Site Ratings/Linkscanner Recommendations

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by TheKid7, Jun 26, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. TheKid7

    TheKid7 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2006
    Posts:
    3,469
    What are your latest recommendations for Site Ratings/Linkscanner software?

    I have been using McAfee SiteAdvisor and AVG Linkscanner for a long time, but I am thinking about uninstalling McAfee SiteAdvisor and replacing it with something else.

    Any suggestions?

    Thanks in Advance.
     
  2. cheater87

    cheater87 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Posts:
    3,125
    Location:
    Pennsylvania.
    I like WOT. To do a test on it have WOT and both Link Scanner installed and do a search result on Screensavers. See which rating program protects you better by what rating the site got and for what reason.
     
  3. shadek

    shadek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Posts:
    2,363
    Location:
    Sweden
    I like BitDefender TrafficLight for Chrome. What I really like about it is that you can shorten URL to links to share to friends and at the same time, BitDefender scans the link for malicious content.
     
  4. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    If you want I can PM a link where you can grab malicious URLs/Domains and you can then copy and paste the domains in the search engine and see which will perform better.

    I must say that LinkScanner's Search-Shield performs really bad. lol

    On the other hand, TrafficLight performs quite well. :thumb:
     
  5. TheKid7

    TheKid7 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2006
    Posts:
    3,469
    Yes. Please PM me the link.

    Also, how "buggy" is TrafficLight? Does TrafficLight work OK with Firefox 5.0?

    Thanks.
     
  6. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    I can't say. I use Chromium. But, according to this post it runs OK.
     
  7. bo elam

    bo elam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Posts:
    3,770
    Location:
    Nicaragua
    TrafficLight addon is working fine on my Firefox5, no bugs or issues.

    Bo
     
  8. TheKid7

    TheKid7 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2006
    Posts:
    3,469
    I run Firefox in a Sandboxie sandbox. How do you update TrafficLight? Is it "cloud" based, and you only need to update the software version periodically or does it frequently download and store new signatures? When you do a software version update, do you uninstall the old version first or do you just go ahead and install the new version?

    Thanks in Advance.
     
  9. bo elam

    bo elam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Posts:
    3,770
    Location:
    Nicaragua
    When its time to update, do it on your real Firefox, out of the sandbox.
    I also use Sandboxie and TL does not seem to have any issue at this
    time with FF or SBIE.
    You should update the same way as you update your other Firefox
    addons. As far as I can tell, all is done in the cloud so Firefox is not using
    additional resources, at least I don't feel any lags because I am using it.

    Bo
     
  10. TheKid7

    TheKid7 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2006
    Posts:
    3,469
    Which version of TrafficLight do you recommend to install? I see a choice of Windows (more protection?) and one for the web browser only.

    Thanks.
     
  11. bo elam

    bo elam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Posts:
    3,770
    Location:
    Nicaragua
    I prefer the addon since you are getting extra protection with no wasted
    resources. Personally, I would not use the installer at this time. Maybe in
    the future will work better but my understanding is that at this time, it is
    using plenty memory and CPU.
    I did use the installer when it first came out and memory on my FF went
    up to about 600MB, not good, have not installed it ever since.

    Use the addon, no wasted resources, extra protection.
    -https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/trafficlight/-

    Bo
     
  12. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    I recommend TrafficLight as well. LinkExtend is great for ratings, but can't block for some reason (even though Chrome version can). WOT is effective as well, but with plenty of false positives.
     
  13. 031

    031 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2007
    Posts:
    185
    Location:
    Bangladesh
    Why not use NortonDns and a site rating or linkscanner software ? With this approach you can get better protection . I use Dr. web linkchecker, norton dns and Wot. Wot however shows many false positives as it is based on user ratings.
     
  14. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    Yep... If you couple a decent rating service with a decent DNS service, it's better than just one. :D :thumb:

    Also don't forget that Firefox makes use of Google Safebrowsing, so there's at least 3 domain rating services: TrafficLight, Norton DNS and Google Safebrowsing.
     
  15. TheKid7

    TheKid7 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2006
    Posts:
    3,469
    I already have NortonDNS (on my Cable/DSL Router).

    I just installed the TrafficLight Firefox Add-On on my oldest PC. I also have WOT and AVG LinkScanner installed on that PC. TrafficLight seems to work fine with no significant slow downs.
     
  16. TheKid7

    TheKid7 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2006
    Posts:
    3,469
    On my newest PC, I uninstalled McAfee SiteAdvisor (using MCPR.exe) because the current verion os SiteAdvisor is no yet compatible with Firefox 5.0. I then upgraded to Firefox 5.0 followed with the installation of the TrafficLight Firefox Add-On. TrafficLight seems to be working OK. Now I have TrafficLight & AVG LinkScanner installed on my newest PC. I may later add WOT.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.