Google Chrome's malware protection

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by The Seeker, Aug 19, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    6,941
    Location:
    USA
    So who else has seen a prompt/warning from Chrome like this?
    Chrome warning.jpg
     
  2. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,146
    When you install the free panda it comes with the URL scanner as a separate program/ extension.
     
  3. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,146
    Oh loads of times Page42. And any .exe is also given a warning saying "This file could be malicious."
     
  4. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    6,941
    Location:
    USA
    I never see it.
    Lots of possible reasons why that is, but do you think it's because you are running Chrome betas and I'm not?
     
  5. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,146
    I think it's because I actively seek out malware to download haha
     
  6. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    6,941
    Location:
    USA
    That definitely falls into the "Lots of possible reasons why" category. ;)
     
  7. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,146
    Yup haha

    I don't see it all that often since I mostly search for 0days but I've definitely seen it.
     
  8. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    Yes I know, though it's not an URL scanner It's an URL Blocker, not the same.
     
    Last edited: Aug 22, 2011
  9. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    Well if that's the case, I wonder why bother with it? It makes you install a toolbar first to even use it, then, if you're already using something like Norton DNS, you don't need it. *shrug* To each their own.
     
  10. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,146
    Two different blacklists, always nice to layer things.
     
  11. John Bull

    John Bull Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2009
    Posts:
    904
    Location:
    London UK
    I am taking a cursory interest in this thread, because it is both interesting, topical and important. The OP did well to raise it.

    The odd comments I have made after my post 50 opting out statement are simply a result of spontaneous bits and bobs worthy of my obviously much appreciated contributions.

    My message to those poor frustrated and exasperated posters who delight in calling other people nasty names due to their lack of any competitive ability is - Carry on with your childish behaviour and tantrums. I have always considered Wilder`s to be a magnificent Forum for ADULTS not a play-school.

    Actually you are more guilty of "Trolling" as a result of your insulting and mischievous remarks than the person you are applying this unjustified and defamatory term to.

    Just to be constructive, have any of you read this :-

    http://askbobrankin.com/which_browser_is_the_most_secure.html?awt_l=EfSiF&awt_m=Izgopfsq28P6SL

    My very kindest regards - John
     
  12. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    6,941
    Location:
    USA
    Yes, now I am seeing it... more so on one machine than on the other, for some reason. :doubt:
    chrome pfw warning.jpg
     
  13. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    Have you tried downloading the same file on the different machines? Or different files? Also, be aware that, initially (I believe), the file info is first checked against a local file in your Chrome profile. Only then, it will be checked online for more info. (If it's like the malicious domains verification.) That said, could it be that, for some reason, one of your machines doesn't have the most up-to-date malicious files database?
     
  14. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    6,941
    Location:
    USA
    Hi m00nbl00d

    That's what I'm saying... same file, different machines, same OS and browser, different results. And it is Privatefirewall from here.
     
  15. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    Sorry. I just noticed that you received the "normal" warning, saying that the file typo is potencially harmful. Yes, you should be getting the warning. It's odd you don't get it in one of your machines.

    What I previously mentioned is only for files known/suspected to be malicious. These are checked against a database. Unlike the other warnings, which are regular warnings.
     
  16. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,146
    God tier.

    Confirmed.
     
  17. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    6,941
    Location:
    USA
    Yes, it is odd... but I think I discovered why.
    The machine that is not producing the warning has "under the Hood" Downloads settings different than the other. The non-warning machine is set to ask where to save each file before downloading.

    I changed it in the other machine to make them both the same and will test.


    Also I got latest Chrome 13.0.782.215.

    Edit in: That is the difference. When set to ask, no warning is displayed on either of my machines, FWIW. :)
     
    Last edited: Aug 22, 2011
  18. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,146
    Makes sense.
     
  19. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    6,941
    Location:
    USA
    And I don't really care that much... just pointing out the difference.
    Though it seems to me that the basis for the warning still exists no matter where the designated download spot might be.
    :)
     
  20. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    Norton may block some URL:s that Panda won't, and vice versa.
    And you can take benefit from both of them without any chance of conflicts.
     
  21. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,146
    Yup.

    That's the whole point of a layered security, no single product will get everything.
     
  22. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    Judging from the experience I've had with both so far, I see Norton providing greater protection from malicious URLs than Panda. But, at least Panda gives the user the ability to have such protection.
     
  23. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    Yes. And the Panda URL Blocker will later get incorporated into the core, so we don't need to handle the toolbar.
     
  24. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    5,614
    Location:
    Milan and Seoul
    Well said Page, it is usually the case with antivirus programs, but obviously the disease ('I have the best anti virus' - I.H.T.A.V.) is spreading around at an alarming rate and is now threatening the browser community! On a more serious note it is indeed odd how some people get so defensive by simply discussing a program they happen to like.

    Very diplomatic and true, but obviously too hard to understand by some. To remain on topic I have used Opera, Firefox, and since its creation Chrome. The only browser that ever warned me about any danger when browsing was Chrome, but the latest Firefox and Opera may have also improved their security.
     
  25. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,146
    They've improved some blacklisting but neither of them have incorporated the sandboxing techniques of Chrome (yet.)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.