How do i allow a website through Avast

Avast Free Antivirus / Premium Security
1

So i use www.kickass.so a lot and i recently downloaded avast, (which i paid for) but now it wont let me open kickass.so.
I can open it when i disable avast shields but i dont want to do that. Is there any way to allow kickass.so through avast

2
[b]Sorry, the web site www.kickass.so is not available through Sky.

Sky has been ordered by the High Court to block access to this website[/b].

Does this answer your question

3

Level one threads
http://urlquery.net/report.php?id=1419012289324

No content:
http://sitecheck.sucuri.net/results/www.kickass.so

301 status:
http://zulu.zscaler.com/submission/show/61c339bc2fb2123cb7e9fe742f382247-1419012330

Severe DNS problems:
http://dnscheck.pingdom.com/?domain=www.kickass.so

Old server software:
http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=www.kickass.so

https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=www.kickass.so&s=68.71.58.34&latest

And there is ofcourse the hosting of illegal content.

4

When I tried to connect to the site - Avast isn’t the only security based application to consider the site malicious - MalwareBytes AntiMalware (MBAM) that IP resolves to 195.3.147.99 in Latvia

Please break the link to avoid accidental exposure to a suspect site - change the www to wXw, this stops the link being active.

Considering this is a Torrent site, it isn’t too surprising that some security based applications would be concerned with it.

There is a third party to yadro.ru, which seems strange given that the site domain is kickass.so. Checking further this external link (3rd party) goes to counter.yadro.ru and I can recall this featuring in the viruses and worms forum before.

Interestingly I didn’t get an avast alert whilst checking this - which isn’t that unusual as the kickass.so domain has multiple IP addresses in different countries. So depending on your location you may get served up something different.

Personally I wouldn’t be trying to exclude this URL from scanning before I was 100% certain it wasn’t infected/malicious, etc. and there is no way I could say that at this time.

5

This must be a false positive by Avast as the site comes up clean at virustotal.

https://www.virustotal.com/en/url/20736f5732a68163eb5617fc53f2e949c6ad4dcf6a613acb125f0a04d6fecb9f/analysis/

6

Virustotal doesn’t scan websites, it only checks some blacklists.

7

So you assume Avast is always right?

Another scan: https://app.webinspector.com/public/reports/27892297

And another:

8
So you assume Avast is always right?
And what has that question got to do with the topic and the website? Did you even read what we said and looked at the reports?
9

Well Eddy is right. Did you look at the reports and do you know the risks involved in “torrenting”, because the way it is frowned upon by content industry and therefore who is complaining when malcreanrs abuse these sites?
Do not blabber when someone does not condone online piracy or another party likes to discourage the use of non-legal P2P copyright offenses.
Malvertising is allowed here, an example: http://blog.armorize.com/2011/10/malvertising-on-kickasstorrents-katph.html
See: https://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?/topic/142021-kickassto-and-btdiggorg/

polonus

The blocking is because of an ongoing issue with the AS that site is hosted on!

10

I looked at the sites but that means nothing.

You and eddy are not the internet police.

What I find interesting is how you and eddy want to force your opinion on someone instead of answering their question.

It is their computer not yours and where they go is their business not yours.

To answer the OP’s question:

Either go to setting > active protection > web shield then click on customize.

You will find exclusions in there.

Better yet you could open setting then scroll down to exclusions and place the URL in URL exclusions.

11
I looked at the sites but that means nothing
The only thing that means nothing is your reaction. Security risks at level 1(!), dns problems sure do mean a thing. They should be solved if the owner/host of the site doesn't want to get his visitors in problems.
What I find interesting is how you and eddy want to force your opinion on someone instead of answering their question.
We do not, but we are not gonna help people visiting a site that is a security risk for the visitor. We are trying to help people removing malware, not installing it. We are trying to help people to be safe, not to put them at risk.
12

…a verbal shoving match. nobody answered the question. :-\

IF IT WORKED AS EXPECTED - IT DIDN’T WORK FOR ME.

The answer, for users of AVAST INTERNET SECURITY 2015 is this…

  1. open AVAST USER INTERFACE (right click the avast icon in the system tray)
  2. click SETTINGS - gear icon at the bottom of the left side
  3. click on ACTIVE PROTECTION at the top of the right pane
  4. click on ‘Customize’ beside WEB SHIELD
  5. click on ‘Exclusions’ – 3rd from the top of the left page
  6. CHECK the box beside URLS TO EXCLUDE
  7. enter the url of the site you want to EXCLUDE and click ADD

…you can find your way home from there.
good luck

13

Thanks for helping the op. A user should have the freedom to browse the web however he/she wants, even if others disapprove on the content.

14

Avast doesn’t block because of the site content, unless that content is infected or has third party access to another site considered malicious.

I mentioned why avast was most likely blocking this and that I could access the site without an alert:

There is a third party to yadro.ru, which seems strange given that the site domain is kickass.so. Checking further this external link (3rd party) goes to counter.yadro.ru and I can recall this featuring in the viruses and worms forum before.

Interestingly I didn’t get an avast alert whilst checking this - which isn’t that unusual as the kickass.so domain has multiple IP addresses in different countries. So depending on your location you may get served up something different.

All that the site needed to do is use a different counter service than one that is considered malicious.

It is the users choice what they make and I said they could exclude the URL, but advised caution:

Personally I wouldn't be trying to exclude this URL from scanning before I was 100% certain it wasn't infected/malicious, etc. and there is no way I could say that at this time.

So the OP had enough information from the initial posts to make an informed decision for themselves. Considering they only made one post we will never know what advice/action they took.

15

Sounds to me like the OP listened to some very “smart people” Kevtech and tb161
They both gave him/her the advice he/she wanted to hear.
Avast must be wrong because it didn’t allow me to go to a site and their advice allowed that visit.
It’s always more important to visit a site than to be sure that my computer remains safe. After all, it’s my computer.

My only question to all of this is why bother having any protection on your system when you don’t intend to listen to it’s advice in the first place ???

Avast may not always be right but, it warns me and, it gives me a chance to thoroughly investigate before making a rational decision.
In almost all instances, I’ve always chosen to find an alternate “safe” site.
Just my 2 cents…