LQ Suggestions & FeedbackDo you have a suggestion for this site or an idea that will make the site better? This forum is for you.
PLEASE READ THIS FORUM - Information and status updates will also be posted here.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Just stopped by here for the first time in a long time, and I was presented with this by my Google Chrome. It even popped up in the upload window to add the attachment of this screenshot. I'm not sure what they would have picked up, but something here has angered the Google gods. From the sound of the message in the "Details" page, somebody probably posted a link to something fishy on one of the forum topics. Anyway, just wanted to let you guys know.
Interesting. They visited the site two days ago, but have found nothing in the past 90. Yet the site is still dangerous.
The result was no malware being downloaded or installed.
Did not appear to function as an intermediary for the infection of any sites.
No, this site has not hosted malicious software over the past 90 days.
This kind of nonsense is why I do not have warnings enabled. I stopped using them after Debian's social contract on their home page was reported as dangerous, with the same kind of warning as this one. "We have found nothing, ever, but the site is dangerous. Really." Debian's social contract is not even a site. Only one part of a site. So the problem of false reporting is not limited to fora. Yet another reason not to use Google. As if there were not enough already.