Best Link Scanner for Chrome ?

Ink

Administrator
Verified
Staff Member
Well-known
Jan 8, 2011
22,361
Chrome has decent protection when it comes to Malware and Phishing sites. It's my personal opinion, but AVG LinkScanner is a no-no if paired with Chrome only.

Personally, I would rely on my Antivirus to scan for any malicious code on a website.

As for Website Advisor -( as I think you are speaking of) - I wouldn't say not to choice WOT, but if you cannot rely on WOT that would be good, if you know what I mean.

I won't give a definite answer just yet. :)
 

jamescv7

Level 85
Verified
Honorary Member
Mar 15, 2011
13,070
Famous linkscanner and generally good extension were AVG Linkscanner, Bitdefender Trafficlight, Panda URL Filter and even McAfee Siteadvisor.

Which uses their own algorithms on detecting malicious website and not on users rating based.
 
D

Deleted member 178

jamescv7 said:
Which uses their own algorithms on detecting malicious website and not on users rating based.

Everything based on users rating is flawed since most of those users are not security "experts/geeks"
 

Littlebits

Retired Staff
May 3, 2011
3,893
umbrapolaris said:
jamescv7 said:
Which uses their own algorithms on detecting malicious website and not on users rating based.

Everything based on users rating is flawed since most of those users are not security "experts/geeks"

I will have to partially agree but on the other hand, how many times has a trusted vendor's add-on blocked a legitimate trusted site?

I couldn't count how many times that I see a trusted site blocked by products like AVG LinkScanner, Bitdefender Trafficlight, McAfee Siteadvisor, Panda URL Filter, etc.

For awhile some of these products were listing MalwareTips as malicious, even my own website was listed as malicious because of supposedly hosting infected files even though my site doesn't even host a single file, all files are hosted on download sites like Softpedia, MajorGeeks and vendor's sites.

In my opinion, user ratings are more accurate but not perfect.
WOT is my choice for checking sites, I know it has some issues with trolls giving false ratings and commits but WOT is still far better than the rest.
Always read the commits and do your own research before coming to conclusions about a website. All website checking add-ons have issues with false positives and missing the detection of infected websites. So don't always believe what they say.

Thanks.:D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kent
Z

ZeroDay

I'm going to have to agree with Littlebits on this one, WOT is a great add on.
 

woodrowbone

Level 10
Verified
Dec 24, 2011
480
What about this one: http://www.m86security.com/securebrowsing/
A bit slow as it protects in real time as I understand it.

/W
 

Ink

Administrator
Verified
Staff Member
Well-known
Jan 8, 2011
22,361
You could try Dr.Web AV Link Checker

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/aleggpabliehgbeagmfhnodcijcmbonb
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kent

malbky

Level 1
Jun 23, 2011
1,011
You have to manually check each link with Dr Web. Norton Safe Web just shows a small red x for unsafe websites. It does not have blocking. So best idea is get TrafficLight or AVG Linkscanner and use Norton DNS. Its a great combo. I am using Vipre which has clearclouds databases so has amazin webfiltering. Just thinking of adding TraficLight again.
 

Ink

Administrator
Verified
Staff Member
Well-known
Jan 8, 2011
22,361
None of the ones you mention can scan each link, except Dr.Web AV Link Checker.

Safe Web, TrafficLight could indicate a site is safe. The download may not be, you could scan with Dr.Web and the once more with your AV or upload it to VirusTotal.

Norton Safe Web (Lite) isn't compatible with Chrome, or at least when I tried it, or it's installs a background process.
TrafficLight has a Privacy issue which will be improved in their next update release, in a couple of weeks, but again it cannot detect a malicious download on a clean website (unless someone can test this).
AVG LinkScanner uses background processes and scans for exploits, which on an updated/secure OS there shouldn't be a need for it.

So yes, this is why I suggested Dr.Web AV Link Checker.
 

Ink

Administrator
Verified
Staff Member
Well-known
Jan 8, 2011
22,361
Not at all.
Once installed it appears in the right-click context menu of your browser (IE, FF, Chrome, Opera, Safari) and you can use on-demand for any live links.

http://www.freedrweb.com/linkchecker/

Just remembered..
Another one is AVG Threat Labs Site Safety
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ncnjjicckpooflgclhneahpkahcpoama
 
D

Deleted member 178

No, it works on demand, you right click a link then it scan it.

Damn, Earth answered 10sec before me ^^
 
P

Plexx

Earth is on fire that is why Umbra.

Nevertheless will give both Dr Web and AVG a try.

Thanks for the sharing!
 
D

Deleted member 178

I used DrWeb Link checker, but since Comodo Site Inspector is built-in Dragon & IceDragon and do the same job, i removed it.
 

Overkill

Level 31
Verified
Honorary Member
Feb 15, 2012
2,128
Littlebits said:
umbrapolaris said:
jamescv7 said:
Which uses their own algorithms on detecting malicious website and not on users rating based.

Everything based on users rating is flawed since most of those users are not security "experts/geeks"

I will have to partially agree but on the other hand, how many times has a trusted vendor's add-on blocked a legitimate trusted site?

I couldn't count how many times that I see a trusted site blocked by products like AVG LinkScanner, Bitdefender Trafficlight, McAfee Siteadvisor, Panda URL Filter, etc.

For awhile some of these products were listing MalwareTips as malicious, even my own website was listed as malicious because of supposedly hosting infected files even though my site doesn't even host a single file, all files are hosted on download sites like Softpedia, MajorGeeks and vendor's sites.

In my opinion, user ratings are more accurate but not perfect.
WOT is my choice for checking sites, I know it has some issues with trolls giving false ratings and commits but WOT is still far better than the rest.
Always read the commits and do your own research before coming to conclusions about a website. All website checking add-ons have issues with false positives and missing the detection of infected websites. So don't always believe what they say.

Thanks.:D

I have to agree with Littlebits. WOT is the best in my opinion but I have the layered frame of mind "if one doesn't get it, the other one will". I made a little video of me testing some links from hostsfile dot org...now my hosts blocked those cause I have their hosts installed but wot,mcafee and bdtr also jumped in so I feel pretty safe, plus my browser was sandboxed. Normally I would never click on any links that were not green.
If anyone is interested in watching it, just pm me. :)
 

Ink

Administrator
Verified
Staff Member
Well-known
Jan 8, 2011
22,361
Just wait a second, you might want to read this
http://malwaretips.com/Thread-AVG-LinkScanner-discontinued-replaced-by-AVG-Secure-Search

Biozfear said:
Nevertheless will give both Dr Web and AVG a try.

EDIT:
Not sure if this is the old AVG LinkScanner
http://free.avg.com/us-en/download.prd-smf
 

About us

  • MalwareTips is a community-driven platform providing the latest information and resources on malware and cyber threats. Our team of experienced professionals and passionate volunteers work to keep the internet safe and secure. We provide accurate, up-to-date information and strive to build a strong and supportive community dedicated to cybersecurity.

User Menu

Follow us

Follow us on Facebook or Twitter to know first about the latest cybersecurity incidents and malware threats.

Top