whats better and lighter linkscanner or mcafee site advisor?

atm i use site adviser for both firefox and IE
but i notice it has a service called siteadv.exe which lanuches at boottime which uses around 10mb of ram.
link scanner looks good and its not owned by mcafee lol.
plus its getting firefox support soon.
does link scanner free version have a backgrond driver as well and how much ram does it use?
mainly im wondering whats better and the ram usage doesnt matter to much but its nice to know anyway.
is linkscanner's flag system better at flagging good and bad sites?
it seems alot better system than siteadvisor since you do an on demand scan of the web page without visiting the site.
site advisor seems a bit lacking on features after reading about linkscanner.
site advisor has two processes siteadv.exe which uses around 10mb and saservice.exe which uses around 4mb.
two processes just for a traffic light system doesnt seem reasonable.
lodore

 

linkscanner lite does not use a service, it simply runs in teh background.

working set: 5,176 K
private bytes: 3,332 K

 

Perhaps you cal google for a HOST file replacement ? I have heard that there are quite comprehencive host files that block malware sites and advertising etc

 

As I use OpenDNS which provides an anti-phishing service I have turned off FF's inbuilt one which may speed up browsing for some.

Tools - options - security tab - tell me if the site I'm visiting is a suspected forgery

 

Hello,

Franklin, visiting a site that is a suspected forgery ...
Forgery of what?

If you go to a site-dot-com, it is just a site. It may have malicious content or it may not. but it is not a forgery unto itself.

On the other hand if you tried to access your bank site (bank-dot-com), you would wanna be sure that you access it correctly.

This means doing it directly - typing the address or using a known bookmark. Forgery could occur if you tried to access a link given to you in some email or from some other webpage. Then, you would need something to warn you.

Firefox does it by default, btw.

If you access your pages directly, then you don't need anti-forgery tools.
If you don't allow scripts for most webpages or emails, then the exploits that refer to forged pages won't work.

Hence, anti-phishing, pharming etc are rather redundant.

Mrk

 

"Tools - options - security tab - tell me if the site I'm visiting is a suspected forgery"

Just showing where FF's setting is if you want to turn it off.

Quote:

http://www.mozilla.org/support/firefox/options

Tell me if the site I'm visiting is a suspected forgery

Check this option if you want Firefox to actively check whether the site you are visiting may be an attempt to mislead you into providing personal information (this is often referred to as phishing).
Check using a downloaded list of suspected sites

With this option selected, Firefox will check the current site against a frequently updated list stored on your computer. No data about the sites you visit is transferred to third-party anti-phishing providers during normal browsing. Since phishing techniques and sites evolve quickly, this mode of protection may not be as effective as having an anti-phishing provider check every site you visit.


Check by asking ... about each site I visit

With this option selected, Firefox will send the address of the current page over an encrypted connection to the selected third-party anti-phishing provider in order to verify its identity. This method offers the greatest protection, but information such as your IP address and browser version may be transfered and stored by the selected provider. You will be prompted to review and agree to the selected data provider's privacy policy after selecting this option.

 

Hello,
That's the first thing I did when I installed FF 2.0.
Mrk

 

ive already got mvps hosts file.
i just like site advisor mainly for my dad when he does searches on google.
he doesnt search for dodgy things but sometimes links get mixed in with the good ones in google results.
lodore

 

I´ve found that SiteAdvisor flags good sites as bad.

 

I´ve not checked out SiteAdvisor, but I do know that I do not like LinkScanner at all, I kept getting prompts about CallingID and stuff. And it did not even seemed to work, at least the free version didn´t, so it´s not for me.