Identifying Compromised Websites

linuxwrangler writes "'An infectious disease broke out recently in a number of communities. We'd like to tell which communities they were, just in case you were visiting one at the time, but we can't. It would be bad for business, after all.' Thus begins an interesting column in InfoWorld's Gripe Line in which Ed Foster discusses the astonishing secrecy surrounding the identity of the sites that were compromised by Scob/Download.ject and spreading malicious code to their visitors. As Foster notes, when food-poisoning is traced to a store or restaurant the health-department makes every effort to inform those who may be affected. Shouldn't we demand the same when a business's server poisons our computer?"

Comments

good topic, not so good replies?

[ffa]

wow! not many replies to this topic with scores > 1... come one people!

-f.

attrition.org website defacement list

[kaos_]

attrition.org used to have a very up to date website defacement list. This publicly showed which companies were compromised and served as a hall of shame.

Why not continue along these lines?

I'll take "who cares" for $200, Bob

[Jamie Zawinski]

My phone can't even display HTML 3.2 legibly, why in the world would I want it to be able to run Flash or a Flash clone?

"The problem for your problem!"

Re:nice moderation.. not

[Jord]

Karma whore :)

Re:My Letter to the Senate

[Fissure_FS2]

My complaint is if a resturant down the street came down with E. Coli and people became sick or died the US FDA would of notified the public about this resturant and we would be aware of that resturant's name and location.

s/of/have/
Apparently, you forgot that using correct grammar makes you sound much more important and likely to be considered. (Yes, this is now officially my pet peeve)

Re:Of course

[untaken_name]

You mean 'affected.' To 'effect' a change is to make a change happen. When you change something, that thing is 'affected.' In other words, when you effect changes, you affect the things you're changing. Of course, perhaps you were even farther off and meant 'infected,' I don't know. I've just seen approximately 5 misuses of affect/effect in this thread alone and you're the one I responded to.