WOT works or not works

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by Sampei Nihira, Sep 24, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Sampei Nihira

    Sampei Nihira Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2013
    Posts:
    658
    Location:
    Italy
    An example of action and inaction of WOT:

    Chromex.JPG

    FF1x.JPG

    WOT works in different ways inside browsers.
    An example Pale Moon (Firefox) and Comodo Dragon (Chrome).
    Sorry my bad English !!
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 24, 2013
  2. guest

    guest Guest

    You gotta be surprised when you see WOT gives a green rating for a warez website while that dang site gave you a malware infection in the past. Hmm, WOT... one of the worst failure in the history. :rolleyes:
     
  3. TonyW

    TonyW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,633
    Location:
    UK
    I don't understand. The images above show both giving warnings to the same site, right?
     
  4. The Red Moon

    The Red Moon Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2012
    Posts:
    3,871
    Your point of view on WOT is incorrect.
     
  5. guest

    guest Guest

    It doesn't show popup in Dragon. Possibly due to the engine.

    Or it might be yours... ;)
     
  6. FreddyFreeloader

    FreddyFreeloader Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2013
    Posts:
    527
    Location:
    Tejas
    I did a search today for a medicare advantage company, search results on one company had a WOT yellow circle, didn't think that was too big a deal so I clicked it - Opera cut the connection straight away and Avast popped up a Trojan Horse has been blocked. This should have been a WOT red circle instead of a yellow one. This was on Google search, bty.
     
  7. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    No, that site just monitors other sites that hosts anything until they're reported.

    WOT isn't supposed to block sites, but warns instead. It works fine with the usual phishing and downloads you have to execute. Drive-by exploits never last and are rarer to encounter than lottery winners in my opinion.

    WOT has its uses, but you really have to watch out for false positives, because it's very public opinion based (with lots of bots).
     
  8. guest

    guest Guest

    What about malicious scripts? Now I know it might be a false positive. But still, warez sites shouldn't get "green" for reliability or trustworthy for example, regardless if the site contains malicious scripts/downloads/ads or not. The only most accurate category WOT could give is child safety (adult contents is the most effective) which I mostly ignore.
     
  9. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    Malicious scripts won't get rated green (unless recently hacked), that's for sure. Maybe if the general consensus of piracy changes, but until then it's going to stay like this unless the site is at least a scam or somehow dissatisfactory.
     
  10. Esse

    Esse Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Posts:
    383
  11. Impet

    Impet Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Posts:
    894
    WOT blocks political parties even if there's no malware. I don't like dictatorship. :gack:
     
  12. vojta

    vojta Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Posts:
    830
  13. vojta

    vojta Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Posts:
    830
    That's the problem, followers of rival parties spam the rating system to destroy the other party's reputation.

    Or you can always find in the WOT comments religious trolls telling you that a certain adult site is full of malware even if that's not true.
     
  14. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    Religious sites actually are actually more likely to be voted red than adult sites, amongst what you guys already mentioned and more.

    Which is why I said WOT is very opinion-based, although they claim otherwise. Never trust it as your only source. I would've dumped it a long time ago if it wasn't effective at detecting malicious sites.
     
  15. 0strodamus

    0strodamus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Posts:
    1,047
    Location:
    United Surveillance States
    As they should be! +1 WOT :thumb:
     
  16. JohnBurns

    JohnBurns Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Posts:
    454
    Location:
    Oklahoma City
    :thumb: Right on, Ostrodamus!
     
  17. guest

    guest Guest

    And in what sense flagging religious sites as red has anything to do with protecting your computer security or privacy? o_O
     
  18. Sampei Nihira

    Sampei Nihira Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2013
    Posts:
    658
    Location:
    Italy
    WOT in Chrome has inferior performance compared to Firefox,same Ghostery.
     
  19. guest

    guest Guest

    Adblock Plus also doesn't work very well here.

    I think it's not only Chrome but also other Chromium-based browsers. There was a problem in the past with Chromium-based browsers extensions. I thought it has been solved.
     
  20. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    It's because Google limits the how much of the browser extensions can affect and isolates them in different sandboxes, unlike Mozilla which basically gives free reign. In the early days, extensions had little more power than userscripts, but now more Chrome API's are open allowing powerful extensions like ScriptSafe to exist.

    Performance aside, everything works fine for me even on my slow netbook (haven't compared Firefox post version 17, which was slower).
     
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2013
  21. Impet

    Impet Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Posts:
    894
    That's why I uninstalled WOT years ago. It makes no sense at all. :)
     
  22. Joxx

    Joxx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Posts:
    1,125
    WOT classifies sites under a mix of criteria, security/privacy is only part of the mix.
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Sep 27, 2013
  23. Joxx

    Joxx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Posts:
    1,125
    continuing
     

    Attached Files:

  24. Joxx

    Joxx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Posts:
    1,125
    Yes it does, it makes a lot of sense.
    I've been using it for 4 years and can't recomended it highly enough. It's not perfect, of course; it's only a very efficent security tool.
     
  25. cdnsempre

    cdnsempre Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2013
    Posts:
    15
    Location:
    Madeira Islands
    Try extension TRAFFIC LIGHT on your browser.
    It´s better than WOT.
    Presents itself as a green traffic light is yellow caution and red safe not click.
    Just add the options of extensions in your browser crhome, Opera or Firefox v.24.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.