Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Un-fair decision by Site Advisor can damage reputation

Users are prompted on their first visit to my homepage to add my site (only) to their favorites list, this is completely optional and you can easily cancel the request, the user will also not be prompted again for at least one month, whether they accept or refuse the request. This feature employs a simple cookie to remember the users decision, if the cookie is deleted, the user is optionally prompted again on their next visit.

Site Advisor unfairly marking my site:

I intended this feature to be a simple way to add my site to their favorites, leaving the user ultimately with the decision to accept or deny it. so in light of this I feel it's somewhat unfair that Mcafee Site Advisor have marked my site with a yellow warning mark claiming my site feature to be an annoyance, when it's obvious that McAfee haven't actually tested what site is being added or the frequency of the request, only suggesting "a website" is attempting to add to favorites.

Not only does a Site Advisor user see a yellow flag when visiting my site, but if searched through a search engine like Google, they also see a clear 'CAUTION' message too.

Because of this simple feature, (which might I add, my visitors have liked), my site is being branded as a 'Phishing' website because of it, only due to recent marking policy changes by Mcafee Site advisor team.

This blantent branding by Mcafee has the potential to seriously damage my websites otherwise impeccable reputation. This decision is even more unfair seeing no user to-date has left any comments or complaints about my site or it's features.

I will go further to say that over 3000 visitors have not made any negative comments about the site, in fact totally the opposite.

Also to rub salt into the wounds, I've been activately promoting Site Advisor as a reliable source of safety information when surfing, now I'm having my doubts as to it's credibility.
2 Replies
Level 9
Report Inappropriate Content
Message 2 of 3

RE: Un-fair decision by Site Advisor can damage reputation

Not sure if you already did this, but you could contact the SDA team. For options see this sticky: Contacting the SiteAdvisor Team

RE; Un-fair decision by Site Advisor can damage reputation

Thanks for the advice, however yes I have contacted Site advisor technical support team.
My point of my thread was to complain at the way Site Advisor can damage someone's reputation with a careless and hasty decision by simply pigeon holing a site because of a well established browser feature that's now being deployed by some phishing sites.

What Site advisor team failed to do was notify websites of the change of policy before making such a claim public, if websites are reliant on it's customers feeling safe, then Site advisor's decision have essentially sabotaged the credibility of my site and other similar safe sites with their new reclassification. surely it must be on Site Advisor's records that for the last year they have rated my site 'Trusted' with a green rating.

It might also help if Site Advisor produced a list of their rankings, and continue to update it when they change/update their marking policies.

Update: Thank you McAfee team, My site status has been cleared up back to a 'Green' rating.

I would like to suggest a feature that might help to prevent a repeat of this problem, by contacting the affected sites with an automated email notification to the site's administration, (most legitimate websites have an admin/support email address), and warning the administration of that site of the impending SiteAdvisor status change including reason/s for change.

Lastly offering a legitimate site owner the option to correct the issue before the status change is applied.