Again - please, web master, fix the attack site stuff

[brewdude]

I'm getting a warning about phishing scams on my phone now.

[Structo]

Hmmmm, trout or bass?

Disclaimer:
I have been accessing The Amp Garage despite the warnings.
I use Chrome.

Not sure what triggered the malware warning but I think we suspected a former
member that shall hence forth be referred to as Fart Blossom.

Anyway, I am not really concerned with the warning.
Unless it was an actual threat.

Malwarbytes (or other malware scanner), a decent anti-virus program and some fortitude is called for.

[RWood]

Who is the webmaster of this site? The folks at google are telling me that it's 2-3 days max to square away if webmaster follows protocols.
The school system I work for had a similar incident which was remedied in 24 hrs!

[HeeBGB]

Allynmey is the webmaster!

[RWood]

This thing seems to be hurting the site as evidenced that Fender discussion hasn't had a single post in 6 days, Marshall in 7 days, and Vox in 9 days.
I know that those discussions are not all that busy, but a week without even 1 post?

[M Fowler]

I actually don't mind not reading all the questions created from fly by internet searchers. This system keeps them all away and only regular subscribers dare enter our domain.

[R.G.]

I actually don't mind not reading all the questions created from fly by internet searchers. This system keeps them all away and only regular subscribers dare enter our domain.

That does have a teenage appeal - until the site actually does get compromised and everyone who has learned to take their defenses down gets infected.

It's a lot like a restaurant with a sign on the door:

Health Inspector Warning!
This food establishment has been found to be contaminated with e. coli, shigella, and listeria. Eating here may make you sick.

Sure the regulars may think it's clever, and it may be a way to keep the riffraff out, but what happens when the cook or a waiter really gets sick?

[Leo_Gnardo]

I actually don't mind not reading all the questions created from fly by internet searchers. This system keeps them all away and only regular subscribers dare enter our domain.

All well and good, I kinda half like the idea of an exclusive club. But dismiss it out of hand as it would, over time, dissolve down to a couple of correspondents.

I suspect some of our 'regulars' have been scared away, as well as those who google for answers to their amp questions and could find them here but the goog won't even connect 'em.

WE NEED THIS PROBLEM FIXED PRONTO!

Please!!!

What is it going to take???

[vibratoking]

I actually don't mind not reading all the questions created from fly by internet searchers. This system keeps them all away and only regular subscribers dare enter our domain.

All well and good, I kinda half like the idea of an exclusive club. But dismiss it out of hand as it would, over time, dissolve down to a couple of correspondents.

I suspect some of our 'regulars' have been scared away, as well as those who google for answers to their amp questions and could find them here but the goog won't even connect 'em.

WE NEED THIS PROBLEM FIXED PRONTO!

Please!!!

What is it going to take???

Optimally, this should be taken care of. It is true that you cannot search this site with Google and actually get to the threads. This is inconvenient since the built in search engine sucks. Non-google search engines will work. I know that duckduckgo works, for instance.

This raises the question as to whether Google's warning is valid and/or necessary. Is Google actually protecting us or is it just overkill non-sense that allows Google to exercise it's power? Is using duckduckgo akin to not using a condom or is using Google like using a condom even though she passed the AIDs test yesterday? Your viewpoint is likely to change depending on what actually occurs. Life is a crapshoot.

[R.G.]

This raises the question as to whether Google's warning is valid and/or necessary. Is Google actually protecting us or is it just overkill non-sense that allows Google to exercise it's power?

That's a reasonable question, and I've done a fair amount to try to find out. Apparently at one point back in ... June? July? the server that hosts this site really was infected.

I've been told that the infection was quickly taken care of. Probably true, as google then went ahead to say in its warnings that no malware has been detected in the last N days here. That's persisted for some time now.

The thing is, once the infection really is removed, the webmaster can ask google to rescan and remove it from the "infected" list. Apparently this is a necessary step. My personal site was infected. I disinfected it, and asked for a rescan. The warning was removed for my site about one day after I asked for a rescan.

For some reason, the request for a rescan and removal is not happening. I have offered my help to do this, but I can understand the server owner not wanting to trust someone else with the passwords to the raw server, which is (very reasonably!) necessary to do the dance step to convince google you own the site.

Is using duckduckgo akin to not using a condom or is using Google like using a condom even though she passed the AIDs test yesterday?

It ain't the search engine's fault. Or responsibility. Duckduckgo does not maintain a blacklist (that I know of). Google does. There is no need for any search engine to maintain a black list. There is no need for any browser to look at a black list that is maintained.

Google is not the enemy, although it's apparently fashionable to say that it is. Google merely says that they found malware in this list of places. Period. Browsers can and do look at the blacklist and nail up a sign that says
Health Inspector Warning!
This food establishment has been found to be contaminated with e. coli, shigella, and listeria. Eating here may make you sick.
You're free to wander in and eat even after being warned. That's what all of us have done if we've posted here.

The problem is that if you get used to ignoring warnings, you're really in trouble when the warning is appropriate. Remember the way "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" ended?

Your viewpoint is likely to change depending on what actually occurs.

Yes, your viewpoint will change a lot depending on whether you get infected. But your getting infected is not dependent on the health inspector posting a warning. It's what you do with the warning.

Life is a crapshoot

Yes, it is, to some extend. However, this is a non sequitur. Thinking that you should ignore warnings because they may not be true is ... well, probably self-fixing in the end.

[RWood]

I actually don't mind not reading all the questions created from fly by internet searchers. This system keeps them all away and only regular subscribers dare enter our domain.

I usually agree to some extent, but...
If I would have received the same warning the first time I tried to enter I would have likely not returned to the Brain-Trust that is TAG. I would have also not gained the knowledge and confidence that I now have building and servicing amps.
People like R.G. would still be just authors of articles I read instead of someone who actually respond to questions that I pose.
Also...I would not be entertained by the likes of Miles or Mr. Bass!

[JazzGuitarGimp]

I've been holding back on this. Primarily because I really like having access to this invaluable resource. I've been respectful of Allynmey's time, assuming that he would take care of this when his schedule permits. The fact that he so graciously hosts this site at no charge to the members, especially given the foorprint this site obviously consumes, earns him some due respect in my book. That being said, I am finding this site increasingly difficult to access, and it is becoming more frustrating as time marches on, what with updates to ios and Mac OS. Something has got to give. Allynmey, it would be nice if you would at least tell us your thoughts on this. What are your intentions? If you've had enough of TAG, and it's your intent to just let it wither away, then just step up to mic and tell us.

[vibratoking]

Google is not the enemy, although it's apparently fashionable to say that it is. Google merely says that they found malware in this list of places. Period.

Maybe not your enemy. In many areas, including some outside the scope of this thread, Google is invading on privacy, tracking personal info, manipulating hardware and software vendors with their Android policies, influencing politics through financial manipulation, is the biggest copyright infringer in world, etc... This is why I consider them an enemy. Google conducts business unethically IMO.

Back to the point. Google automatically found malware without anyone requesting their 'service'. Why hasn't Google followed the same automated approach to clearing their warning? Last I checked, I didn't ask Google to provide virus protection for me. I have taken care of that on my own. Which is why I don't need Google to 'help' me. In fact, Google's practice is significantly affecting a website which has not asked for any input from Google whatsoever. But what we are experiencing is a small example of Google's choke hold on the web and on much more outside the web. They have too much power and do not use it for the greater good. Some might call it standard business practice, I call it bordering on illegal.

Having said all that, this issue can be, and could have already been, fixed by the webmaster by jumping through the hoops that Google created without being asked to. But, don't let me take away anyone's right to be butt fucked by Google. I am waiting for the Supreme Court to rule in favor of that too.

[JazzGuitarGimp]

But, don't let me take away anyone's right to be butt fucked by Google. I am waiting for the Supreme Court to rule in favor of that too.

And I am sure they will - as well as vote in favor and support of all greedy corporations. It's how politicians really earn their livings.

[R.G.]

Maybe not your enemy. ... This is why I consider them an enemy. Google conducts business unethically IMO.

Not pertinent to the issue. I really don't like some of my in-laws, but that doesn't make them responsible for all the evil in the world.

Back to the point. Google automatically found malware without anyone requesting their 'service'. Why hasn't Google followed the same automated approach to clearing their warning?

Don't know. I was hoping they would.

However, I believe the issue is more complex than that. There are quite a number of blacklists for sites, and I think the real, deep underlying issue is that one of the blacklists that google consults still lists the site. That's about as deeply as I have pursued it. so far.

It may well be that google looks where the third, fourth, fifth... party blacklists say, and if malware is found, they scan it, yada, yada.

Even then, Evil Google does not cause you issues with accessing the site. The **several** sets of browser software that reads the site have decided it's prudent to look for whether the site may be infecting their users. It is possible that there is a conspiracy that involves multiple unnamed parties in making blacklists, Google for looking at them, scanning and reporting those results, and multiple browsers for reporting that you may pick up some unwanted bugs.

But given the regular reports of new break-ins in databases, and the rate of identity theft and on-line extortion, wouldn't it make more sense to blame the folks who write the malware? Is it better to curse the messenger than go after the root cause?

Right. The Root Cause is hard to fix, and we have the messenger here where we can call him names.

I do know that it's simple and easy to get off the blacklist. Been there myself.

Once you decide something is Evil Incarnate, it's easy to blame all the misfortunes of the world on it. Sometimes you're right to do so, sometimes not. But neither version of blame helps fix the issue. Blaming Google for having found malware on the web is a little like thinking it's better to curse the darkness than to light even a single candle.

Last I checked, I didn't ask Google to provide virus protection for me. I have taken care of that on my own.

You don't want any help?

They have too much power and do not use it for the greater good. Some might call it standard business practice, I call it bordering on illegal.

Fine. Sue them. That will help.

It will take years and what you get in the end may be a $0.25-off coupon for a cup of coffee. This I know by personal experience too, having been a party to a class action suit that was "successful" in holding the miscreants accountable.

And when will that remove the site from the blacklist?

Having said all that, this issue can be, and could have already been, fixed by the webmaster by jumping through the hoops that Google created without being asked to.

The "hoops" are (1) show that you're the real website owner, so that google doesn't get hoodwinked into un-listing real attack sites and (2) ask them to re-scan. The "hoop" takes under five minutes on line.

Your sig says:

Electronic equipment is designed using facts and mathematics, not opinion and dogma.

Think about it.