Tim Smith wrote:

> In article <642dveF2a7vd5U1@mid.dfncis.de>,
> "Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote:
>>> You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
>>> USED TO INFECT OTHERS.
>>
>> There's no indication that his website was compromised. Stating it in big
>> letters doesn't make any less false.
>
> You don't consider someone other than yourself editing the pages on your
> website to be being compromised?


Now that would be a serious indication if it's true. But this is unrelated
to the infection since a totally unmodified website including content from
potentially untrusted third party (as most big websites do) could appear
like it's infecting machines to the clueless.