Thanks for your response guys.
But the problem remains the same and that is the hosting have run tests on my site and reported that there are no links pointing to such an IP or sites. When i raise a support ticket with my hosting company, the response time is approximately 30 minutes 24/7, and that's a human response not an auto generated email informing me the request has been received.
As SA neither responds, or going by some of the posts, takes weeks to respond if you're lucky, to an URGENT request from a webmaster, then obviously I would trust the word of my hosting company who respond and act promptly, rather than that of a company who doesn't seem to have any kind of support policy in place. I say again, these reports can damage the web credibility of a site and its owner, and so are very serious issues to genuine 'white hat' webmasters.
SA does not say that a site is dangerous. The wording is more cautious, it implies the site is potentially dangerous. SA is there to make the visitor more aware of his actions while visiting a website.
Dangerous or potentially dangerous means the same thing to a web surfer who can simply skip your site and go to a competing one!
Websites are tested automatically.
I find this interesting. So if sites are tested automatically, why then aren't they retested automatically on periodic basis too? This would certainly keep the SA data more current and therefore more accurate.
In my own experience it takes some time before e-mails are answered, but one of the SA team checks this forum regularly and I assue he will pop in after easter. Best bet is to respond to his thread next tuesday, and bring it back to our attention.
And so the saga continues! Now it's holidays getting in the way, perhaps another excuse is a backlog of re-test requests, lost emails, moved departments, broken forms, and understaffing ad infinitum. Surly if the service can't be supported it should be withdrawn until such times that it can! Does that make sense to anyone other than me?
The right thing to do would be to at least inform folks why there is such a delay or potential deny of support. Or just let them know of the anticipated time duration for each and every request. Even that could be done via automated email which could easily be tweaked during the peaks and dips of workload!
I still have no idea how any company can legally plaster damaging reports all over the world wide web about other people's websites. It certainly wouldn't be allowed in the Bricks and Mortar world! What's in it for McAfee anyway?
Ok, enough said, as it's taking even more time as i become more disgruntled over this issue. Or perhaps i shouldn't be disgruntled about a damaging report that has been sitting there about my 3 year old beautiful and costly web project since September 2007. Maybe i should focus my frustration on the hosting company and put the trust of SA above that of my hosting.
I hope something will be done about this soon. I certainly have a huge log now on the avenues and time taken thus far in an attempt to get some human help on the issue. It also seems a little odd to have to come to a forum when SA has it's own online support forms, but as they don't work, this place seems the only option left. If this doesn't work, then i don't know what my next move shall be, if indeed there is one.
Thanks in advance to anyone who can assist with this issue.
Andy