Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Firefox 3.5 and Google Block MassResistance.org
Google ^ | 07-28-09 | FreepShop1

Posted on 07/28/2009 6:56:09 PM PDT by FreepShop1

The new update to Firefox, 3.5 is blocking access to the critical anti-homosexual activist site MassResistance.org...

UPDATE: Google is now also blocking access, warning "Site is listed as suspicious - visiting this website may harm your computer."

MassResistance folks told me that Google started doing this leading up to a recent vote on a Transgender Bill in Mass., in an obvious attempt to shut down dissent. There were not aware that the new Firefox is also censoring them.

This is an illegal violation of the 1st Amendment, 4th Amendment and Digital Millenium Act. We need to get to our Representatives on this ASAP.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: activism; gayagenda; homsexual
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 next last

1 posted on 07/28/2009 6:56:09 PM PDT by FreepShop1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1

Doesn’t block me with FF 3.5.1


2 posted on 07/28/2009 6:57:50 PM PDT by OldDeckHand (No Socialized Medicine, No Way, No How, No Time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand
Doesn’t block me with FF 3.5.1

Your security preferences may be different from defaults.

3 posted on 07/28/2009 6:58:43 PM PDT by FreepShop1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1

See the little words in the bottom right hand corner that say “ignore this warning”?


4 posted on 07/28/2009 6:59:34 PM PDT by Artemis Webb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

LOL Using an old IE v 6 and it’s OK.

BING doesn’t “block” it.


5 posted on 07/28/2009 6:59:36 PM PDT by max americana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1

It all depends on what your settings are. If you have high security filtertering, it will be blocked because of keywords used in articles (such as the word “tranny” in the article you linked to above.) It isn’t personal, it is just you use words in your articles normally associated with porn sites and such.


6 posted on 07/28/2009 7:00:27 PM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1

i have 3.5.1 and i also don’t see this problem


7 posted on 07/28/2009 7:00:37 PM PDT by Mount Athos (A Giant luxury mega-mansion for Gore, a Government Green EcoShack made of poo for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1

No blockage here.


8 posted on 07/28/2009 7:00:44 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1
"Your security preferences may be different from defaults."

Nope. I haven't touched them. "block reported websites" is definitely checked. FWIW.

9 posted on 07/28/2009 7:00:53 PM PDT by OldDeckHand (No Socialized Medicine, No Way, No How, No Time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1
Came up without any problem for me (Firefox). It looks like they have cleared the site.

I'm wondering if homosexual activists just falsely reported the site as an attack site and Google and Firefox took the reports at face value.

10 posted on 07/28/2009 7:01:24 PM PDT by behzinlea
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

>it will be blocked because of keywords used in articles (such as the word “tranny” in the article you linked to above.)

What do people have against transmissions?


11 posted on 07/28/2009 7:02:02 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1
Blocks on my test box with all default settings.

/johnny

12 posted on 07/28/2009 7:02:20 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (God Bless us all, each, and every one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1

Diagnostic page for www.massresistance.org

What is the current listing status for www.massresistance.org?

Site is listed as suspicious - visiting this web site may harm your computer.

Part of this site was listed for suspicious activity 2 time(s) over the past 90 days.

What happened when Google visited this site?

Of the 304 pages we tested on the site over the past 90 days, 4 page(s) resulted in malicious software being downloaded and installed without user consent. The last time Google visited this site was on 2009-07-28, and the last time suspicious content was found on this site was on 2009-07-28.

Malicious software includes 1 scripting exploit(s).

Malicious software is hosted on 4 domain(s), including carmelazfunz.com/, web-analize.org/, cqzinomonster.com/.

3 domain(s) appear to be functioning as intermediaries for distributing malware to visitors of this site, including analitic-manager.net/, web-analize.net/, web-analize.org/.

This site was hosted on 1 network(s) including AS32392 (OPENTRANSFER).

Has this site acted as an intermediary resulting in further distribution of malware?

Over the past 90 days, www.massresistance.org did not appear to function as an intermediary for the infection of any sites.

Has this site hosted malware?

No, this site has not hosted malicious software over the past 90 days.

How did this happen?

In some cases, third parties can add malicious code to legitimate sites, which would cause us to show the warning message.


13 posted on 07/28/2009 7:02:23 PM PDT by Artemis Webb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1
Ran a quick check. Google tried to block it, and claimed it was an attack site. Firefox and Safari both went through with no glitches.
14 posted on 07/28/2009 7:02:50 PM PDT by Richard Kimball (We're all criminals. They just haven't figured out what some of us have done yet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1
This is an illegal violation of the 1st Amendment, 4th Amendment and Digital Millenium Act.

Unless the government is behind it, it is not a Constitutional violation.

15 posted on 07/28/2009 7:03:56 PM PDT by Always Right (Obama: more arrogant than Bill Clinton, more naive than Jimmy Carter, and more liberal than LBJ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1

One word - Opera


16 posted on 07/28/2009 7:04:11 PM PDT by asformeandformyhouse (I've been listening to a lot of rap music lately. Mostly at red lights and stop signs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1

The massresistance site (like any other Web site) has to try to protect itself from hackers.

Here’s Google’s report on what’s happening:

What happened when Google visited this site?

Of the 304 pages we tested on the site over the past 90 days, 4 page(s) resulted in malicious software being downloaded and installed without user consent. The last time Google visited this site was on 2009-07-28, and the last time suspicious content was found on this site was on 2009-07-28.
Malicious software includes 1 scripting exploit(s).

Malicious software is hosted on 4 domain(s), including carmelazfunz.com/, web-analize.org/, cqzinomonster.com/.

3 domain(s) appear to be functioning as intermediaries for distributing malware to visitors of this site, including analitic-manager.net/, web-analize.net/, web-analize.org/.

This site was hosted on 1 network(s) including AS32392 (OPENTRANSFER).

Has this site acted as an intermediary resulting in further distribution of malware?

Over the past 90 days, www.massresistance.org did not appear to function as an intermediary for the infection of any sites.

Has this site hosted malware?

No, this site has not hosted malicious software over the past 90 days.

How did this happen?

In some cases, third parties can add malicious code to legitimate sites, which would cause us to show the warning message.

Next steps:

Return to the previous page.
If you are the owner of this web site, you can request a review of your site using Google Webmaster Tools. More information about the review process is available in Google’s Webmaster Help Center.


17 posted on 07/28/2009 7:05:11 PM PDT by LibFreeOrDie (Obama promised a gold mine, but he will give us the shaft.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1
This is what I got when I searched "MassResistance"

"This site may harm your computer.
Google blocks MassResistance blog! Posts warning notice that our factual transgender rights reports (with photos) are "objectionable"! ..."

18 posted on 07/28/2009 7:07:05 PM PDT by stevio (Crunchy Con - God, guns, guts, and organically grown crunchy nuts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehring
If you have high security filtertering, it will be blocked because of keywords used in articles (such as the word “tranny” in the article you linked to above.) It isn’t personal, it is just you use words in your articles normally associated with porn sites and such.

Incorrect.

According to Google's Safe Browsing Diagnostic page for www.massresistance.org, they are blocking it because some sites linked from it are attempting to purvey malware. In other words, Mass Resistance probably needs to look into for whom they are serving ads.

Google's as efficient as any good search engine at finding p0rn.

19 posted on 07/28/2009 7:07:56 PM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1
MassResistance folks told me that Google started doing this leading up to a recent vote on a Transgender Bill in Mass., in an obvious attempt to shut down dissent. There were not aware that the new Firefox is also censoring them.

You could at least understand the technology being implemented before crying wolf. "Firefox" itself is not blocking a damn thing: Firefox's anti-phishing filter references a Google-maintained database to discern if the URL the user is attempting to connect to is suspected of being a malware vector. Sometimes the Google list gets it wrong: I've occasionally been warned that an innocent, non-political site could potentially be a malware-distributing or falsified webpage. Usually a site lands on Google's list because a random advertisement on the site contains malicious code, or attempts to clickjack your browser.

Mozilla is 100% blameless.
20 posted on 07/28/2009 7:12:30 PM PDT by Terpfen (FR is being Alinskied. Remember, you only take flak when you're over the target.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: asformeandformyhouse

Two words: no thanks.


21 posted on 07/28/2009 7:13:09 PM PDT by Terpfen (FR is being Alinskied. Remember, you only take flak when you're over the target.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1
That message is from a piece of malware/scamware called "Personal Antivirus". Its insidious, and Spybot won't remove it.

Go to www.filehippo.com and download Malwarebytes Anti-Malware. That one will send it straight to hell.

22 posted on 07/28/2009 7:14:09 PM PDT by Spirochete (Texas is an anagram for Taxes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1

it works on my Firefox


23 posted on 07/28/2009 7:16:00 PM PDT by omega4179 ((/) Happened)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb
thanks, for the information.

24 posted on 07/28/2009 7:19:16 PM PDT by skinkinthegrass (Zer0 to the poor (foolish) voter: Welcome to MY DeathCARE ® You Sucker... Now Die! :^)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Terpfen

Three words - Aren’t you clever.


25 posted on 07/28/2009 7:19:26 PM PDT by asformeandformyhouse (I've been listening to a lot of rap music lately. Mostly at red lights and stop signs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1

Claiming this is a first amendment issue just makes the author look kinda stupid. Nevertheless, it is a good reason to quit using firefox - and google for that matter.


26 posted on 07/28/2009 7:25:06 PM PDT by eclecticEel (The Most High rules in the kingdom of men ... and sets over it the basest of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1

Doesn’t block me with FF 3.5.


27 posted on 07/28/2009 7:30:16 PM PDT by BullDog108 (A Smith & Wesson beats four aces)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: asformeandformyhouse

Four words - Yes, he sure is.


28 posted on 07/28/2009 7:31:17 PM PDT by Right Wing Assault ( Obama, you're off the island!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1

I clicked on “Ignore this warning”.


29 posted on 07/28/2009 7:34:27 PM PDT by Sans-Culotte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: max americana

I am no MSFT fan but Firefox is constantly sending you updates. I stopped using FF.


30 posted on 07/28/2009 7:34:37 PM PDT by Frantzie (Where is the birth certificate?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1
FF 3.5 Safe Browsing Diagnostic page for www.massresistance.org

What is the current listing status for www.massresistance.org?

Site is listed as suspicious - visiting this website may harm your computer.

Part of this site was listed for suspicious activity 2 time(s) over the past 90 days.

What happened when Google visited this site?

Of the 304 pages that we tested on the site over the past 90 days, 4 page(s) resulted in malicious software being downloaded and installed without user consent. The last time that Google visited this site was on 2009-07-28, and the last time that suspicious content was found on this site was on 2009-07-28.

Malicious software includes 1 scripting exploit(s). ,P> Malicious software is hosted on 4 domain(s), including carmelazfunz.com/, web-analize.org/, cqzinomonster.com/.

3 domain(s) appear to be functioning as intermediaries for distributing malware to visitors of this site, including analitic-manager.net/, web-analize.net/, web-analize.org/.

This site was hosted on 1 network(s) including AS32392 (OPENTRANSFER).

Has this site acted as an intermediary resulting in further distribution of malware?

Over the past 90 days, www.massresistance.org did not appear to function as an intermediary for the infection of any sites.

Has this site hosted malware?

No, this site has not hosted malicious software over the past 90 days.

How did this happen?

In some cases, third parties can add malicious code to legitimate sites, which would cause us to show the warning message.

31 posted on 07/28/2009 7:35:04 PM PDT by piroque
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1
Since 2005 the MassResistance blog has been hosted on Google's blogspot blogging site with few problems.

One moral of the story is don't let Google host your blog.

32 posted on 07/28/2009 7:35:23 PM PDT by Tribune7 (I am Jim Thompson!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Assault
Five words

Ok guys get a room

33 posted on 07/28/2009 7:37:52 PM PDT by Syncro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

I have FF 3.5.1 and it blocks me. I just press the ignore button...


34 posted on 07/28/2009 7:39:34 PM PDT by FortWorthPatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand
Doesn’t block me with FF 3.5.1

Same here. Google is doing this, not Firefox. The headline should be changed.

If click the button for why there is a block, you are told the following:

Of the 304 pages we tested on the site over the past 90 days, 4 page(s) resulted in malicious software being downloaded and installed without user consent. The last time Google visited this site was on 2009-07-28, and the last time suspicious content was found on this site was on 2009-07-28.

Malicious software includes 1 scripting exploit(s).

Malicious software is hosted on 4 domain(s), including carmelazfunz.com/, web-analize.org/, cqzinomonster.com/.

3 domain(s) appear to be functioning as intermediaries for distributing malware to visitors of this site, including analitic-manager.net/, web-analize.net/, web-analize.org/.

This site was hosted on 1 network(s) including AS32392 (OPENTRANSFER).

35 posted on 07/28/2009 7:42:34 PM PDT by Repeal 16-17 (Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1

There may be an actual problem with the website.


36 posted on 07/28/2009 7:43:20 PM PDT by Jeff Chandler (The President Who's Always Apologizing For America Couldn't Apologize For Himself)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Assault

Five words - What were we talking about?


37 posted on 07/28/2009 7:50:29 PM PDT by asformeandformyhouse (I've been listening to a lot of rap music lately. Mostly at red lights and stop signs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: asformeandformyhouse

Four words: Safari is still better.


38 posted on 07/28/2009 7:52:30 PM PDT by Terpfen (FR is being Alinskied. Remember, you only take flak when you're over the target.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Terpfen

I thought six came after five. Of course, an Apple fan would go the wrong way.

I’m sorry, but we’re going to have to quit talking. I didn’t realize that you were a member of a cult. :)

Unless you mean that mess which is Safari for Windows.


39 posted on 07/28/2009 8:04:59 PM PDT by asformeandformyhouse (I've been listening to a lot of rap music lately. Mostly at red lights and stop signs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Mount Athos
I have Firefox 3.0.11
It blocked me (there is a small click-link "ignore this warning" in the lower right corner of the warning box though).
I went to the top left of the browser window and clicked "Edit"
Then clicked "Preferences"
Then clicked the Security (with the padlock icon above it) icon.
Unclick the box next to "Tell me if the site I'm visiting is a suspected attack site".
40 posted on 07/28/2009 8:12:59 PM PDT by Screaming_Gerbil (The light at the end of the tunnel might be an oncoming train...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Terpfen

Seven words - Good Night and have a pleasant tomorrow.


41 posted on 07/28/2009 8:16:27 PM PDT by asformeandformyhouse (I've been listening to a lot of rap music lately. Mostly at red lights and stop signs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1

Reading the diagnostic page for the malicious software warning, the site was officially blocked because some of the pages they linked to (probably gay porn sites) had malware hosted on them. It’s going to be a problem when you link to the type of sites they are using to illustrate the depravity they see around them.

The Blogspot warning was clearly the result of complaints from the gay lobby. That shouldn’t happen, but that is why you should pay for your hosting.


42 posted on 07/28/2009 8:30:55 PM PDT by MediaMole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: asformeandformyhouse

You wrote three words, I wrote four in response. The counting error is on your end.

Safari on Windows is still better than Opera on Windows. Opera’s chronic inability to compete has led them to file lawsuits in Europe attempting to force Microsoft to ship Windows 7 with Opera included.


43 posted on 07/28/2009 8:53:01 PM PDT by Terpfen (FR is being Alinskied. Remember, you only take flak when you're over the target.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: MediaMole
The Blogspot warning was clearly the result of complaints from the gay lobby. That shouldn’t happen, but that is why you should pay for your hosting.

They pay for their hosting at their main website. The blogger site is an old site they maintain for visibility.

44 posted on 07/28/2009 9:01:53 PM PDT by FreepShop1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1

Blocked here with FF 3.5.1

It may be geographically-oriented


45 posted on 07/28/2009 9:27:42 PM PDT by JRios1968 (The real first rule of Fight Club: don't invite Chuck Norris...EVER)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

Hmm, thanks for the tip. I thought IE was the browser with those constant, annoying updates..


46 posted on 07/28/2009 9:45:11 PM PDT by max americana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: FreepShop1

Websites can get minor hacks or hijacks where just external links are inserted into their code, typically index.php files will have external links added from a hacker. Firefox can actually bar entrance to a website just because the index.php file has an external link to a known spyware site. As soon as all the index.php files are restored, firefox will let you in immediately.


47 posted on 07/28/2009 10:46:36 PM PDT by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Terpfen

Whoa there fanboy. The truth is that the Windows 7 (and XP and Vista via an update) will allow for the selection of one of 10 different browsers commonly used in Europe. This is the result of an EU lawsuit, not specifically an Opera lawsuit. I think choice is a good thing. Linux has allowed it since the beginning.

But when you’re in the dominant position, people take notice. Maybe someday they’ll get around to noticing Apple.


48 posted on 07/29/2009 10:30:15 AM PDT by asformeandformyhouse (I've been listening to a lot of rap music lately. Mostly at red lights and stop signs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: asformeandformyhouse
The truth is that the Windows 7 (and XP and Vista via an update) will allow for the selection of one of 10 different browsers commonly used in Europe. This is the result of an EU lawsuit, not specifically an Opera lawsuit.

You really need to brush up on your facts. Opera filed an antitrust complaint with the EU Commission claiming that Microsoft was violating the law by not including Opera with Windows. The EU Commission ruled in favor of Opera, which is based in Norway. Microsoft then said they would not include any web browser, not even IE, with European copies of Windows 7. They recently relented and offered to present users with a screen that lets the user select a web browser to download. Opera got half of what they wanted, which is a vehicle to increase their market share without actually competing, something they have been notoriously poor at.

Maybe someday they’ll get around to noticing Apple.

I would hope for the sake of legal sanity and common sense, they don't. But I suspect Opera is considering filing suit against Apple. It must really burn them up that Safari has a bigger market share than Opera's own browser.
49 posted on 07/29/2009 12:26:25 PM PDT by Terpfen (FR is being Alinskied. Remember, you only take flak when you're over the target.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Terpfen

No. The lawsuit was by the EU, not Opera. The anti-trust complaint that initiated the lawsuit was initially filed by Opera but others signed on to the complaint. Filing an antitrust complaint is roughly the equivalent of reporting a crime. Opera reported what it perceived to be illegal activity to the EU - the EU has agreed. The motives of Opera are irrelevant in this situation - illegal is illegal. The same thing was done with Media Player in 2004.

Granted, some would consider this a distinction without a difference, but from a legal perspective it is what it is.

Opera is a leader in the mobile browser market and one of their assertions was that if they had been allowed to compete fairly they would have been in the PC browser market as well - and the EU agrees.

As to how they feel concerning market share and Safari, I have yet to hear. But since they are a EU country, and the law consistently agrees with them, we may soon see.


50 posted on 07/29/2009 1:41:55 PM PDT by asformeandformyhouse (I've been listening to a lot of rap music lately. Mostly at red lights and stop signs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson