Contributions of images are welcome.
I use the latest BitDefender. At times it seems to be overly protective, but I'm ok with that.Page loaded fine for me. But that's not saying what you got isn't wrong. It could just my browser or protection software didn't catch anything.
Loading is not the concern. It depends on what scripts,links,etc are embedded in the page and what happens when they execute.Loads fine for me on my android phone and chrome on mac.
I downloaded the main page (wget) and took a peek in an editor. I didn't see anything that was nefarious looking. Though I'm not even close to an expert so I could have missed something. Fed into Firefox the page looked good. I didn't check any of the subsequent pages.
Thank you ;-)all the criminal gangs in Russia prefer to use .su
This is why I don't blindly rely on something like "bitdefender", and if I'm skeptical of a page, I check the page source. Been online since the early 90s, never been phished, virused or otherwise (unless I was intentionally running a honeypot), so you do you. Meanwhile the rest of us thank dk_spb for his contribution... and when I say "loading" I don't just mean the page renders, I guess I should have been "clearer".Loading is not the concern. It depends on what scripts,links,etc are embedded in the page and what happens when they execute.
Bitdefender does not complain if a page is pure HTML for display purposes only.
IDK what source scripts are embedded in that page or what links.
Never got that far, I bailed.
Won't get fooled again.
YMMV.
So many files...Alternatively you could upload the files to dropbox or similar.
Thank you. I can't help to "Web authorities".Site Issue
Index page missing. Directory and file listing permitted