Slashdot Mirror
IE 5.5 Tracking Default Bookmarks
Paul Guinnessy writes: "Has anyone else noticed that the default bookmarks in Microsoft Explorer 5.5 do not go directly to a site such as cnn.com, but instead go via a redirection via Microsoft. I'm just a bit curious (and a bit uncomfortable) to know what they will gain in gathering this sort of personal information. " There's been a lot of slimey stuff with browsers (remember the What's Related problems not so long ago?). I guess I'm glad Mozilla is coming of age. As long as Web sites don't start doing something stupid like requiring IE... oh... wait.
And this is just the very tip of the iceberg of the shit we know about.
Coming across what appears to be, at first glance, another MS ploy amongst the thousands that we've already seen, it's not hard to make that assumption that they're at it again. And if they appear to be at it again, it behooves /. to try to get to the details. and if there's a little backlash of any sort, it's just the Slashdaughters demanding accuracy out of /. and wanting to prove how bright they are.
And you could have taken advantage of that by gently nudging, saying something like "Just because it's MS, don't assume the worst!" That might have prevented the next MS expose. But you went off the deep end. trying to paint MS as Apple-like and noble, which is quite frankly naive. Just a few penniless guys in their garage -- out of Harvard with rich, connected and powerful parents like the rest of us. No more dirty tricks than any other company? Pfaugghh! They tried to play dirty tricks during their own federal anti-trust trial!
And as far as Win2000 goes, since MS-DOS 2.1, the hype always says that the next MS operating system is always supposed to be the "really good one". There are 65535 bugs that tell us to reserve granting that title to this one.
Study history, pal, or you'd better keep good backups.
--
Nah, Bill is just using this re-routing to pump up hits on M$ websites. ;-)
What those crazy guys in Redmond won't do for a buck!
Vote Naked 2000
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
This is a link from a /. banner ad, and it redirects you to another site! Oh my god! Evil Andover is tracking my browsing!
Why is it inherently evil when Microsoft does it?
Well, you are on Slashdot. Home of the paranoid Linux faithful and poorly filtered "news" articles.
Do you need more of an explanation?
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And like that
Erm, could it be because Microsoft are tracking which sites you visit that have nothing to do with them at all? I mean with a banner, the site you are clicking from is going to want to know how many people clicked so they can get paid... Or are you implying that Microsoft are getting paid click-through from the default favourites? I would have thought it would be the other way round, companies paying Microsoft to have their site in the default favourites. Of course Microsoft could be providing statistics back to the default favourite sites so that they can see how much value they are getting for their investment. This is shifting things from the web-page right into the app... I don't care, who are the /.ers that use IE5.5 anyway? Don't they know this is Linux country ;-)
this is some site selling personal protection items (don't ask how I stumbled upon that one)
And our intranet was IE only in practice for weeks.
I agree that a web agency who does a IE only site makes a lousy job. unless the customer specifically said "skip Netscape I'll not pay for that"
See my other post in this thread.
I agree that time is running out for Mozilla.
All opinions are my own - until criticized
If you want to rig the tally counter:
x &target=http://www.slashdot.org
watch wget http://www.microsoft.com/isapi/redir.dll?prd=linu
this makes a request to microsoft every two seconds. It doesn't do the redirection, but just makes the request from microsoft's site.
You need to knock the WWW off the front of the slashdot link or it may drop your preferences. http://www.microsoft.com/isapi/redir.dll?prd=linux &target=http://slashdot.org
Just out of curiousity, how do you get those custom icons(like the lowercase g for geocities pages) next to your bookmarks? I always wanted to do a custom one for my site.
Via http://home.netscape.com/bookmark/(browserversion)
Is this the same? I've noticed that when I connect up, and go to the first site, it'll go to microsoft.com, check to see if I have the latest version of IE, then go to the site designated.
Maybe someone's just a bit paranoid?
If that's with the default bookmarks only, the issue is not with microsoft, but with yourself. I mean, of course the default bookmarks are whatever microsoft wants them to be. If you want Yahoo as a bookmark, bookmark them yourself.
"My opinions are my own, and I've got *lots* of them!"
"My opinions are my own, and I've got *lots* of them!"
"Why back in my day, we had web pages with gray backgrounds and no graphics, with 10,000 word essays about esoteric computer science topics - and we LIKED IT!
In fact, we didn't even use bookmarks. We memorized IP addresses - no sissy domain names for us - and typed them in manually. Why, back in my day we didn't even have web pages, we had web paragraphs, because our computers didn't have enough memory. And we LIKED IT!"
...
I'm all for responsible use of HTML and sticking close to standards. But there is value in an aesthetically pleasing site as well. And the sad fact is, recent versions of IE (for the Mac at least) are more standards compliant than anything Netscape is shipping to date.
And while I can already hear the chants of 'Mozilla! Mozilla! Mozilla!', let me remind you that Mozilla defies some equally important standards - intra-platform user interface consistancy.
Barring that, it's still not released. And it's very, very late.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
- Jeff
Really nice browser, but the competitors are free(beer).
Gecko
Too low on features. Do you know how many sites require Javascript today? I know Javascript sucks and that you should never build a site that depends on it, but nevertheless, without it you are effectively shut out from a large percentage of sites.
icab
Mac only. Plus the same problems as Gecko.
Show me a browser that is stable, supports the most frequent add-ons to html (like Javascript), is free(beer and preferably speech) AND FINISHED and I'll jump for joy.
All opinions are my own - until criticized
As long as Web sites don't start doing something stupid like requiring IE... oh... wait.
It's a sad day but unfortunately, if you want a site that utilizes anything more than basic HTML these days without crashing, IE is what you have to code for. Opera is ok but lacks key layout aspects that IE can handle and Netscape has mutated simply into a blob of useless crap.
Last I checked, 90%+ people on my sites used IE, so why shouldn't I write specifically for it?
Oh yeah, and I never use the default bookmarks.
it's one thing for ads - that's known by the user as a revenue source, and you have to expect that clicking on it redirects you. A *bookmark* in a browser is *not* expected to take you anywhere but the deestintion stated - who would think, "these bookmarks came with the browser, so obviously they'll take me through Microsoft's site for tracking purposes before I get where I'm going" (not to mention that it ends up being twice as slow as before...). Apparently we all *should* expect this type of thing from Microsoft, but it really is a shame that it has to happen.
Add microsft.com to the list of banned sites in IE... find out how often you really are there...
--
"It's tough to be bilingual when you get hit in the head."
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
Only 'flamers' flame!
Yup, the article title is "IE 5.5 Tracking Default Bookmarks". Notice the use of the word "Default" between "Tracking" and "Bookmarks".
In the summary - "...the default bookmarks in..." again, we see the word "default" being used directly before "bookmarks". Strange coincidence, or ignorant, overmoderated, trolling parent post? You be the judge.
(at least read the *title* of the article before ou post - you don't need to do this sort of crap to bash Slashdot - There's plenty of legitimate claims...)
--
"It's tough to be bilingual when you get hit in the head."
They are now spending billions of dollars on research because they have so much disposable cash. They didn't use to. None of their major current product lines are based in any interesting way on the results of their research, and whether they ever will remains an open question.
Gates's attitudes towards research spending were widely reported in the press in the early 90's; you can dig it up yourself. If you were in research at the time, that was a big deal.
I didn't say Microsoft was any worse than other big companies. I took issue with your claims that Microsoft got to their current position through innovation. Nonsense. Microsoft is a succesful business because of hardball business tactics, quite a bit of luck, some questionable practices, and excellent marketing.
Technologically, what they are selling is largely still behind what was state-of-the-art in research labs in the 1980's (but, then, so are Linux and MacOS; the industry as a whole has stagnated).
No, that's not "ALL" you tried to say. The story was clearly inaccurate, as I pointed out myself. But you also went off on a lengthy exposition about Microsoft's supposed innovations and software skills. That's where you are just as wrong as the original story was.
Face it, Microsoft is a big company, no better and no worse than other big companies. Claiming that Microsoft makes high-quality, innovative software is like claiming that MacDonald's makes high-quality, innovative cuisine. In reality, both make cheap products for the masses; the good stuff clearly happens elsewhere.
I don't care, who are the /.ers that use IE5.5 anyway? Don't they know this is Linux country ;-)
/. It was mostly IE. And if you've spent any time moderating, you know that anti-M$ comments are not modded well. Certainly this site has a pro-linux slant compared to most, but that comes from its editors and not from its readership. The readership is mostly using IE5.5.
Back in the day, Hemos and Taco tracked web browsers visiting
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
Only 'flamers' flame!
It's true that if there's something bad to be said about Microsoft, you'll probably read it here first. However, I think some of your defense is a little over-stated.
I can't comment on the "feature packed"-ness of ie, since I don't use it. Netscape sure hasn't caught up in the number of security issues, though - Internet Explorer had about one per week for a while there, didn't it? Maybe a few less features and a little more thought would have been in order.
I don't approve of "dirty tricks" on the part of any company, but there is a legal distinction in the U.S. when it comes to such actions on the part of a market monopoly. Like it or not, Microsoft is held to a higher standard (rightfully, IMHO) in its business dealings since it significantly greater power as a monopoly than if it were just one of a number of competitors in a market.
In the hypersensitive world of free software and Linux, it would have been impossible for Red Hat to get to where it is without being "nice". Even as they are now, distributing their primary products for free and contributing thousands of dollars of hacker salary back into community Linux development, there are constant fears that Red Hat will become the next Microsoft. There is very little trust of big, unresponsive corporations in the Linux market, such that I can't believe that Red Hat has been getting away with MS-like tactics on the sly. Do you have specifics?
-- ethereal, who isn't normally a big RH defender, and definitely has no IPO buzz goin' on (the very thought makes me chuckle :)
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
Konqueror is a GPL browser. It renders a
lot faster than both Netscape and IE.
It supports Netscape plugins (e.g. for Flash)
and has a cool ftp client.
It allows you to set your own cookie policy:
you can make it ask whether you accept a cookie,
and then you can reject them by site. So no
more cookies from doubleclick - and I'll never
be asked about them either.
So definately: there is a serious competitor out
there. I admit it's still beta, but this is
something which can overtake IE. Go get it and
submit bug reports!
Pretty please, pretty please, can I have a good browser for Linux???
... so TURN THE (Shop, Radio) BUTTONS OFF!
From the Version Notes at http://home.net scape.com/eng/mozilla/4.7/relnotes/windows-4.75.h
No comment on the buttons, they look fine to me at 1152x864 resolution.
Andy
---
The Crystal Wind is the Storm, and the Storm is Data, and the Data is Life
Microsoft's success stories have mostly been achieved by copying products and ideas from other companies like Apple, Lotus, Sun, Bell Labs, IBM, and others. What they have been been "working hard" on is cloning other people's software. Gates even used to brag about the fact that he didn't have to spend any money on research--he'd just copy Apple (now that hardly anybody else is left, they have to do their own R&D). And Microsoft's pyramid-scheme-like stock option plans and accounting practices put many money-burning startups to shame--Microsoft is not the enormously successful and profitable company you seem to think they are.
No, Microsoft is not the "Borg cube", but they are generally not an innovative company either, and they have engaged, and continue to engage, in a lot of questionable business practices.
And, coming back to the core of this story, Microsoft clearly puts a low priority on security, quality, professionalism, safety, and privacy. The fact that Netscape isn't much better is irrelevant. Microsoft is not a startup anymore, and neither are they a fly-by-night company in the Arizona desert anymore. They are the market leader, one of the biggest US corporations, and in that position, they ought to behave responsibly in all these areas. If they don't, it's completely justifiable to take them to task. You see, with billions in revenue comes a lot of responsibility and exposure.
Netscape is doing the same, and it's not exactly new either: this feature is there since version 4.0 (1998?). The default bookmarks in the Personal Toolbar Folder redirect through Netscape's site.
m arkname).html
The redirection URL is http://home.netscape.com/bookmark/(version)/(book
Take a look at http://home.netscape.com/bookmark/ to see all supported versions.
----
Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
So now, the censor proxies will have to block Microsoft as they block Babelfish.
:)
__
__
Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
GW Bu
Hmmm... pulling out my trusty old HTTP proxy spy, let's see exactly what information IE is sending to MS server:
o ws&sbp=MediaPlayer&ar=Favorite&sba=CNET& pver=6.2 HTTP/1.0
/ 1.0 302 Moved Temporarily
GET http://www.microsoft.com/isapi/redir.dll?prd=Wind
Accept: image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, application/vnd.ms-
powerpoint, application/vnd.ms-excel, application/msword, */*
Accept-Language: en-us
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows NT 4.0; y)
Host: www.microsoft.com
Proxy-Connection: Keep-Alive
And it gets back:
HTTP/1.0 302 Moved Temporarily
Location: http://stream.cnet.com
Server: Microsoft-IIS/5.0
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Length: 145
Age: 0
X-Cache: MISS from x.x.x.com
Proxy-Connection: keep-alive
<head><title>Document Moved</title></head>
<body><h1>Object Moved</h1>This document may be found <a HREF="http://stream.cnet.com">here</a></body>HTTP
In other words, it's not sending any extra information, and it's very plausible that MS would use it to 1) redirect to a current, correct URL for the given services, and 2) verify usage of the latest version of the browser. In other words, nothing sinister, even if they're keeping statistics on which links are used -- if they don't have statistics, then they won't know which URLs to keep and which to trash.
Sigh.
---
---
"Go Metallica. Die RIAA." -- Linus Torvalds
MS does a lot of research into HCI (Human computer Interaction). By redirecting their default bookmarks to MS first, they can track how well their default bookmarks are used. They may also see any trends in bookmark usage. For example:
- If a user visit one sports site, they visit many sports sites, but no business sites
-
Or someone visiting a science site tends to also visit cooking sites.
This information can then be used to create predictions about how a majority use bookmarks and possible creeate a system to help the needs of that majority.Unfortunately:
But I'm not talking /. readers. I'm talking about the vast majority of web users. Their opinion on what "sucks" differ from yours and mine. The sad truth is that those flashy Javascript ridden websites *work*. When I try to explain to people that they shouldn't have Javascript turned on I get a questioned look and eventually remarks like. "Well, but I have never had any problems, and my favourite site won't work without it. (Damnit our corporate homepage demands Javascript. Quite embarassing, but not my desicion)
In a nutshell: Geeks no longer have final say on the web.
All opinions are my own - until criticized
I believe what you want to do is:
user_pref("custtoolbar.has_toolbar_folder", false);
If you look at the big-ass file on netscape.com that describes preferences.js, you'll see this is a "reserved" setting, with a note to the effect of "we're not gonna tell you what it does, 'cuz we don't want you fuckin' with it".
If that doesn't work, also try adding:
user_pref("custtoolbar.personal_toolbar.Version" , 0);
user_pref("custtoolbar.personal_toolbar_folder", "Netscape_engineers_are_weenies");
Fuck them and the marketers they rode in on. And that goes for Nutscrape and Internet Exploiter.
This should not be suprising to anybody who hasn't been under a rock for the last few years, remember how much power Microsoft seemed to wield during the DOJ anti-trust trials just by being able to keep somebodies icon on or off of the desk top.
I hope you know that everytime you bookmark a page in IE5.x, it automatically request a custom "Favorites Icon" from the bookmarked site.
What this means is that the site's webmaster know exactly what page you bookmarked (plus the time, IP, etc).
The URLs that they are forwarding to are subject to change under the control of other companies. Microsoft certainly may be tracking usage. However, they may have also been building in the flexibility to change the URL without having to update the client software.
The net will not be what we demand, but what we make it. Build it well.
Right on man. I've noticed that too. people arn't blindly going a long with the anti-MS FUD. It's good to see, and better to read it put so well.
thanks,
-Jon
this is my sig.
h ttp://www.microsoft.com/isapi/redir.dll?prd=linux
and if we all do the same, it'll really throw the Microsoft statistics gatherers. "This month we got 34,432 redirections for the Windows page and 485,550 redirections in a category of 'linux'".
bp
That leaves convincing the browser producers to use your link as a default. Microsoft and Netscape very likely get payed to put those links there, and naturally they are going to want to track the usage of those links, so that they can see which ones are beneficial and which ones are duds. The purchasers of the default link would no doubt be interested in those statistics as well.
I have no idea if this is the case, but it seems to fit together for me.
V
I mean, come on.
/. team head over to Fark.com and recycle some of that; at least it's funny.
IE has had bookmarks that redirect through the MS version checker since 4.0.
This is not news.
I suggest that the
--
Peter
I am running Corel Linux Second Edition (2.2.16 kernel) at present and all of its Netscape Bookmarks (and it has a relatively nice selection including Slashdot) pass through product.corel.com, as does the default Homepage which is a corel page. I presume this is to gather usage info and stats and don't really have a problem with this sort of tactic. If you don't like the extra smidge of traffic generated fix your bookmarks. If you don't know about it should you care? I don't think so. You are simply providing some usage analysis data and all that is visible is the standard CGI environment (such as User Agent, IP, etc.). It lets them (Corel, MS, Netscape) see just how many users they have, what versions they are using and how useful their bookmarks are. Personal info gathering is still down to the browser (and whether it allows javascript etc), nothing has changed. It has the potential to be about as obnoxious as doubleclick and deserves the same treatment, care and fix it or don't care and let them gather some info based on your usage. Now if anyone can prove that these redirects are used to do some form of persistent tracking and that they are gathering email addresses I will take a different view. Until then ...Dear Slashdot, please stop posting stupid argumentative stories (like InterVideo's press release dissappearing when it is sitting in plain site).
Never underestimate the dark side of the Source
I'd love to. unfortunately I lack time and skill to code my own browser (if I want something more than text, at least)
But the sad state of affairs is that INTERNET EXPLORER CURRENTLY IS THE ONLY BROWSER THAT FUCKING WORKS!
Don't tell me about standards and how the evil empire embraces and extends. I'm talking reality here. So many sites uses MS specific code that I'll always need IE as a backup. I do web pages for a living. (or rather the heavy stuff behind the pages, not the stupid html/javascript shit) and I see why Microsoft is winning. It is easy. They give people what they want!
People want "cool" sites. I know it is stupid, and so do you, but the other 99% of the web surfers think those flash intros and AciveX gizmos are nice. If a page renders and updates faster in IE than netscape, people will use IE. If a page is inaccessible with Lynx, nobody will use Lynx (exept hard core geeks and disabled persons) If people get a virus because of shitty security in IE and windows they will complain about "that damned Gates" and continue to use Windows and IE because they work. Someone will switch to Linux only to find that his favorite web site no longer works. (and that Netscape crashed three times) "Sorry, Linus. Nice system and all, but I'll stick to windows, since they have this working web browser."
I'm worried, because if there is not a serious competitor to MSIE out there soon we will have a MS proprietary web.
Boy, am I pessimistic today?
All opinions are my own - until criticized
"Guille Bisho" wrote in message
news:39B84795.8A32DC4F@redestb.es...
(snip possible good catch)
Good possiblity something fishy going on there. The XMLHTTP object is installed and registered with IE5 and functions without prompt under default settings. The example code below will send an HTTP request to MS, fetch and parse as html the response:
<script>
function SubmitTrackingInfo(){
var objHTTP = new ActiveXObject
("Microsoft.XMLHTTP")
objHTTP.open("GET", "http://www.microsoft.com", false)
objHTTP.send()
xmlDoc=objHTTP.responseText
document.write("" + xmlDoc + "")
}
SubmitTrackingInfo()
</script>
In the case of the search.msn.com example. There is additional data being sent back to the server: objHTTP.send("BSTR")}function fnInit(store). Clearly the name of the function firing all this: "SubmitTrackingInfo" can suggest some things. More so the recent "ballyhoo'd" anouncement by MS to allow greater control over privacy for their customers, with the addition of a "cookie" privacy control add-on for Internet Explorer 5:
http://www. microsoft.com/presspass/features/2000/jul00/07-20c ookies.asp
So, while _everyone_ else's "cookies" are curtailed by this privacy add-on for Internet Explorer, Microsoft's operations utilise this method of 'non-cookie" tracking?
Conspiracy theory of course ;-) but perhaps worth investigating thoroughly
by someone with experience as to what exactly is going on?
First of all, the probable original reason for using redirs is if the URL changes. The secondary reason is probably so Microsoft can have a hold over the companies (if you don't pay us $1 Kajillion, "My Weather" will go to....). A side-effect is that Microsoft can track how many people use each link (and maybe who those people are).
But if you think about it, Microsoft could already do that even without using redirs. The obviously have a "partnership" with the companies at those links--they could just ask each company to send them data on people who arrive from those links (by adding some data to the URL, by sending a special header, whatever--better yet, just track ALL IE users to those companies--or why limit to IE users?). Never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by slightly less malice.
--
Linux MAPI Server!
http://www.openone.com/software/MailOne/
Linux MAPI Server!
http://www.openone.com/software/MailOne/
(Exchange Migration HOWTO coming soon)
check this out:
i cle,tkgk0081en
/. banner ad, and it redirects you to another site! Oh my god! Evil Andover is tracking my browsing!
http://images.slashdot.org/cgi-bin/adlog.pl?art
This is a link from a
Sorry, just feeling a bit paranoid this morning... web redirects are nothing new. They can be used for a variety of legitimate features such as load balancing, randomizing, hit tracking, etc etc. Why is it inherently evil when Microsoft does it?
---- I made the Kessel Run in under 11 parsecs.
Customer: I want a site that looks something like this, and I want these functions on it ...and YYY $ extra to get it to work with Netscape
Developer: OK That will cost XX $ for IE users.
Customer: Uhm OK
Developer:
Customer: YYY $ extra? Why?
Developer: Well, IE and NS have some different features. Those functions you described are easier to make for IE
Customer: OK I guess you know what you are talking about. I assume we must support Netscape too
Developer: And then there are some other browsers. If you want them supported you must cut back on functionality, or make a parallell low-feature site.
Customer: an extra site just in case someone doesn't use IE or Netscape?
Developer: Yes to catch everybody
Customer: Guess I don't want to lose any customers. How much would that be?
Developer: ZZ $
Customer: ZZ $? How many are using omething else than the major two browsers?
Developer: Less than one percent of your target group, I'd say
Customer: OK here is the deal. Start making my site for IE users. Then you can add functionality for Netscape (if they are still around then). I don't think we'll bother with the rest.
Developer: Are you sure? It might not look so good if some people can't even access your site.
Customer: Yeah, but it would cost too much. And most people does have IE somewhere if they really want to get here don't they?
Developer: Yes. Lynx and Opera users are used to being shut out. They may complain, but they'll know how to get aroud the problem.
All opinions are my own - until criticized
Actually folks, I wrote that ending with fake /sarcasm meta tag, as in "this is a joke". Too early in the morning to remember this thing greps out those sorts HTML streams from non-HTML text input.
My preferred browser? IE. Has been for a long time. Never liked how slow and how much memory Netscape grabbed (esp. the java VM). Also never liked how animated GIFs used to consume 100% of the CPU. Been trying Mozilla, but it looks about 8 months away from completion.
Goes to show ya' can't tell on Slashdot what's sarcasm, and what's zealotry. My mistake for not clicking the Preview button.
There's nothing wrong with a visually appealing website, but too many people (usually corporate types) think that in order to be visually appealing, a website must have Flash, javascript and frames. Good, pretty, functional, web design can be done without any of these evils (look at Slashdot for proof of this!).
The best looking designs needn't be the most technically impressive - Melon Dezign's Amiga demos in the early 1990s proved that the prettiest things are not necessarily the most technically advanced. Someone with good design skills can make something useable and visually impressive, without the need for much complexity. Complexity is often added in order to hide a fundamentally poor design.
I'm reading all the replies and wondering, is it finally starting to happen. Everyone knows /. is ant-MS and pro-anything-but-MS. The quickest route to a good karma is a MS slam and ANYTHING even remotely bad for MS is a front page news item but it's a rare day when linux looks bad around here.
Windows products ain't perfect but NEITHER is Linux (or any *nix for that matter).
But - IE's been out for a while and since version 4 it's been stable, fast and feature packed - Netscape and others can't hold a candle to it. Windows 2000 proves MS can finally get it right - there hasn't been a single _true_ negative story about W2K here that I can remember. There are millions using these products who've noticed - hey... I'm not crashing. What is this BSOD people talked about? It just works. MS ain't stealing my personal diary nor is it paying me to say good things about it.
Now this absolutely stupid story comes out from one of the biggest MS haters on-line and perhaps people have finally had enough. Come on Taco, did you take a second to notice that every other browser does this as well? Don't you know your own site tracks the comings and goings of it's users? How about those banner ads? Are you so desperate to slam MS? Your users have noticed and I wonder if enough of them were willing to risk some karma to speak out and tell the truth: Some MS products don't suck. Gates is not a borg and MS isn't a huge death cube from a billion light years away - it's just a hugely successful company that started out much MUCH smaller than any of the current linux companies who rode the wave and sucked down millions/billions in IPO and VC moneys from the unwise. MS came outta a dream of two people without any cash - kinda like Apple. They worked hard and played hard ball to get where they are. If you used any "dirty tricks" - I think no more than any other successful company (wanna check Oracle's records? Novells? Even Apple isn't lilly white. And if you think Red Hat got to where it is just cause it's being "nice" - well... just think about it and review those news stories AFTER the IPO buzz faded).
Anyway, sorry for the long post - I just think a backlash against unnecessary paranoia might be long overdue. If you got a legit beef and can prove it - hell yeah, great, go for it. But, if you have to resort to mud slinging like this in order to make your personal enemy look bad (especially if the mud could equally be thrown at yourself) - you only make yourself look desperate and show us all that you feel you are on the losing side and going down.
Just MHO of course, YMMV.
db
(now, lets see if there are any honest moderators)
I've not seen this mentioned and I'm surprised /. didn't make great hay out of this story but...
http://www.pc-help.org/privacy/ms_guid.htm
That I found linked from SecurityFocus.com
Scary stuff, no? And if you block refers AND cookies you CANNOT navigate their sites as it supposedly gets caught into some sort of loop. If you've got cookies turned off they use refers to track you on their site using a GUID set in the URL and then hidden with a redirect! Just turning off cookies isn't good enough anymore! Thankfully for me @Guard can block refers too, a real shame Symantec bought the product and turned it into crap!
Interesting that this came about just as IE was about to introduce tools to block 3rd party cookies isn't it? Create a feature but make sure YOU are immune from it - cute.
Supposedly the Ad Banner folks are really up in arms about this new security feature in IE and are "meeting with MSFT". Gee, what do you think "meeting" means? Little money moving around maybe?
It's been found that 3rd party sites can redirect through the MSFT GUID server and use the GUID just fine - wonder if the ad banners will start doing that now. And you thought being tracked with an SSN was bad?!
Welcome to the 'net - here's your GUID and if you don't accept it you can't go anywhere. Here thought I had to worry about the Congress Critters trying to create some sort of silly Internet License - Microsoft has apparently not waited on them! Let's hope this practice doesn't spread and that bringing this slimy thing to the light of day will make it wither and die...
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
Okay, troll me all the way you want.
But it's the truth.
xer.xes -- 4181
This shows how Microsoft is still clueless about the enterprise market.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Yup, you're right. As we are all aware enough not to be taken by this, then why on earth is this even a /. story? Oh well..
Mr. Ska