Without avast! my computer would'a crasht!

[DavidR]

I would like to know if a site is safe before I click on its link.
How does LongURL help me determine if the site is safe?
Unfortunatly, I'm a nOOb.

If you can't see where a URL is pointing (click on the images I posted to expand them and you will see), you can't make 'any' decision, if you can see it in it un-shortened form then you have a better chance of making an informed decision on what is displayed as the url if you want to go there.

How you make that informed decision I can't say, it rather depends on your common sense in most cases as the url will look weird.

[DavidR]

Browser..??
Would be nice to add a sig.

I asked HeavyD25271 about that what seems an eternity ago in Reply #2

[Asyn]

I asked HeavyD25271 about that what seems an eternity ago in Reply #2

I know, I saw it.
Was a reminder...

[Jack 1000]

I have used WOT and have had great success with it.

David mentioned the precautionary issue about Script Redirects:

In all honesty these redirect google search results generally don't point directly at the site, but use a redirect script in the actual url string and WOT or McAfee, etc. won't make a blind bit of difference.

So, what needs to be done in order for Web Rep, WOT, or Site Advisor to make a difference in David's example?  WOT has just released an update that allows for evaluation of shortened URL links on Facebook and Twitter,  (It's out for Firefox and Chrome now, will be out for IE I think next month.)

Web Rep will get better if the following are added in a future update:

Implementation of ratings from virus lab data to co-exist with Avast community input.
Blocking of Red Sites by default (Like WOT already does.)

Jack

[HeavyD25271]

NEW AND IMPROVED!

NOW WITH SIG!

[Asyn]

NEW AND IMPROVED!

NOW WITH SIG!

Great.
No need to shout, though.

[DavidR]

NEW AND IMPROVED!

NOW WITH SIG!

Now that didn't hurt now did it

[DavidR]

<snip>
David mentioned the precautionary issue about Script Redirects:

In all honesty these redirect google search results generally don't point directly at the site, but use a redirect script in the actual url string and WOT or McAfee, etc. won't make a blind bit of difference.

So, what needs to be done in order for Web Rep, WOT, or Site Advisor to make a difference in David's example?  WOT has just released an update that allows for evaluation of shortened URL links on Facebook and Twitter,  (It's out for Firefox and Chrome now, will be out for IE I think next month.)
<snip>

I was interested in this comment, but it appears that this really hasn't been implemented. I went checking this on their blog and date of the blog entry was Fri 08 Apr 2011 but I haven't seen a WOT add-on update later than that. The current version is 2011/03/23, perhaps the blog was just plain late and I haven't seen this in action for shortened URLs, not that I have been actively looking.

[pcclean3453]

Add the URL to your blocked sites list. (If you don't have it enabled, enable it and add it.)

[DavidR]

That is pointless, a) because the URL wasn't likely to be the same as what you were redirected too, b) unlikely to crop up too frequently in a google search string and c) these URLs are a constant moving target.

All you end up with is a lot of redundant urls in the site block list when there are better pro-active options to manual exclusion of urls.

[HeavyD25271]

Now that WebRep is back up, how do I vote against the site that tried to infect me while WebRep was down?

WebRep gives the site all grey bars.

I'd like to see those bars turn red.

[DavidR]

Well I wouldn't recommend going to a site that tried to infect you just to give it a bad rep.

However, clicking on the webrep icon on the page whilst at a site (can't be done from the google search results), that opens another window. Use the slider to select how like the site and select the relevant icon description that matches the site content and click the Vote button.