-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 818
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[badware] Bundled software on lots of inofficial sites #3060
Comments
Hmm.. and what do you propose? Adding every single domain out there serving malware into the list? |
That's the purpose of the badware risks list, isn't it? |
Yes and No. These domains are used for deception, true, but that is not my point. Because if you want to go gotta block 'em all here, you are in for an endless game of whack-a-mole.
If you think that's what happening, you've clearly not been paying attention. Because this very repository here, on which we are exchanging our commentary, is testament to the fact that this is a never-ending effort, only made possible by the work of numerous volunteers. Without this circumstance pretty much nothing would be blocked at all. The only thing that can be done (until some fundamental change happens to the underlying standards and technology that make the Web) is resorting to a bit more radical measures like blocking third-party JS in general, which has the unfortunate consequence of risking site breakage. But you have to take some bullet here, either one way or the other. I know, the WWW was a mistake. Not really. Although it has more than just a kernel of truth. |
That's what we do and all the other filter lists that have specific filters. I'm one of the volunteers you called out, no?
I get the idea that you think it's another category because of the difference between collective downloadsites and single scam sites. As those domains imho are still worth blocking, should I open a request for a new filterlist? I'd just add it to "badware risks". What's the downside of adding those? It can help ruining and spreading those sites by not making them successful and protecting users. |
As long as they're not random domains and display a webpage when browsed to, they should get added. |
My proposal:
By the way, I think using |
The |
|
Hi. |
@AlainRnet It's an inofficial site that served malware / PUPs in the past. However they changed the shipping of the files to go through Go to the official site https://www.scribus.net/downloads/ |
try:
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dashboard:-My-filters |
@stonecrusher :Thank you very much for that clarification. Since Scribus is already installed on my system, I had not noticed the passage by cdndownloadpr.com but I had however seen the clear mention that this is not the official site and the legal mentions appeared to me also sufficiently developed. @krystian3w : No need, I just clicked Disable strict domain blocking permanently |
Inspired by
https://twitter.com/JusticeRage/status/1021815597972291591
All from the same scammer:
URL(s) where the issue occurs
Describe the issue
The old trick:
Notes
I checked every single one manually with at least one download (Windows x64 installer) and it always points to the same downloadmanager (just with different filenames but same hash):
Downloadserver mostly is
http://www.femmfa-gis.com/
so maybe block that too.https://www.virustotal.com/#/url/b5a4709f12b139aa77ac3a34ee6d4a7f6c107f0f3c5b811fc9a77a6d780ae616/detection
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: