Posts tagged ‘defamation’


Google continues to blacklist innocent site, seven months after its owners cleaned it

22.11.2013

Seven months after Google blacklisted our websites over false allegations of malware, I can say that the traffic to some has not recovered. And to prove that Google continues to publish libel based on its highly dubious systems, here are two screen shots from my browser tonight, which I saw when trying to access bjskosherbaskets.com, the site that hackers linked to back in April, where they placed some malware.


   I’ve noted here that we were hacked back in April, and we fixed everything within hours. But good luck getting off Google’s blacklists. They claim six to seven hours, whereas our experience was six to seven days. (No surprise: it took Google four years to remove my private data from Adsense, while my dispute with them over retained Blogger data, which they promised to delete in 2010, is ongoing. Things happen very slowly in California.)
   Bjskosherbaskets.com, meanwhile, is finding that seven months, not seven days, are still not enough to get off a Google blacklist.
   Browsers will block the site based on Google’s claims. Yet when you read why Google has blocked it, there is no reason: even the big G says the website is clean, and free from malware. It says, rightly, that it detected some more than 90 days ago, but there isn’t any now.
   The question is: why does Google continue to ruin the reputation of a website whose owners have, like us, done everything they could to remedy a situation? And why is libel permissible?
   There are just too many breaches of ethics by this company, yet it beggars belief that it still ranks as the number-one website in the world.
   At the very least, internet security companies need to stop relying on Google, whose systems are faulty, and who dedicates the grand total of two part-timers to the task of malware detection.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in business, internet, publishing, technology, USA | 4 Comments »


The answer’s no: Google’s still in a dream world

25.04.2013

That was an interesting experiment. Although Lucire Men is still clear (for now), Google decided it would play silly buggers a few hours after we put our (clean) ad server code back on Autocade:

   But why? Here’s what Google says:

which means: we can’t find anything wrong with this site since April 8, even though our last scan was on the 23rd. Really? There has been nothing wrong for 15 days, but you’ll still block our site? (Note: Google did not block this site on the 23rd.)
   Let’s go to Google Webmaster Tools to see what it says there:

That’s right: nothing. There’s nothing wrong with the site.
   Maybe we’ve been flagged somewhere else, then? How about Stop Badware?

Nope, we’re all fine there, too.
   In fact, even Google is wrong when it says there were problems on April 8—another sign of its malware bot reading from a cache instead of fresh pages, because we say we fixed everything on April 6. Well, here’s what Google itself says about Autocade when you go into Webmaster Tools in more depth:

which correlates with the claims we have made all along: our ad server got hacked on April 6 (NZST), and we sorted it within hours that day.
   We’re interested to see if the false malware warnings can carry on for a month—after all, Google will block a blog for six months even though it says it will lift a block in 48 hours after an investigation. Things take a bit longer there than they claim. There’s a case of one gentleman who has had his site blocked by Google for two months for no reason. I’m sure many, many others are being wrongly identified by Google—and there are far too many companies relying on the Californian company’s hypocrisy in identifying malware.
   The Google belief that webmasters are wrongly claiming there to be false positives is looking more dubious by the day.

PS.: The last post at this forum entry is interesting: Google blocks a website based on stale data. The website where the malware allegedly was did not even exist, but it still triggered a warning at Google. The webmaster writes, ‘The site concerned doesn’t exist and more to the point, there is no DNS record for it either—so it cannot exist. / The IP which was once assigned to it is now assigned to someone else.’ That was in March. Judging by the articles online, Google’s been having problems with this particular bot since the beginning of 2013. The sooner they retire the program, the better, I say.—JY

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in internet, publishing, technology, USA | 6 Comments »


Of course Google’s Chrome blocks this site, too, over false accusations

11.04.2013

This is from my good friend Alexandru Dutulescu. Where I come from, this is libellous, since it is, well, a load of bollocks. In the delusions of Googleland, presumably, this is an innocent computer error. I can’t believe how often Google gets away with this stuff just by fooling people and telling them their motto is ‘Don’t be evil.’

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in internet, publishing, USA | No Comments »