Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Is "Web of Trust" good or bad?


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 razz3333

razz3333

  • Members
  • 104 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:05:23 AM

Posted 07 April 2017 - 10:21 AM

Forgive me if I'm posting in the wrong forum.

 

As most of you likely know, in November last year Web Of Trust was removed from Firefox & Chrome add-ons.

 

A portion of an article ( http://www.digitaltr...s-wot-add-on/ ) from Digital Trends, dated January 26/17, states the following:

 

Mozilla’s Firefox browser is apparently disabling the WOT add-on and marking it as suspicious based on concerns over the protection of user data. Apparently, WOT was previously identified as a problem add-on and removed from the list of available add-ons, and now those users who still have WOT installed in Firefox are no longer able to use it

 

I'm a little confused now because I discovered WOT is back again in the Google Chrome Web Store (updated March 27/17).

 

I have 3 questions:

 

1) In your opinion, is WOT good to use or should it be avoided?

 

2) Has anyone used "Bitdefender Traffic Light" which will also (like WOT) display an icon on links within Facebook?  

 

3) Are there any other add-ons (that you would recommend) that I can use in Chrome that would display an icon on links within Facebook?

 

Thanks for your time!



BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 51,954 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:05:23 AM

Posted 11 April 2017 - 06:04 AM

Many site rating vendors (i.e. McAfee WebAdvisor (formerly SiteAdvisor), WOT, Google's Safe Browsing, Avira Scout browser, Symantec WS.Reputation.1, Webutation, avast! Online Security Plugin (formerly WebRep), etc) use a system of volunteer testers that continually patrol the Internet to browse sites, download files, and submit information. All the results are documented and supplemented with feedback from users, Web site owners, and analysis from their own employees. The advising site vendor then summarizes the results typically into a color-coded red, yellow and green ratings scale to help inform Web users as to the safety of each tested site. While these tools are useful, they are not foolproof and sometimes may provide misleading ratings. Just because you visit a risky site, that does not automatically mean the site is bad or that your system has been infected by going there. In contrast, going to a safe site could even prompt a warning. There are legitimate programs available on web sites which are falsely detected by various anti-virus programs from time to time. This sometimes results in an inaccurate site rating/warning of potentially dangerous software when that is not the case. The use of rating sites does not always guarantee an accurate rating of the results they provide and can provide a false sense of security especially for the novice user.
.
.
Windows Insider MVP 2017-2018
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#3 razz3333

razz3333
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 104 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:05:23 AM

Posted 11 April 2017 - 10:51 AM

So even though Web Of Trust was removed from Firefox & Chrome add-ons due to the issues revealed in reports last November (as you know, currently back in Chrome but still not in Firefox), do you feel that WOT is equally as safe to use as any of the others you mentioned?



#4 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 51,954 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:05:23 AM

Posted 11 April 2017 - 12:43 PM

I do not use any of these site rating tools...I just practice safe computing.
.
.
Windows Insider MVP 2017-2018
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#5 MusiCALpuLLtoy

MusiCALpuLLtoy

  • Members
  • 116 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:AZ
  • Local time:03:23 AM

Posted 21 October 2017 - 05:50 AM

well, i used it with no issues. BUT if chrome slash google endorses it, run like hell. google is dangerous in my eyes . imo

#6 r.a.d.

r.a.d.

  • Members
  • 767 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:02:23 AM

Posted 21 October 2017 - 11:38 AM

I never used a browser plug-in for checking, but for years I used to copy/paste any questionable website into URLVoid/then hit Submit and wait for the scan results which utilizes several, including WOT. If one listed showed it wasn't safe, the 'View more Details' would elaborate as to why.

Results of this forum as an example:

http://www.urlvoid.com/scan/bleepingcomputer.com/
Bleepin' desert rat retiree in climes yet to fry brains (knock on cactus).

Past climes/best friend:  photo-91.gif

#7 isaccasi

isaccasi

  • Members
  • 147 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:zealand denmark
  • Local time:11:23 AM

Posted 06 November 2017 - 05:53 AM

I use Bitdefender Trafficlight,Grammarly,Lastpass and Windscribe VPN/proxy service in Google Chrome,The same extensions is available for Firefox. :bounce:



#8 rp88

rp88

  • Members
  • 3,069 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Local time:10:23 AM

Posted 10 November 2017 - 01:40 PM

There was a time when noscript included a part where you could query a script and get these sort of site rating pieces of info about the domain it was coming from, back when this feature existed I glanced at web of trust quite a bit and while it knew nothing about minor websites it usually marked out things like which major domains served adverts (usually a risky thing which one shouldn't allow scripts from as adverts can often carry malware). But since it was removed as a feature from noscript I've hardly used WoT at all and haven't missed it too much, such things can be useful, but definitely aren't the be all and end all of which pages are safe.

I did however find web of trust to be more useful than some of it's equivalents (most of which are still accessible when querying a domain in noscript), just because the interface of the WoT website was nicer.

I've never tried the add-on though.

Edited by rp88, 10 November 2017 - 01:42 PM.

Back on this site, for a while anyway, been so busy the last year.

My systems:2 laptops, intel i3 processors, windows 8.1 installed on the hard-drive and linux mint 17.3 MATE installed to USB

#9 dallae1

dallae1

  • Members
  • 5 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  

Posted 21 November 2017 - 08:36 AM

Used to use WOT but found it to be pretty useless product to be honest. It did nothing but slowed down the google search for me.



#10 AnythingButMalware

AnythingButMalware

  • Members
  • 218 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:06:23 AM

Posted 21 November 2017 - 02:05 PM

I feel as if Web of Trust should be avoided by users, especially those of a more general audience considering that services such of these can throw false flags/warnings quite often. As others have said, practicing safe browsing habits and using the proper software will enable you to a certain degree of security.


Have you tried turning it off and back on? :P


#11 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 51,954 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:05:23 AM

Posted 21 November 2017 - 05:28 PM

...practicing safe browsing habits and using the proper software will enable you to a certain degree of security.

True. As I often say...no amount of security software is going to defend against today's sophisticated malware writers for those who do not practice safe computing and stay informed. It has been proven time and again that the user is a more substantial factor (weakest link) in security than the architecture of the operating system or installed protection software. Cyber-criminals succeed because they take advantage of human weaknesses...relying heavily on social engineering to exploit that weak link in the security chain.
.
.
Windows Insider MVP 2017-2018
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users