If they are not current, they are screwing up everything like blocking users to visit a clean site!

“Even if a domain no longer resolve but you site contains code that load tries to load something from that domain”

It was not about another site but that non-resolving domain itself. Google finds a domain that does not resolve and finds malware in it too !! It is not that they say “Hey, though this site does not exist now we found this site bad in past !”

it would have been ok if Google kept the mess within themselves but they are spreading it like anything blocking many users to visit clean, legit sites with NONCURRENT information or very flawed techniques

I read every comment. Ijust don’t have time to respond to them as I’m moving my blog to a new server.

The import didn’t went smoothly and comment threads got broken.

Regarding Google Malware warnings: they are usually very accurate but sometimes are not very current (you should check the date on diagnostic pages).

Even if a domain no longer resolve but you site contains code that load tries to load something from that domain, your site is considered potentially dangerous since the malicious domain can be reactivated any time.

Don’t rely on Unmask Parasites too much though. It just highlights suspicious things but in some cases they may be legitimate. It’s just an advice to a webmaster to take a closer look at highlighted items.

Googles technique seem to be severely flawed as they marked certain stuffs safe when unmaskparasites was catching those inline susp. things.

Moreover did you read my above comment that Google still finds a domain containing bad things on a date when already that domain has vanished ( or not resolving )

Its serious that either Google corrects its techniques or we discard it.

I have made several “request a review” but Google still has the site as listed suspicious. There is no external js file, the site is clean by unmaskparasites as well as safe by AV like AVG. Google was not listing any sample page as infectious in the inbetween days, after the 3rd or 4th review request it did list one page which is clean by any standards.

It may be well worth considering that logarithms or techniques adopted by Google need serious review ( like many of their bad policies are under scanner and Google has been discarded by many too ). Blocking pages on browser like FF is like evil dictatorship, which very small noncommercial website owners cannot fight.

May be unmaskparasites should judge by its own technique and discard what Google says. I think unmaskparasite judges better and in useful way because when unmaskparasite actually detected an inline script google was saying things were safe when it was not.This is documented and this is serious : Google has no reliability.

Are there any tips so that visitors using FF or Chrome can actually deactivate and so some browsing comfortably? Most users have their own AV with webshield which works practically and usefully.

IE 7 now seems a lot more safer and comfortabler to browse not bogged by these nuisances.

Edit by Denis: Site address was removed from your signature. It still contains malware.
http://www.UnmaskParasites.com/security-report/?page=nriinternet.com