• On CHOW: Girls who hate girly drinks
April 20, 2009 4:26 PM PDT

LinkScanner stands alone once more

by Seth Rosenblatt
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 23 comments

LinkScanner is once again available as an independent plug-in for Windows-based Firefox and Internet Explorer, following more than a year spent as a feature of AVG Technologies' AVG security suite. Still available as part of AVG, users can now once again download LinkScanner independently of AVG's antivirus software, and for free.

AVG's LinkScanner evaluates link safety on the fly, as well as making click-throughs for dangerous sites harder.

(Credit: Screenshot by Seth Rosenblatt/CNET)

The new LinkScanner works much the same as the original one did. Once you've installed the EXE, AVG's "Search Shield" returns search results from both Google and Yahoo with flags next to them. Green flags on Google indicate a result is safe to click through to, while Yahoo safe results display no flags. Links that are unsafe on both search engines will return red flags.

Hovering over a flag will pop open a window that provides further details about the link. Green flags will show you the IP address, the amount of time the scan took, and the date and time of the most recent scan. Red flags highlight the same information, as well as the risk category and the site name. Attempting to click through to a red-flagged page will take you to a warning screen that repeats most of the red-flag information--AVG calls this the "Active Surf-Shield".

A small link at the bottom of the red-blocked screen will let you click through, although it cautions users that it will continue to block potentially harmful content. When I tried to click through to warez.com, for example, LinkScanner would only show me the CSS code for the page.

LinkScanner doesn't have references for all links, as evidenced by the third one in this Google search for ringtones.

(Credit: Screenshot by Seth Rosenblatt/CNET)

In addition to the clear messages behind the green and red flags, LinkScanner also offers two "slow down" warnings. The first is yellow with one exclamation point in it, while the second is orange and has two exclamation points. I found it nearly impossible to locate search results with a yellow or orange flag, but the meaning is clear: we can't tell what this is, but it looks sketchy so be careful.

It's worth noting, too, that both green flag and red flag boxes (and, presumably, the yellow and orange warning boxes) include a link at the bottom to an AVG product comparison page.

Before Grisoft, now AVG Technologies, bought LinkScanner, many users appreciated that both the free version and the paid LinkScanner upgrade provided smooth integration with your daily Web browsing habits. There are some similar services, such as McAfee's SiteAdvisor, that have interfered with performance for some users--an instant turn-off. After trying LinkScanner out for half the day, though, I was pleased to see that the once-again independently available add-on continues to function as well as it did in the past.

Seth peers into the deep, dark corners of software so that you don't have to. He has yet to suffer a single nightmare about OS/2. You can follow him on Twitter.
Recent posts from The Download Blog
Log in with your face
See what's under McAfee's new interface
Tales2Go: Get on-demand audiobooks for children
Microsoft, Google split over browser bug bounty
Mozilla plans to drop Mac OS X 10.4 support
TweetDeck gets a few tweaks
Adobe promises faster Flash on Macs
Security software maker Vitamin D exits beta
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (23 Comments)
  • prev
  • next
by polrai14 April 20, 2009 5:05 PM PDT
I wonder how does it compare to WOT (Web Of Trust), which is also free and integrates seamlessly with Firefox (and SurfCanyon) ?
Reply to this comment
by flyerdog April 20, 2009 5:20 PM PDT
I HAVE FIREFOX PLUS WOT ... GAVE AVG LINK SCANNER A TRY .. THEN WENT TO KNOWN SITES THAT WOT FLAGGED AS DANGEROUS AND KNOWING FOR A FACT THESE SITES ARE JUST THAT .. SOMEWHAT SURPRISED THAT EVERY ONE OF THESE KNOWN NASTY SITES .. AVG LINK SCANNER LIKED THEM IN THAT GAVE GREEN NOTICE THAT SITES WERE OK ..... ONCE AGAIN AVG FOR WHAT EVER REASON PEOPLE USE AT ALL ASTOUNDS ME .....
Reply to this comment
by nopinktoday April 20, 2009 5:38 PM PDT
Honestly the link scanner didn't really detect anything on a Google search. Like ABSOLUTELY nothing. Turned it off after a while. Don't take my word for it, try it if you want.
Reply to this comment
by Angmarr April 20, 2009 8:20 PM PDT
"McAfee's SiteAdvisor" Works Without a Glitch on my Firefox + Vista.<br /><br />And just like FEW users found the McAfee's SiteAdvisor to interfere with surfing SO will they find the LinkScanner to do the same - I Do NOT appreciate a Biased Statement such as that the LinkScanner obviously performs better!<br /><br />Furthermore - the McAfee's SiteAdvisor comes COMPLETELY FREE with a rating for any site you visit in addition to Google/Yahoo ratings, which I believer the FREE LinkScanner DOES NOT have. (Not sure because its been awhile since i moved from AVG to AVAST - nothing against AVG though!)<br /><br />On the other hand, the "Active Surf-Shield" is cool!
Reply to this comment
by dxyuen April 21, 2009 8:28 PM PDT
I also thought McAfee's SiteAdvisor worked fine on Firefox and Internet Explorer (with XP Pro), until I disabled SiteAdvisor and installed LinkScanner. Both Firefox and IE start faster and both are faster at loading web pages. <br /><br />Both SiteAdvisor and LinkScanner seem to come up with warnings on the same sites. I have not used WOT, I will give it a try.<br /><br />I am not using AVG, but I'm going to use SiteAdvisor until I find something better.
by dxyuen April 21, 2009 9:30 PM PDT
In my previous comment, I meant to say: I am not using AVG, but I'm going to use LinkScanner until I find something better.
by Angmarr April 21, 2009 11:11 PM PDT
Did you try "SiteAdvisor 2.9" I dunno I never seems to have noticed any speed issues! <br /><br />p.s: it runs as a separate process!
by cheboncruz April 21, 2009 12:00 AM PDT
I prefer WOT + Siteadvisor.
Reply to this comment
by GEO2003 April 21, 2009 7:19 PM PDT
WHY BOTHER WITH THIS OLD AND UNRELIABLE TECHNOLOGY. <br /> <br />Not only it depends on a properly updated database if at all, but it also introduces speed degradation into the browsing process. <br /> <br />A good example of how internet trafffic should be handle, would the Antivirus AVAST HOME FREE, which re-directs HTTP traffic to is WEB SHIELD built right into the program and adjustable to the users preferences. This Shield stops any incoming traffic if it detects a malicious website. Yes it notifies you of it, but stops it, before those files are downloaded to the Browser's Temp Folder from where malicious code could spread. <br /> <br />There is not any noticeable speed degradation in internet browsing. <br /> <br />AVAST includes both Antivirus and Antispyware protection within. No need for Extensions, No need worries about updates since the program updates both program and signature database. You can even set it to update every 30 minutes. <br /> <br />I have try a few of this extensions with mix results. As posted by one user, some websites get through the so call protection because it relies on a properly updated Web Site Name Database, which in my experience is not as bullet proof as the way HTTP traffic is handle by AVAST. <br /> <br />No, I don't work for AVAST, I have been using their free program for a year and has not let me down. <br /> <br />Haven't had any infections as I did with AVG 7.5 which is the reason I changed. <br /> <br />In all honesty, I haven't try AVG 8, but I have read about the problems that causes with Vista and although those may have been resolved, there still the issue of performace hit you take when using AVG.
Reply to this comment
by Angmarr April 21, 2009 11:09 PM PDT
interesting, I also switched from AVG to AVAST and its been much better. <br />But i guess its just added protection especially when you search for random stuff, and with the newest "SiteAdvisor 2.9" (and the one before) I really didn't see any noticeable speed problems.
by uazquazq April 22, 2009 11:49 AM PDT
Bro, supr correct, Avast is the best, its good to see Avast climbing in most popular index from 5th to 3rd place, always felt that it should b at number 1st, at least above AVG,
by Loki gamer April 22, 2009 12:03 AM PDT
Avg free does not have a rootkit scanner you have to pay to get it YOU NEED a rootkit scanner...avast has one
Reply to this comment
by rodolphekreutzer April 22, 2009 1:27 AM PDT
"Still available as part of AVG, users can now once again download LinkScanner independently of AVG's antivirus software, and for free." <br /> <br />Please review your grammar. Given the sentence structure, "still available" should be qualifying "users".
Reply to this comment
by csims1965 April 22, 2009 1:58 AM PDT
AVG Link Scanner can't compare to LinkExtend which uses most of the web scanners out there in one scanner.
Reply to this comment
by tiagara April 22, 2009 5:15 AM PDT
The only way to really know software is to see how well it performs for the average user. It's amazing that LinkScanner survives in a world where much more reliable software like WOT is available. AVG seems to be on continuing mission to confuse users.<br /><br />Glowing reports of Linkscanner are unfounded.See real test results - simply and elegantly displayed in a comparison chart - http://thundercloud.net/infoave/answers/2009/comparing-safe-surfing-tools.htm<br />LinkScanner says "FinallyFast.com is "safe". LinkScanner says "FunWebProducts" (SmileyCentral) is "safe". LinkScanner says "Starware toolbar" is "safe". Really?
Reply to this comment
by Wimpy6 April 22, 2009 9:21 AM PDT
Hmmm. Well, I downloaded Linkscanner, installed it and was told that everything was successful.<br /><br />However, when I tried to connect to the internet it kept telling me that the connection was being reset and so I could not connect to anything. Tried all my bookmarks and kept getting the reconnection reset each time.<br /><br />I then un-installed Linkscanner and it not only un-installed itself, it took away my Firefox RoboForm extension.<br /><br />Had to re-install Roboform.<br /><br />Don't know what Linkscanner does when you un-install it, but this is not good.<br /><br />Oh well, just chalk it up to mother nature and weird weather conditions. :)))<br /><br />Now go have a great day.
Reply to this comment
by Wimpy6 April 22, 2009 9:24 AM PDT
Oh, a P.S. here. It also set up some kind of YAHOO search toolbar on my browsers even tho I told it not to. Why is YAHOO so darn pushy and arrogant?
by YellowTR6 April 23, 2009 5:23 AM PDT
I had pretty much the same problem as you describe. For no reason it would suddenly return the "connection being reset" message on my Win XP Home PC. My wife didn't get that error on her Vista 64 bit PC. We both saw a slowdown when getting a Google results page. We both use Firefox and had the McAfee Site Advisor extension disabled. When we uninstalled Linkscanner it REMOVED the McAfee extension from both of our PCs. Our Roboform extension was OK.
by April 22, 2009 2:29 PM PDT
Come on people this is really not needed, unless your a kid and can't tell by your self if a web site is safe or not by reading what's in the search outline. <br /> <br />Besides we really want lest applications running in the background, not more.
Reply to this comment
by rick hutchinson April 22, 2009 2:38 PM PDT
AVG's Link Scanner surpasses WOT by a long shot.I've been looking for a utility to replace WOT and McAfee's Site Adviser (the new browser update is garbage) and now I have it.Thank you,AVG.
Reply to this comment
by franhigg April 22, 2009 4:41 PM PDT
Hopeless. Downloaded and installed LinkScanner as per instructions, and it immediately completely screwed up IE7; the window would not close and I had to use Task Manager to shut it down. So I've uninstalled LinkScanner, and all is well again.
Reply to this comment
by rashus April 23, 2009 3:15 AM PDT
I am using it in conjunction with WOT and it works fine. One advantage that LinkScanner has over WOT, is that if a malicious website is detected it stops the sitefrom loading altogether, WOT on the other hand does not stop the page from loading (it does give a warning message though).<br /><br />WOT is community-based which in the software world these days means it is much more reliable, and therefore remains my first choice.
Reply to this comment
by bleri007 April 26, 2009 2:59 PM PDT
I reccomed u dont use AVG anti-vir. I uninstalled every one of my antiviruses and bought AVG premium. <br />The i got a viruse it detected it but it said it could heal it. That virus installed a new anti-vir in my pc. i bought that anti-virus and then it removed the anti-viruses in my pc but i couldnt open any browsers. <br />i hate AVG :(
Reply to this comment
(23 Comments)
  • prev
  • next

Search Download Blog posts

About The Download Blog

Download.com editors cover the world of downloadable software and beyond.

Add this feed to your online news reader

The Download Blog topics