On Sun, 05 Oct 2014 20:59:13 +0000, mark lewis wrote:


I haven't used, and therefore can't vouch for Sucuri, but it's a legit 
multi-national company based in California and one of the few which 
understands the WordPress issues many of the compromised sites are 
experiencing. 

This original poster in this thread is on M$ IIS/7.0 and the Sucuri 
webtool identified multiple issues with the infection, so that gave me a 
positive impression to start with. I've used this free tool to examine 
many compromised sites which have been infiltrated by spammers. Most are 
WordPress, but not all. Additionally, I have a few contacts who have used 
this company and they claim positive results. 

In the absence of a dedicated IT staff, companies are faced with how to 
maintain a clean web presence. So my take (yes it's a personal one), in 
the absence of staff who know what they are doing, then outsourcing the 
security to a company who does understand it, makes total sense. They 
(Sucuri) publish an $90 per year charge for a website, which sounds to me 
extremely cost effective. In the end, it's not my money or decision, but 
it's an option.

It's worthwhile to check thegreatwall dot ca on Sucuri and you'll see the 
detail this free tool offers. If you understand how to fix your own 
sites, and can monitor and maintain them, great. Otherwise, if it were 
me, I'd outsource this to someone who understands it.

Peace.

Thane

--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2