Today Firefox notified an update for SiteAdvisor, which I allowed.
I then found it installing another program without asking, which seemed to be a search bar. I have now removed all traces of McAfee from my computer because I do not trust any company which tries to install something without permission.
I should like to know what other forum members think about this? Am I being unreasonable?
I have found that Web of Trust flags more bad sites anyway, so will just use that from now on.
Well my personal opinion is that site advisors aren’t effective. Simply because they flag sites safe or unsafe based on user reviews, not on the content.
You could have myspace.com flagged as safe, how ever it could be “hacked” while Mcaffee still says it safe.
Though sites could be hacked… for an average user it gives him atleast a warning before entering any site which had a suspicious history, so that atleast we won’t enter those sites which are ‘red’ and not enter ‘yellow’ unless necessary or known sites. Even with robust protection of CIS I never enter a site with 'red’tag. So, though it is not 100% sure of the results, it is still usefull.
It will definitely help a user some sort of protection, especially when entering sites through searches like Google. Normally without a site advisor we will enter any site and the chances of infection would be much higher. Prevention is better than cure!
i think siteadvisors are great, i used McAfee siteadvisor once too. I liked it, but weboftrust is better i think. jes a site could be hacked, and then it would give a false sense of security but still. Alot of bad sites are flagged, and weboftrust hase a great userbase. It helped me out already a few times ;D
I agree with Kyle in that these static advisors can give a false sense of security.Just because facebook doesn’t actively push malware doesn’t mean it can’t be hijacked.I prefer pro-active advisors such as Finjan and Browserdefender which check in real-time.
Also in regard to the OP the smallprint of Siteadvisor does state that they retain data of the user’s surfing habits,not a good thing and something the afore-mentioned don’t do.
I got rid of SiteAdvisor some time ago. Right after the “updates” required the toolbar install (whether you agree to it or not). I am using Browser Defender at the moment. Agree w/Kyle that these advisors are not to be entirely trusted, but also agree w/layman that it gives at least some kind of warning.
Yes, it is nice to have multiple security “layers”, but too many “layers” can slow down your computing eXPerience.