homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 23.20.34.25
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Accredited PayPal World Seller

Home / Forums Index / WebmasterWorld / Webmaster General
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: phranque & physics

Webmaster General Forum

    
'New report identifies' dangerous Web domains
.hk, .cn, .info take the lead...
Miamacs




msg:3666586
 11:41 am on Jun 4, 2008 (gmt 0)

Perhaps Google took this report a little too seriously when filtering out all .info sites [webmasterworld.com]...? ( j/k )

Not sure if I should be surprised about the figures... and the 'leading' .tlds:

New report identifies dangerous Web domains [news.yahoo.com]
JORDAN ROBERTSON, AP Technology Writer

...

McAfee found the most dangerous domains to navigate to are ".hk" (Hong Kong), ".cn" (China) and ".info" (information).

Of all ".hk" sites McAfee tested, it flagged 19.2 percent as dangerous or potentially dangerous to visitors; it flagged 11.8 percent of ".cn" sites and 11.7 percent of ".info" sites that way.

A little more than 5 percent of the sites under the ".com" domain the world's most popular were identified as dangerous.

...

this was funny:

Where McAfee found some of the least-risky domain names:

".gov" (government use), with 0.05 percent flagged;

".jp" (Japan), with 0.1 percent flagged and

".au" (Australia), with 0.3 percent flagged.

...

Australia is... among the safest places on the Internet? *heh*
Didn't see that one coming.

Also that 0.05 percent of corrupted .gov sites makes one wonder.

is it something like: '- Wellyah, the department of Preventing Hackers From Breaking Into Governmental Systems ( PHFBIG ) is doing a great job I'd say, *only* 0.05 percent of all governmental websites carry the risk of loading malicious software onto citizens' computers...' ( and then imagine what else the hackers do on those servers).

[edited by: Miamacs at 11:43 am (utc) on June 4, 2008]

 

pageoneresults




msg:3666617
 12:30 pm on Jun 4, 2008 (gmt 0)

The .info TLD was poisoned within months after its release. Heck, you could get a free .info with a .com purchase, that is how desparate they were to get them into the marketplace. Google's little mishap was more of a "eye-opener" for me. Why would they even be messing with a filter on .info TLDs to begin with?

As a long time Internet Marketer, I would never, ever touch a .info TLD and quite a few others. The writing was on the wall way back when these were first released. And we all know there are exceptions to the rule so there is no need for the .info brigade to start breathing down my neck. ;)

Hundreds, perhaps thousands, of companies are in the business of registering domain names; some are large and well known, while others are small and less reputable, offering their services on the cheap and with flimsy or no background checks to lure in more customers.

All of this trickles downward. Of course using Registrar information as a means for determining which of the Registrars have the most abuse might be a bit challenging. But, if you come down to the host level, the playing field changes. That's when I think this comes into play...

Trusted Hosting Environments
Are you at risk in your current hosting situation?
[webmasterworld.com...]

I see a lot of people looking for the lowest hosting prices, cheap this, cheap that. I'd be very careful as to what you are getting yourself into when moving into a "cheap" neighborhood.

ChuckyG




msg:3666791
 3:26 pm on Jun 4, 2008 (gmt 0)

Also that 0.05 percent of corrupted .gov sites makes one wonder.

me too, considering how many elected government officials are corrupt, I'd expect the domains to follow suit. >grin<

Webwork




msg:3666839
 4:41 pm on Jun 4, 2008 (gmt 0)

From the summary (link above):

The McAfee report is based on results from 9.9 million Web sites that were tested in 265 domains for serving malicious code, excessive pop-up ads or forms to fill out that actually are tools for harvesting e-mail addresses for sending spam.

Excessive pop-ups? Dangerous? Ummm . . okay.

.Info domains are especially dangerous? Especially if you are naive enough to place your email address into a online form?

Maybe McAfee's report should be captioned "Online Forms Dangerous!"

Why don't we tell the real truth? The danger isn't the gTLD called .Info. The danger is

  • Turning over control of PCs to unsupervised children who will click anything and authorize anything to get a free game downloaded to their PC.
  • Adults who don't know how to set their browser security settings.
  • Stupid human nature: That there is NO free lunch has never deterred anyone from not lining up for the meal . or clicking a link or a submit button to get something for free.
  • Insecure and hole riddled browsers and operating systems, which have made McAfee and other "security software providers" billions of dollars - which "externalized costs occassioned by buying Microsoft products" we have borne simply because Microsoft is willing to shift the risks to consumers and get away with it - by law.
  • Argh . . I could go on.

No, it isn't the .info gTLD or any other ccTLD that is the "security problem". Spammers and evildoers will simply default to the next cheap option if the cost of a .info domain is increased - because it's not the gTLD that's the problem. The minute you begin believing it is the TLD that poses a special risk that becomes the last minute before you get nailed by a download from a .Org or .Net or .Com domain.

[edited by: Webwork at 4:44 pm (utc) on June 4, 2008]

StoutFiles




msg:3666916
 6:34 pm on Jun 4, 2008 (gmt 0)

Well the real question is what sites with a .info do you check out on a regular basis? I don't think the .info's add anything to the web; any person serious enough to make a .info site worth going to would also realize the difficulty in marketing it and pick a .com,.net, or .org instead.

piatkow




msg:3666985
 7:23 pm on Jun 4, 2008 (gmt 0)

The only way that things like .info would work would be if there was very rigid rules over domain allocation, applied restrospectively.

bill




msg:3667286
 2:11 am on Jun 5, 2008 (gmt 0)

McAfee found the most dangerous domains to navigate to are ".hk" (Hong Kong), ".cn" (China) and ".info" (information).

The China .cn domains are incredibly cheap this year due to a CNNIC campaign. They're offering them for the equivalent of about US 14 until December 2008. As there are no ownership restrictions for a .cn, that's enough to attract a lot of the spammers to that extension.

Baruch Menachem




msg:3667591
 2:01 pm on Jun 5, 2008 (gmt 0)

it might not be a good idea to respond to any emails that link to citibank.cn when they ask for your account information. And your social security number. and your DOB ~_^ Especially if the grammar is slightly off.

I might like to get a bunch of domains from .cn I only do this for my own amusement, and it is kind of fun to have lots of domains. $20 is kind of spendy for each domain though.

gpmgroup




msg:3669840
 4:06 pm on Jun 8, 2008 (gmt 0)

A little more than 5 percent of the sites under the ".com" domain the world's most popular were identified as dangerous

On the face of it looks like bad reporting using bad math for example

There are around 77,000,000 5.26% bad? thats aprox. 1 in 20 = 3,850,000 all dangerous? LOL

Put another way thats 1 bad .com site on every second Google page (10 results per page) that everybody searches ever.

The cynic in me observes they do stand to benefit if more people believe they need McAfee products to protect themselves, it may be however their reporting of their analysis is just genuinely flawed.

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / WebmasterWorld / Webmaster General
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved