Bing is reporting Mono Project as malicious



  • And no, that's not an ad on the right side, it pops up when you click on the mono link.



  • Well... To be fair, it's true... mono is maliciously killing my patience as a developer.

    Also... Discobug on iOS9...
    It snapped to this zoom level when I tapped in the edit box.

    edit: and you can't resize the screen either. Wonderful.



  • @Minimaul said:

    Discobug on iOS9

    Don't recognize you thus head over to meta.d to report it. :trolleybus:


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @locallunatic said:

    Don't recognize you thus head over to meta.d to report it.

    Say abarker sent you!

    No, wait...



  • I was going to say "at least it reports it. I searched Google for a chrome download. The first site up fooled me. It was chrome, but chrome (third party) loaded with adware, malware, and shiteware®

    I did think that Google might want to look at that, then I remembered that if you pay enough you can get top slot. So if Google are more concerned about revenue than their Users, that's their Business Strategy fail. I could go on about trying to download Chrome from the official Google Site, but it would turn into a rant and end up having this post jeffed

    Anyhoo, getting back to the OP. Let me state now that I know nothing about Mono, have no desire to learn anything about Mono. Looking at the Mono Project - Novell entry it describes it as an "open source implementation of the .Net Framework" (just above the linux bit), so it is no surprise that Bing would want to scare people away from it


  • area_deu

    Read up on:
    Xamarin
    Xamarin integration in Visual Studio 2015

    TYVM.



  • @locallunatic said:

    Don't recognize you thus head over to meta.d to report it.
    Do I have to? I might get infected and start Jeffing...



  • If you make it obvious where you are from you'll get banned before you could be infected.



  • @Onyx said:

    No, wait...

    Just say TDWTF loves Discourse and they'll fix your bug in a dash!



  • @loose said:

    I searched Google for a chrome download.

    If that's not what you saw, then you already had malware.



  • Can't recall what my search string was (something like google chrome download), can't recall the results and the site I selected. I was using IE 8, it was a (fresh) reinstall of windows 7, and I was in a hurry to stop using IE8. Normally I have a recent download of firefox or chrome kicking about that I can install and update. No... don't get me started on that......

    The annoying thing is that I done what I tell people not to do and something I am normally careful on. I was about a month or two (maybe three) ago, and I would possibly accept that it may have been flagged and removed etc.

    Pretty much a :wtf: of my own making, but it just goes to show that nobody is perfect 100% of the time.

    I even have Norton doing it's Web safe shit. It probably wasn't even harmful, just trying to be "helpful" with it's own "search engine" and stuff. But when I am working at speed, delays and unexpected response piss me off a bit.

    Thanks for the help though,



  • @ben_lubar said:

    If that's not what you saw, then you already had malware.

    If I'm searching for a Chrome download, it's because I'm on a fresh PC with only IE installed. So, yeah, malware. :trolleybus:



  • @loose said:

    I did think that Google might want to look at that, then I remembered that if you pay enough you can get top slot.

    Are you sure about that? There was a time when what Google meant by "We're not evil" was that they wouldn't do that.





  • It quite clearly says that's an ad.



  • Not disputed! Only to show that you can pay to have your website (appear to be) in the top slot. It used to be "more" obvious it was an ad with a "sponsored site" heading. And you may notice that the "ad" thing is subtly different to those on the right where we have been "trained" to expect them.



  • If you have trouble determining what an Ad is, you might want to use adblock. Other people (myself included) are able to tell the difference between ads and actual content.



  • Well done! Have a gold star or cupcake or something. My post earlier had little or nothing to do with "ads", just that Google managed to list a site that could cause harm to itself. In the context of the OP, one could be forgiven in assuming that Bing "checked" a site, or had some mechanism that allowed Sites to be reported as potential malware whilst Google appeared to not have.

    At a very, very, very subtle level: If you have to "add" stuff to an application to make it better / safer (like "ad block") then you have to ask yourself "...is it the right application for you..." When you have no real choice about the application you use, then you can be exploited and have a "trust" slowly suborned.

    Perhaps I should have been more specific in my original post (I continually fail to learn that lesson here) and stated "selected from the first page of results"

    Also, you should have noticed (from later expansions of the OP), that this was an "out of the box" installation of Windows 7 / IE.

    That being said I have a preference for using stuff "out of the box" / unmodified because I cannot guarantee that any customisation I add to to it, and thus come to "rely on", may not be available on the next computer I use. Or from a development point of view I cannot assume what, if any, level of customisation has been applied to the Browser. So I design for the basic.

    Equally, especially in a Linux environment, I insist on developing in an exact copy of the production machine, because Devs are the group of people most likely to "apt get" or "yum install" new_shiny_toy_cum_plaything and wonder why things don't work in production.

    You know. I am really beginning to get sick and fucking tired of this place.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @loose said:

    You know. I am really beginning to get sick and fucking tired of this place.

    YMBNNH

    Really though, if you're not using Ninite or Chocolatey, you're probably trwtf..........



  • @loose said:

    whilst Google appeared to not have

    Google's had this feature since before the search engine Microsoft made before Bing was made.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    Google announced the Safe Browsing feature in May 2008, MSN Search (originally using resources from Inktomi) dates back to at least 1999.

    I also find it funny that Google's own diagnostic reports malware being served from google.com, which as any fule kno is true.



  • Live was made in 2006, so I'm only off by 2 years.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    Live is the same thing, just rebranded.


  • sockdevs

    .... google.... you really should reevaluate your stance there.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    Same result specifically for meta.d, for which I has a sad.



  • @accalia said:

    .... google.... you really should reevaluate your stance there.

    @Arantor said:

    Same result specifically for meta.d, for which I has a sad.

    Hmm, what happens if you use the tool on tdwtf.discourse.org... or discourse.org/tdwtf.

    Will @woodboy 's twitch responds to "TDWTF" fire automatically, and he'll IP ban the entire block? Thus cutting himself off from Google?


    Filed under: Which was is the evil idea thread again?


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    @loose said:

    it just goes to show that nobody is perfect 100% of the time.

    Speak for yourself.



  • I didn't know that computers were susceptible to the Epstein-Barr virus, but I can understand why Bing would want to protect them from it.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.