McAfee SiteAdvisor for Mac OS X 2.0

3.9 out of 5 stars 3.9 (54 votes)

()

Mac OS X / Freeware / 11,109 downloads

SiteAdvisor helps protect you from all kinds of Web-based security threats including spyware, adware, spam, viruses, browser-based attacks, phishing, online fraud and identity theft.

The authors automated testers continually patrol the Web to browse sites, download files, and sign-up for things with e-mail addresses. As you search, browse, download or register online, SiteAdvisor's safety ratings help you stay safe and in control.

Reviews of McAfee SiteAdvisor for Mac OS X

  1. 1 out of 5 stars
    mcaheehater

    Reviewing 26.5 (Apr 30, 2010)

    I hate a crappy and slow MCAfee antivirus , I don't use it now and I'm happy, but they continue to rip me off via their fraudulent siteadvisor.com website. Why MCAfee Site Advisor is a fraudulent service?

    1) The websites are scanned for security issues about ONCE A YEAR. That's not a joke, see http://www.siteadvisor.com/webmasters/index.html#
    citing:

    "-- How long does this re-assessment period last?
    --The re-assessment period can vary from as few as 10 calendar days to as many as 365 calendar days."

    Is it good for a real security? The URLs and files on modern websites are updated very often, so scanning a website once a year is completely useless and even dangerous and malicious practice. It may damage website's owners business and ruine the reputation. Of course, MCAfee doesn't care. Why? Well, I'll explaint that later.

    2) MCafee siteadvisor is based on a reputation system, where random users are posting their comments with a site rating. That's a great chance for competition to publish a black PR feedback and reduce a competing website rating. Moreover, most users posting the comments there are mcafee BOTS - not people, which are given the most powerful rating 9/9, so you cannot even dispute their posts! What a crap, a machine revolution??

    3) MCAfee is interested to assign a bad rating to a website. First, more red sites - more scares, and their users can see, how MCafee software is useful to protect them - even if innocent website is blocked.
    The most important part of that is MCAFEE EARNS NONEY on SiteAdvisor, although the end-user software is free. How? That's simple- if you don't want to see your site blocked by SiteAdvisor, you can PAY to mcafee to have a green rating "Tested daily by MCAfee".
    That green rating DOES NOT mean a 100% safe website for end-user, for example, I personally saw that refog.com website, containing a commercial spy software, had a green "Tested by MCAfee" rating for years!! Also the sites are scanned so rarely, that MCAfee ratings actually MEAN NOTHING.
    So who needs this useless website rating system? Only MCafee!

    MCafee is interested to put a red rating on your website! Actually, one of my websites has a red rating , and while trying to find out why, I've found out that some files listed as a "viruses" don't even exist on my website, and the date is from Sep 2009 , more than 6 months ago!!
    Also some of definitely innocent and proven downloads are listed as trojans and viruses! OK, I've contacted their support, they even replied me the next day, but NOTHING has changed, now a month after my request! I also saw that some well-known websites like www.snapfiles.com were suffering because of MCAfee blocking.
    There was also a story in some blog about a website owner, who stopped to pay to MCafee for a green rating, and after some time his rating was changed to yellow for no real reason! They remind "not forget to pay them"!

    4) It's impossible to change the rating for website owner, even if it's assigned by mistake. They promise to "re-test it" in 5 days, but it will be never done. And I'm not alone with this. they still list the "malware" in URLs, which don't even exist for about a year.

    A great advice - stay away from this "security" scam, the main purpose of which is to steal your money. There are enough free solutions available - like Microsoft Security Essentials, AVG, AVast, Avira etc. Not all of them are great, but at least they are free. And actually the chance of being infected with something really dangerous is low, if you just learn a basic secrity rules of surfing the web!
    Finally, the creators of the service are scammers themselves! See http://pcworld.about.com...-fraud-Researcher-C.htm

    Find out more criminal facts about MCafee by searching Google for "MCafee fraud"!

  2. 1 out of 5 stars
    antiproduct

    Reviewing 26.5 (Feb 3, 2009)

    It used to be a good plugin when it would just notify, one of the updates made it a system app adding it to all browsers and making it do a lot of other annoying crap. Now I feel bad for all the users who's computers I've installed this on. Way to mess things up McAfee.

  3. 1 out of 5 stars
    Undesired Username

    Reviewing 26.5 (Dec 2, 2008)

    Piece of crap. Good luck if you're a domain owner who has their domain slurred as "dangerous" by SiteAdvisor, because McAfee will ignore your pleas to have the rating undone, even if it was a mistake, even if the "malicious" download was never really "malicious", and even if you no longer offer it as a download at all.

  4. 2 out of 5 stars
    McAleck

    Reviewing 26.5 (Sep 4, 2008)

    Well, great idea, except that it doesn't work. After having finally purged my PC of Virtumonde I'd contracted by clicking on a link in Goolge, out of curiosity I downloaded this extension and checked the link again. It said the site is safe! What?

  5. 4 out of 5 stars
    QBgreen

    Reviewing 26.3 (Jul 4, 2007)

    While not a proponent of McAfee's products in general, SiteAdvisor is well implemented. I particularly recommend this to my more timid clients that use Firefox.

  6. 2 out of 5 stars
    avbhanda

    Reviewing 26.3 (Jul 4, 2007)

    I had been reluctantly keeping this installed in my Firefox profile, but chucked it out once I realized that it broke another Addon 'Aardvark'.

  7. 4 out of 5 stars
    photonboy

    Reviewing 26.1 (Jun 13, 2007)

    I didn't like it, but I think it is worth trying. It's been a while so I'm downloading it again. It's hard to rate accurately since I'm not really willing to intentionally go to the "bad" sites to fully test it.

    Here's some useful security tips:
    1) Use Firefox with "NoScript" addon
    2) Use a good security tool like "ad-aware 2007" and use real-time protection
    3) choose a good Antivirus tool

    I might not have the optimal configuration, but my free tools work pretty wel: Firefox with NoScript, Ad-Aware 2007 free, Windows Defender, Windows Firewall and AVG Free are a good start.

    Routers and Firewalls:
    Read your router manual. Many routers do NOT require or even recommend software firewalls as they have hardware protection such as "Network Adress Translation" (NAT for short). You can usually google for a page that will analyze your internet security. Try "Test internet security"; Shields Up is one such web tool.

  8. 5 out of 5 stars
    Haaglander

    Reviewing 23.0 (Nov 19, 2006)

    Great piece of software, surfing with (a little) more confidence!!

  9. 4 out of 5 stars
    JEdwardP

    Reviewing 22.0 (Jun 22, 2006)

    Anyone who counts on this as a primary security tool will obviously fall upon evil days, but that's not what it's intended for.

    It's merely an accesory in the secure toolbox, but as such, it does have value. I don't like or use other McAfee products, but this one works, and is unobtrusive.

  10. 5 out of 5 stars
    Jordanr05

    Reviewing 22.0 (Jun 21, 2006)

    To anomoly: If you don't need the software fine don't use - why are you scewing the rating.

    Ive been looking for a nice phishing filter until FF 2.0 arrives and this program seems to do the trick. Better yet, there's no stupid toolbar add-on like the software on Mozilla's extension page.

    The notifier at the bottom of the page works well, the check for spyware is a great plus, and the warnings on google and yahoo are great.

    The program does exactly what it says it does - quite well in fact.

  11. 1 out of 5 stars
    nefarious1

    Reviewing 20.0 (Mar 13, 2006)

    Worse than useless. Unlike some of its competitors, it lets questionable sites load, and warns you only AFTER the fact. And it "warns" you only with a hard-to-notice little color change down below, in the status bar. (I'm talking about normal surfing, not viewing Google search results, which is what is shown in the screen shot above.)

    And, like all others of its type, it phones home for each and every site you visit. I don't care what they say in their "privacy policy", I am not comfortable with that.

  12. 1 out of 5 stars
    anomoly

    Reviewing 20.0 (Mar 3, 2006)

    worthless trivial information & a complete waste of time. It's like having someone hold your hand while you surf. I protect my pc just fine & am not afraid to surf ANY site-bring it on

  13. 5 out of 5 stars
    niknet

    Reviewing 18.0 Build 1881 Beta (Mar 2, 2006)

    Cool And Very Helpful Program!

  14. 5 out of 5 stars
    gkar

    Reviewing 18.0 Build 1881 Beta (Feb 10, 2006)

    Nice extension, was surprised that some of my favorite sites were showing up yellow and red. I especially like how it lights up google searches with ratings. *****

  15. 5 out of 5 stars
    thebig429

    Reviewing 18.0 Build 1881 Beta (Jan 20, 2006)

    Used this for a day, no problems. Im sure once they streamline it , it will be great!

  16. 5 out of 5 stars
    bheitzel

    Reviewing 18.0 Build 1881 Beta (Jan 20, 2006)

    Wow. Once in a while you see an ap that you think may become a must-have- this could be one. Very handy tool for navigating the unknown expanse of the web- the integration with google and yahoo search is very, very cool. Found a few sites that weren't tested yet, but overall this looks pretty amazing.

  17. 5 out of 5 stars
    primetime30

    Reviewing 18.0 Build 1881 Beta (Jan 20, 2006)

    zee7:
    First of all, download.com IS rated yellow by Siteadvisor, just like betannews.com. It's a different site than cnet.com, which is, as you said, rated green.

    Second, Siteadvisor shows you exactly where it found the questionable file on betanews.com. See http://www.siteadvisor.c...ews.com/downloads/69724/.
    The program in question (BearShare) did indeed have adware and was indeed found on the betanews.com domain. Siteadvisor did NOT say BetaNews is a bad website, just that a small fraction of downloads tested there had adware.

    Finally, many people disagree about the safety of doubleclick.com. Most people who don't like doubleclick feel that way because of their cookie policies, but Siteadvisor has already said they don't (yet) test for cookies. Instead of criticizing, why don't you go help change the rating of doubleclick.com by commenting on the SiteAdvisor doubleclick page.

  18. 1 out of 5 stars
    zee7

    Reviewing 18.0 Build 1881 Beta (Jan 20, 2006)

    Although the idea is nice and the service much-needed, their database needs a complete editorial overhaul and a broader spectrum of user input/analysis intergrated into the ratings. For example:

    Betanews.com is rated "yellow" and bears this warning: "Be careful. In our tests, we found a small fraction of downloads on this site that some people consider adware or other unwanted programs." DUH! No kidding! SiteAdvisor makes no mention of the fact that betanews is the news site and FileForum is a separate software repository where the users are clearly informed of which products contain adware or spyware and, in fact, allows users to filter out such programs when using the site's search engine. Cnet.com (with download.com being their software area), is exactly the same as betanews and hosts the exact same downloads, yet Cnet is rated "green". Why is that?

    Doubleclick.net is also rated "green" and SiteAdvisor insists: "We tested this site and didn't find any significant problems to report." Net savvy users know better. An anonymous writer on SiteAdvisor's page says of doubleclick.net: "Bad download/software or contains spyware/adware
    Found changes in Firefox's about:config after visiting site -- no notification was given." Another user says, "Rating: Advertising - Very aggressive popups or banners
    Advertising agency; source of numerous banners and tracking cookies across the web. Should *not* be green." And another, " One of the most annoying advertising companies in existance."

    There are numerous other erroroneous and/or misleading entries in SiteAdvisor's database, therefore, until such time as it is updated or corrected, I'd advise users to proceed with caution. This program might give you a false sense of security.

  19. 4 out of 5 stars
    Mrcubsfan1212

    Reviewing 18.0 Build 1881 Beta (Jan 19, 2006)

    Why does it ask for a user name and a password when I fire up Firefox?! It doesn't do it on the IE version.

  20. 5 out of 5 stars
    bartowick9

    Reviewing 18.0 Build 1881 Beta (Jan 18, 2006)

    this program is a must...unobtusive and very informative. a wealth of info. on suspect sites. been testing all day and i love it.great tool to surf the web and have information on a site before one gives perconnal info or downloads. a must for everyone

Discuss McAfee SiteAdvisor for Mac OS X