The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Google thinks the internet "may harm your computer"
Improvolone
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
Nearly every Google search for me says “This site may harm your computerâ€. I googled the problem (lol?) and so many people are reporting this issue that most are figuring its a problem on the server end.
My advice: Chill, and just copy paste the URL from the Malware Warning page.
My advice: Chill, and just copy paste the URL from the Malware Warning page.
Voice actor for hire. My time is free if your project is!
Improvolone on
0
Posts
Suddenly it had me doubting whether in fact the BBC website was a trustworthy site, the power of google man.
---
I've got a spare copy of Portal, if anyone wants it message me.
Possible that they want to warn about sites which are wrongfully in the results
Good plan in all honesty.
3DS FC: 5343-7720-0490
Like can you still access the sites in your Google search? Or is Google locking you out from the sites (read: the internet) that it deems as "dangerous?"
nope, just says it might be dangerous.
Did you install AVG Free recently? By default, it has a search filter that, when you do a search (like ona google), can throw up warnings for pages that it doesn't know are "safe".
Edit: Nevermind, this seems to be something different entirely.
It wouldn't let me click anywhere to continue to the website. I had to copy paste the URL it found to get there.
I'm not sure that I agree.
I don't know the details about how often, or under which circumstances google checks the badlist to see if a site is on it or not, but it seems like it wouldn't be too much trouble or cause too much system over head to get it to set a bit each time it grabs a sites status from the list. Then, in the event that it can't connect to the database, it could look at this and throw up a warning saying "Hey, last time we checked, this site was on the naughty list. You've been warned." or, for each site that was marked as safe, it could just put a little "Was all good last we heard." message beside the search result.
There's probably a great reason they don't do something like this already. But I still think it could've been handled better.
Also, someone could just DDoS the badsite lister and make everyone go to bad sites during a peak time/coordinated attack.
So failing safely towards all sites bad > letting sites bypass it through timed attacks.
Well, ideally, it would only fall back to the cached data in the event it can't grab fresh info. Perhaps it could throw different warnings based on how recently the site was indexed. Would such sites be ranked high enough to pose a serious threat? Still, a simpler solution would be desirable.
I'm still not convinced that lumping everything into the bad (or good) category is better than the alternative. There will be people who see that every result is marked bad, assume it's a problem with google (or the badlist guys), and just copy and paste the URL to the address bar anyway. I don't think there's a perfect solution (except for, you know, just don't use it), but I think it's better to be provided with more information so you can make a somewhat informed decision.
Edit: So, according to the Google blog, the problem occurred not because they couldn't access the stopbadware list, but because there was an error in the list they received. Well, that renders pretty much everything I've said moot.
Not really, because if every site is marked as bad, everyone just says "oh, so Google is shitting itself again" and ignores it until it's over, so it's the same as every site being marked as good.
No, it's just that someone at Google accidentally added "/" to the bad sites list.
Please explain to me how a failsafe is supposed to work, then.
The list of bad sites isn't on StopBadware's servers, it's at Google. StopBadware.org went down after the bug, (because then every result on Google was linking to it) not before.
I'm just trying to figure out why people have changed the definition of the word "failsafe", which as far as I know is "to fail into a safe state".
Cod is a fish that, installed improperly, can harm your computer.
Because if you get an alert on every single page, the user will treat the alerts the same as if they were on no pages, so both are equally bad.
but if there are no alerts, the user has no idea that the system has failed, so she will "know" (erroneously) that none of the pages contain malware
it's always best for the user to know that a failure has occurred
Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.