Slashdot Mirror
What Software Do Cable Installers Place on Your PC?
{e}N0S asks: "The cable guy came over to install a cable modem at my Dad's house. As I watched him do his stuff I noticed he was installing something called Broadjump Client Foundation. I know you don't need software for a cable modem to work so I asked if it was necessary. He said he had to do his list of things, and we had to sign that he did his list of things, otherwise he couldn't leave it with us to use. Since I can always remove the software, I agreed, but I noticed while he was flipping through the install, he was clicking 'agree' on every EULA that came up. Doing a search on Google for 'Broadjump Client Foundation' comes up with some pretty scary stuff as far as what it does, like: 'Builds a database of subscriber demographics and buying behaviors to help evolve and refine marketing efforts.' Now, how does this affect us? Neither myself or anyone in my family agreed to the software; the cable guy did. And is there anyway to get cable companies to stop doing this as I can imagine since the cable company is a monopoly in this town, that the percentage of people who still have this software on their computers is pretty high."
Have a bogus PC or bogus windows installation for him to install junk on, which you can leave "unused" till you need to call support when you can boot into that partition if needed.
blog.sam.liddicott.com
This is why I always opt for the self-install option with any ISP. I don't even like my wife messing with my computer, nevermind some complete stranger.
:P)
(Side note: Yes, she does have her own computer. So there.
[PowerPoint] is a tool for capitalist presentation
Do you want theoretical advice or practical?
Theoretical:
If you feel you can't live with the restrictions or you and your machine, then drop the service and use something else.
Practical
Just wipe the stuff off the machine after the guy leaves.
You can only analyze this stuff so far.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
What cable internet provider was this?
Slashdot's first reaction to VMware
I wonder if you could take them to small claims court to compensate you for the time you spent uninstalling the program?
Sure, it wouldn't amount to much money, but taking them to court would get their attention that people don't want that spyware stuff on their machines.
The nerve they have to install that spyware and not have the decency to even let their customer know. This is a severe abuse of your privacy.
Even better yet, I have DSL. It came as an self-install kit.
1) Plugged DSL modem into the telephone line
2) Plugged DSL modem into network hub
3) Connected filters to telephones
4) Threw install CD in the trash
I want my rights back. I was actually using them when our government stole them after 9/11.
While I realize you and your family never agreed to the software, you did authorize the installation of the modem. At best, it's a very gray legal area. The ISP and software manufacturer can both claim the tech was acting as a duly authorized agent (which he was) and you can validly claim that this software was never mentioned as being necessary and that it was sprung on you without prior notice, which would undoubtedly have affected your decision to purchase.
Unfortunately, he left with a valid signature, which legally means you have accepted the service as is, software and all. You may be able to remove the software, but at this point, all you can do is complain about it. But once you sign the sheet saying the work is done, you've essentially stated that the contract (or that portion thereof) has been fulfilled to your satisfaction. I know it's a hassle, but if you have serious misgivings about it, the proper procedure is to decline signature and say you never authorized this software installation, and allow the tech to remove the modem. Then deal with the sales department. If you paid by credit card, remember that you can put a hold on that payment until it is resolved to your satisfaction.
----------
Something cleverI say inform your local newspaper or television news station. As you say, since the cable company is almost a monopoly in the area, I'll bet a number of people would love to know about how their local ISP is "spying" on them without them knowing. Most local news outlets are always looking for juicy stories about companies screwing over consumers.
But what about the mortals? 99% of this monopolistic company's customers have this crap installed on their computer, didn't ask for it, didn't agree to it, and don't even know it's there! Doesn't that strike you as wrong? Perhaps even evil? Laws are not keeping up with technology, and the inherent evil of capitalism is driving us into a dangerous situation. These companies justify their actions based just on maximizing profits for their shareholders. They don't care what petty moral problems this imposes.
If they can't stay in business honestly, they don't deserve to be in business.
If they wish to collect demographic data on your purchases in return for a decrease in your bill, that's fine. But they should have a contract specificying how much that decrease will be, and exactly what the software will do. You can have it in your service contract all nice and above board, or choose NOT to have it and pay higher costs.
Of course, since they're a monopoly, that will just lead to a $50/mo (or more) difference. But that's easier to point a finger at and complain bitterly about to your local regulator.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
The way the guy explained it to me, there are dozens of people who dont want him touching their computer.
Then they cant figure it out (yeah, I know it's just turning on DHCP), and have to call him back to set it up.
If the original work order isn't signed - then there's no proof he ever showed up at all, and the cost of rolling the truck the second time comes outta his pay. If it is, then the customer pays for the second call like he should.
He really didn't care one way or the other, so long as the work order was signed.
No need to dump all the anti-corporate conspiracy theory bullshit on the poor joe who gets payed 10 bucks an hour to hookup peoples homes.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
"suddenly they can no longer use that information to defray some of the costs of running a broadband outfit."
First off, I notice you're assuming that they need this money to defray the cost of providing broadband. I suggest that any business using this model doesn't deserve to stay in business long.
Secondly, you seem to be someone who thinks we should all be very happy with the "opt-out list" mentality because we're somehow "saving money." Businesses need to be taught that abusing and not respecting their customers is a Bad Thing and I for one wouldn't mind paying a little more for a business that actually gives a damn about me (but I have yet to be forced into that decision... seems some enterprising business is always there to provide to us somewhere). And I have the feeling that I'm not alone in feeling this way.
"A better course of action would be to quietly uninstall everything the cable guy installed and keep it all under your hat."
You're part of the problem, then, not the solution. I'm simply not going to just sit there and take this sort of abuse from anybody.
Duh.
They're called "Root nameservers."
Here's a list (from my /etc/dnsroots.global file)
The Web is like Usenet, but
the elephants are untrained.
Our techs install software for clients on a daily basis and I've often wondered whether it makes some difference who actually clicks to accept the EULAs. In our case we are not employees of the companies which actually bought this software, but are paid to install it by the purchasers. So what is *their* legal liability to a EULA if *I* click on "ok" to some incredibly stupid EULA? Who exactly is being put to a liability here (assuming a EULA actually incurs some liability at all, that is)?
I think that if a company needed to wriggle out from under an overly-restrictive EULA they could certainly use the defense: "None of our people clicked on that agreement... it was a contractor and he didn't have the authority to bind us to a legal contract."
No one ever had to evacuate a city because the solar panels broke!
The point is that most internet users don't even know what an IP is. They don't care about linux, and they probably aren't even aware that there could be software doing "bad things" on their PC. These users are having spyware forced upon them in two ways:
This is a serious problem. Let's actually discuss ways to resolve it for everyone, rather than trying to make ourselves look clever.
Depending on quite what you signed I'd say the Eula wasn't signed for you and didn't apply to you.
Possibly the cable installer has actually broken the Eula by transfering the software to someone else.
Eitherway you haven't agreed to not reverse-engineering the spyware. It would be nice then to keep sending them back reports on your computers activity that are completely bogus if enough people did this then all their data would be pretty worthless.
I'm sure most people dmake up names etc when they are asked to give out personal information (income gender age job etc) to get a service.
The general tactic is its even better to give wrong data than it is to refuse to give any at all. As this way you are invalidating anything other people are conned into giving.
It would not cost them a $50 support call to answer direct technical questions from experienced users if they would route questions properly based on their content. For example, if a user calls up, explains that he has changed network cards and asks to have the MAC entry changed in their database, it is not effective customer service to work through a thirty minute script only to end with an escalation to second line support when a direct bump to second line could have finished the call in one minute! (Example from my experience, obviously)
I once got in the middle of a thread on the MindSpring customer-service newsgroups and posted a suggestion that they institute an "experienced customer" line. The idea being you get certified through them that yes, you really know what you're doing (maybe by taking the same tests of proficiency that their employees take?) and after that you're given access to a support line staffed by people who don't insist on going through the "is it turned on?" parts of the script. Who talk to you as though you have a clue, in other words. Hell, they could not only make money on it by charging a token fee (maybe $5 per month), they could use it as a pool to recruit new tech folks.
Basically, phone centers need to program their script bots with something akin to keyword matching to determine when the caller is not going to be served by a cookbook of click heres and tab theres. In my experience, it is luck of the draw whether you get a first line rep who knows their stuff or is just following the script, and there are a lot of gradations between first and second line that could be subdivided more efficiently. Can it really be that cost ineffective to provide decent, non-irritating support to all levels of users, as opposed to just the clueless ones?
It's all about metrics. If you don't force the techs to follow the same script, you can't effectively compare their performance and weed out the ones that aren't making good numbers. (The fact that you can't do that short of actually listening in on a tech's calls from time to time, we'll ignore for now.) ISO 9000 can be a good thing in its place; likewise Six-Sigma. This kind of cookie-cutter tech support is the worst possible application of both, but management just sees a documented, reproducible process and finds it Good.
-- Old Man Kensey