SafeWeb Logic Flawed

Hi

 

We run an ISP.

As part of the ISP we provide personal homepages for our customers where the URL is of the form of the form http://homepages.woosh.co.nz/username

Recently one of our customers account was hacked and his account was used to host a phishing website.

This site was recently picked up by both norton and google.

I will explain what google did and what norton did and question if norton knows what its doing.

(note that being a reponsible ISP we acted within 12 hours of recieving the notification fom google)

 

Google:

1) added to there safe browsing filters the exact URL of the phishing page in question

2) Kindly notified us they had done so.

3) Provided us an easy 1 click link to re-evaluate the site.

 

Norton:

1) blocked the whole domain (i.e. *.woosh.co.nz, so people going to our homepage or webmail get your warning)

2) did NOT notifiy us

3) provides us a convoluted re-evaluation process that involves registering accounts, registering domains, then an unlisting process.

 

comments:

 

Why the %$^& did norton decide to block the whole domain? You do realise that subdomains exist for a reason?

Why did norton not notfiy us? A whois will tell you an abuse contact - Id say its your moral duty to inform site owners that you have taken action against there site.

why the convoluted re-evaluation proceedure?

 

If Norton needs help re-evaluating its proceedures to help responsible ISP's remove harmful contect then i believe Norton should look at googles model and adapt. If Norton needs advice, contact me..