phishing sites are almost always for secure sites like banking, logins to e-mail, etc. The forgeries themselves are fairly easy to spot with (2)
  2. I use the feedback my browser gives me natively:
    - for secure sites the domain/owner ID panel, padlock, etc. - bank logins, e-mail logins, etc. etc. are invariably secure connections.
    - for secure sites that I haven't visited before, I also check the certificate/issuer information (click on the padlock/ID panel)
    - for regular sites the address bar, checking the URL to see if it really is the domain I intend to visit
    - for links on the page: the status bar linkover - do the links make sense for the site?
  3. I don't get paranoid about privacy. The plain fact is that your visits will be recorded no matter what you try to do in your browser. It's just how the internet works; compare it with being caught on camera when you walk down the street or catch a bus. The internet is a public place, and what "tracking" there is done has its benefits, also by helping eCommerce stay afloat. I'd prefer invisible cookies any time over being forced to watch advertisements for the same revenue to publishers ;)
  4. Public reputation-based ratings are, as WOT already proves, vulnerable to social engineering attacks. Bad sites can be flagged as good, good sites can be flagged as bad, depending on having enough people providing feedback one way or another. I keep this in mind if I do end up using reputation services. (Kind of the same as point 1, using your brain)
"There will be times when the position you advocate, no matter how well framed and supported, will not be accepted by the public simply because you are who you are." -- Merrill Rose
Image

dark_moon

Re: McAfee Site Advisor

Post by dark_moon » 2012-12-10, 19:48

I use NoScript, cause i wan't to have the choice which site i allow JavaScript. So i also use the noscript.net site info for new sites i visit.
And i use CsLiteMod - a cookie addon. I work with a whitelist and block all other cookies.

This gives me a realy good privacy and i didnt' think this is paranoid, cause for example NoScipt not only blocks JavaScript.

And last but not least i use the addon RefControl which gives me the control for sending the HTTP Referer for every site.

Locked