Slashdot Mirror


Spyware Fines OKed By House

glimmy writes "The US House of Represenatives passed a bill that imposes fines on the use of Spyware by a majority of 399-1. This bill excludes programs used by the FBI or spy agencies, though."

32 of 429 comments (clear)

  1. Please define spy agencies? by mpost4 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How tight or loss will this definition be??? can any organization apply for it. Or will it be only for government spy agencies? How about foreign ones? The article has this line in it " The House bill approved Tuesday explicitly permits snooping software built by the FBI (news - web sites) or spy agencies secretly collecting information under a court order or other legal permissions affecting federal departments." Ok which courts? US? ones, how about if N. Kora spy agency got court orders to investigate some one in the US (ya right really like this will happen but just for the sake of the question please give me this one) will that be allowed? Now how about company X higher a company in China, that gets a general court order there to do spy ware, and lets say for further argument, lets say this chines corp gets "classified" a spy agency? Is that legal, or is the lay written that only US spy agencies? How about the spy agencies ones from our friends to the North Canada, lets say they are investigating some one that is part of organized crime there, but lives in the US? Or is this just another feel good law, like the can spam law? I would hope this does decrease spyware (but how many of these spyware organizations are just going to move off shore?) I am tired of cleaning it off of friends computers, (one reason I make it a part of my procedure, no mater what I do, I install spywareblaster)

    Put on tin foil hats now?

    1. Re:Please define spy agencies? by baximus · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Better yet - Please define "spyware". A lot of internet users and anti-spyware companies consider browser cookies to be a form of spyware. Does this mean that I will end up having to recode all my web pages to not use cookies, in order to avoid a fine?

    2. Re:Please define spy agencies? by FrYGuY101 · · Score: 5, Informative
      The House bill approved Tuesday explicitly permits snooping software built by the FBI (news - web sites) or spy agencies secretly collecting information under a court order or other legal permissions affecting federal departments." Ok which courts? US? ones, how about if N. Kora spy agency got court orders to investigate some one in the US (ya right really like this will happen but just for the sake of the question please give me this one) will that be allowed?
      This is an American law affecting American companies, american citizens, and american institutions. Set up shop outside the border and you're immune, sadly.
      --
      "If we let things terrify us, life will not be worth living."

      - Seneca
    3. Re:Please define spy agencies? by rts008 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Only Microsoft has that kind of control

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    4. Re:Please define spy agencies? by heli0 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Please define "spyware"

      Here are the criteria specified in the bill

      http://thomas.loc.gov
      H.R. 2929

      (1) Taking control of the computer by--

      (A) utilizing such computer to send unsolicited information or material from the protected computer to others;

      (B) diverting the Internet browser of the computer, or similar program of the computer used to access and navigate the Internet, away from the site the user intended to view, to one or more other Web pages, such that the user is prevented from viewing the content at the intended Web page;

      (C) accessing or using the modem, or Internet connection or service, for the computer and thereby causing damage to the computer or causing the owner or authorized user to incur unauthorized financial charges;

      (D) using the computer as part of an activity performed by a group of computers that causes damage to another computer; or

      (E) delivering advertisements that a user of the computer cannot close without turning off the computer or closing all sessions of the Internet browser for the computer.

      (2) Modifying settings related to use of the computer or to the computer's access to or use of the Internet by altering--

      (A) the Web page that appears when the owner or authorized user launches an Internet browser or similar program used to access and navigate the Internet;

      (B) the default provider used to access or search the Internet, or other existing Internet connections settings;

      (C) a list of bookmarks used by the computer to access Web pages; or

      (D) security or other settings of the computer that protect information about the owner or authorized user.

      (3) Collecting personally identifiable information through the use of a keystroke logging function or similar function.

      (4) Inducing the owner or authorized user to install a computer software component onto the computer, or preventing reasonable efforts to block the installation or execution of, or to disable, a computer software component by--

      (A) presenting the owner or authorized user with an option to decline installation of a software component such that, when the option is selected by the owner or authorized user, the installation nevertheless proceeds; or

      (B) causing a computer software component that the owner or authorized user has properly removed or disabled to automatically reinstall or reactivate on the computer.

      (5) Misrepresenting that installing a separate software component or providing log-in and password information is necessary for security or privacy reasons, or that installing a separate software component is necessary to open, view, or play a particular type of content.

      (6) Inducing the owner or authorized user to install or execute computer software by misrepresenting the identity or authority of the person or entity providing the computer software to the owner or user.

      (7) Inducing the owner or authorized user to provide personally identifiable information to another person by misrepresenting the identity or authority of the person seeking the information.

      (8) Removing, disabling, or rendering inoperative a security, anti-spyware, or anti-virus technology installed on the computer.

      (9) Installing or executing on the computer one or more additional computer software components with the intent of causing a person to use such components in a way that violates any other provision of this section.

      --
      Whenever the offence inspires less horror than the punishment, the rigour of penal law is obliged to give way...
    5. Re:Please define spy agencies? by xs650 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Iraq. Next question.

    6. Re:Please define spy agencies? by jginspace · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, this is the "Spy Act", as opposed to the "I-Spy" act (4661).

      Looking at the provisions it seems the attribution "Spyware" is more a case of hype though. The act is much wider in its scope than what a /. reader would define as spyware.

      1B,C,D,E could be paraphrased in a nanosecond by the average /. reader. Leaving the most important provision: "utilizing such computer to send unsolicited information or material from the protected computer to others".

      And yes it does contain a provision banning "Collecting personally identifiable information through the use of a keystroke logging function or similar function."

      This part, "Removing, disabling, or rendering inoperative a security, anti-spyware, or anti-virus technology installed on the computer." ...would be easy to break. I suppose the action has to be "wilful".

  2. How do I register my company as a spy agency? by 3770 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm sure that I'll get other benefits as well. Maybe I can get search warrants for my former girlfriends new boyfriend.

    It is worth looking into.

    --
    The Internet is full. Go Away!!!
  3. By clicking OK... by JorDan+Clock · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Spyware isn't as secretive as they seem to think it was. Much of it is installed with full knowledge of it's existance, but many people ignore the functions of what they download. I really doubt this will do anything at all because people will keep downloading things like WeatherBug, and think that all it's doing is reporting the weather...

    1. Re:By clicking OK... by brxndxn · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If I download a program called Weatherbug because it tells me that it will give me quick access to the weather, and then I find out that there were also many other stipulations in the 'user agreement' that 1% of people read, it's spyware.

      IMO, Realplayer is spyware, AOL Instant Messenger is spyware. There oughta be a crackdown on dishonest software. When Realplayer starts with all the subscription defaults as deactivated, except for the ones conveniently out of view, SPYWARE. When AOL Instant Messenger wants to put wild tangent bullshit on my computer when AIM used to be for IM'ing people, SPYWARE. Sorry, but it's dishonest programming and doesn't give people enough options for how to disable it or even realize that it's there. Weatherbug does not have anything other than small text about its spyware.

      Also, Microsoft is at fault. It's usually just one-click 'yes or no' that decides whether or not the average user has infinite spam, goes to coolwebsearch.com at default, and loses a reliable internet connection... 'Install on Demand' should be disabled by default. I once had spyware installed.. turns out I clicked 'yes' one time when I was just quickly closing popup windows.

      They ought to impose the same kinds of restrictions that credit card companies have. When I get a CC add, I can instantly sort through all the bullshit. When Capital One sends me their junk mail, I can open it up and instantly see that $79 a year credit card membership fee is a ripoff. In software, you have to read through a longwinded user agreement - often only available after the software is already downloaded and installed.

      The average user is stupid. But, it's not always only stupid users that are being deceived. The software itself lies about its purpose.

      --
      --- We need more Ron Paul!
    2. Re:By clicking OK... by DarkBlackFox · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Oftentimes the bullshit isn't in the software itself, but in the removal mechanism. If I notice a piece of software eating up my system resources, generating popups, sending an unreasonable amount of outbound traffic, first thing I want to do is head to the Add/Remove programs control panel, click "remove" and be done with it. I don't want to click Yes and No 4 times questioning why I want to uninstall, I don't want to enter randomly generated keys to uninstall, I don't want to hunt for registry keys and hidden files to manually uninstall, and I sure as hell don't want shit to reinstall upon reboot.

      Any software to the contrary is in violation of my personal space within my computer, and should be liable for whatever time or money I spend removing it from my computer. EULAs be damned, if I install an application claiming to display weather, that's all I expect it to do. If I notice 4 or 5 other applications installed along with it, whose installations weren't made obvious to me at the time of the original app's installation (no, fine print EULAs are not obvious notification), the publisher of the original application should be held liable.

      Disclaimer: I run linux at home, but work for a small computer repair shop. Roughly 90% of the jobs we do are cleaning spyware. Just today I ran into a little bugger that replaced a built in winsock DLL with it's own mangled version, where it would generate popups and install AdDestroyer and Wintools on boot if an internet connection was present (Windows 98). Yes, the registry was cleared of ALL startup entries, the system.ini was thoroughly inspected, and all startup folders were empty. Task managed showed nothing but Explorer and Systray running. Yet so long as there was an internet connection, within 10 minutes, HijackThis would report wintools and addestroyer set to run on bootup, with the respective programs present in the program files folder, despite having been deleted from safe mode command prompt only via deltree.

      I don't know about the rest of the world, but I think that's bullshit. Bullshit for me to have to clean it over and over, and bullshit for the customer to have to pay for that cleaning over and over. (while good for business, I'm morally opposed.) There should be hefty fines/prison terms/death penalties handed out to software vendors who do not provide proper uninstallation procedures, or valid contact information upon installation of their software.

    3. Re:By clicking OK... by DarkBlackFox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Herein lies the catch, and the bullshit. Typically with adware/spyware/crapware installed, popups are self-spawning. You close one, some little javascript tells another to open. Eventually more than one will open. The result is layer upon layer of popups in slightly different places, where by double clicking one X in frustration will pass the second click to the popup conveniently placed directly under the first ad's close button, thereby "accepting" their EULA and installing whatever crapware they're peddling.

      This ignores the issue of popups using javascript to disable the toolbars and window frame, simulating the titlebar as part of the ad itself, where by clicking the X, you click the ad, again accepting whatever sadistic eula is printed at the bottom, and allowing whatever crap to install itself.

      Yes, many times the installation does boil down to some user clicking the "yes" button when prompted with a Windows systemesque popup claiming "you are infected with spyware, click yes to clean your computer." But others it's the clever placement and deceptive contents of an ad which throws even experienced and savvy users off their block, and once one crapware is in place, it's not long before it invites it's friends over for a party and your computer chokes itself beyond reasonable use.

  4. spy agencies? by osho_gg · · Score: 5, Funny

    Let me guess, microsoft will be the first officially US government sanctioned spy agency?

    Osho

  5. The lone hold out... by nativespeaker · · Score: 4, Funny

    Maybe Ron Paul(R-Texas) would like a free web toolbar that will keep his computer clock accurate and inform him of deals on vacations, Viagara, and more...

    1. Re:The lone hold out... by Brandybuck · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe Ron Paul (L-Texas) actually read the full text of the bill and understood that beneath it's geek-friendly title was a freedom-unfriendly law.

      You may think its funny to criminalize spyware, but that's the first step down a very slippery slope. Spywares are not viruses or trojans. They only get installed via user consent. A government that has the power to criminalize spyware between a consenting user and publisher has the power to criminalize [insert any consensual activity here].

      You don't outlaw mere annoyances. That's taking the power of government way too far, no matter what political stripe you are. Do we ban nose picking next? Belching at the table? Spyware may be annoying, but if it's on your system, you have only yourself to blame. If you're an admin and it's running amock on your wee 'bairns then look to your users and not to the spyware publishers.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  6. Rep. Ron Paul and why he voted against it. by DAldredge · · Score: 4, Informative

    They reason why Rep. Ron Paul voted against it is that he really sticks to what he believes, and one of the things he believes is that the goverment should stay out of transactions between private citizens.

    I am not one way or another if I think he voted correctly on this or any issue in the past, but you have to admire one of the few people in DC that doesn't sell out what they believe.

    1. Re:Rep. Ron Paul and why he voted against it. by DAldredge · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Osama has sold out Islam as portions of the Quron teach against what he has done.

      Bush has sold out per his dealings and love of China even though they have a forced abortion policy.

      Kill-Jonh Il has sold out as he is a professed commie and he doesn't follow the teachings of that system (not that any commie leader in history has)

    2. Re:Rep. Ron Paul and why he voted against it. by BasilBrush · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A transaction implies consent on the behalf of both parties. The kinds of spyware that are being banned are the kinds that do not seek the users permission to install or do what they do. That's not a transaction. It should be a crime, and this bill will make it one.

  7. Great but... by Stevyn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These companies like Claria (Gator) will just hire lawyers to make sure the agreement you click yes to will protect them from any legal action. I would love to see these companies put out of business, but the bottom line is people agree to installing this software. It sucks for me to remove it from my friends' computers, but that's just the way it is. No matter how much I convince them not to install free windows software or use firefox, they won't change their habits any time soon.

    Still, it's a step in the "right direction."

  8. 399 - 1? by Twintop · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well, I take it that one really enjoys his Gator to handle personal information and CoolWebSearch to find his pr0n. Maybe he thinks Intelimail does a better job of sorting his e-mail and Comet Cursor just looks pretty.

  9. Definition of spyware ? by SuneSpeg · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder what the exact definition of spyware is according to that bill ?

    Theoretically the cookie set by /. when you read this is spyware, while the gator and 30 browserhijacks/toolbars/etc you volunteerly installed and accepted thru a 30 pages long eula isnt ?

    Not to mention various pieces of software that installs on windows machines when you try play a regular audio CD..

    Its imho a good thing to ban spyware, but im just really unsure what to ban..

  10. Get The Facts Straight by Pave+Low · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This bill excludes programs used by the FBI or spy agencies, though.

    You left this out from the article:
    The House bill approved Tuesday explicitly permits snooping software built by the FBI (news - web sites) or spy agencies secretly collecting information under a court order or other legal permissions affecting federal departments. There excluded when they have a court order, issued by a judge for cause. They can't just do it willy nilly for kicks.

    You know, cops can also run red lights and speed when they're chasing suspects too. On no! abuse of power!! Sheesh.

    --
    SIG:Slashdot: indymedia for nerds.
  11. Re:who was the holdout by fdiskne1 · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to this article at News.com, it was "Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, a vocal libertarian who frequently says the federal government should not be policing the Internet, was the lone dissenter."

    --
    But why is the rum gone?
  12. Payable to: by Romancer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As long as the fines are payable to the person who had to deal with them and remove them then I'm fine.

    --


    ) Human Kind Vs Human Creation
    ) It'd be interesting to see how many humans would survive to serve us.
  13. Re:Heh by RancidBeef · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Not to nit-pick, but he's a House member, not a Senator. I wish he *were* a Senator, then his voice would be a little louder...

    Go to the House web page sometime and look how he votes. For example, the spyware vote is here. Note that 32 members didn't vote. Who knows what their opinions of this were? Where they just too chicken to vote against it? Or were they too busy giving some cute intern a beef injection?

    He's one of the few (only) politicians who understands there are constitutional limits on what the federal government has jurisdiction over. Hell, even murder isn't a federal crime. (But killing someone might violate the victim's civil rights, which is a federal crime. How fubar is that???) I suppose you could claim the interstate commerce clause gives them this authority, but that part of the constitution has been abused so much in the last century...

    I just finished reading Rome Wasn't Burnt in a Day by Joe Scarborough. He was one of the 73 rookies voted into the House during the "Republican Revolution" in 1994. It's a great inside view into why the revolution ultimately failed, why the "small government" Republicans are now putting us nearly half a trillion dollars further in debt every year, and why someone like Ron Paul who tries to buck the system and vote his convictions almost never succeeds and loses favor in his own party.

  14. Re:Clippy... by geminidomino · · Score: 4, Funny

    "It looks like you're trying to seduce a sexy Russian double-agent!"

    "Not now, Clippy, you fool!"

  15. Get your worms the MSN way! by heybo · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Funny how this story came up on a day like today.

    Today I got a call from one of our clients we take care of about spyware problems. Now they have all the latest and greatest in cleaning tools. They all are net savy and don't click every box that pops up. Well some got so bad today they wouldn't function. The woman's in charge was the worst and I know this lady does know how not to screw things up and she was swearing up and down. "I haven't done anything!"

    Well 4 hours later for 2 people we get everything cleaned back up. I set the "Tea Timer" on Spybot S&D and set it to show a prompt when it hit something. (setting the prompt is something I have never done before). I fire up IE and the home page is msn.com and BANG "Cannot download file AvenueA, Inc". FROM MSN!!!! Yes folks trying to download in the background from an ad image. Coming from machine name view.atdmt.com and it hiding behind the image trying to sell you msn broadband service!!!

    They call this "Trusted Computing"?

    Yes friends not only will MS sell you a holey OS but then we will pirate it from you using their own exploits in their browser!

    I called MS and of course it wasn't us. (even offer to send them the logs and the captures from the network, but I don't know what I am talking about...) After 3 hours I talked with a supervisor that "acted" like he cared. Well log files don't lie and neither do I.

    No this is no joke. I wish it was. At least the problem is solved for our client. We blocked msn at the firewall

    A point about this I'm not really a M$ basher hell I've made my living on NT since 3.51. True I perfer Linux but have always siad that M$ was ok and you could TRUST them. Well that ended that today. As I said I don't lie especially to people who are paying me and putting their trust in me so the next time I am asked "Can you trust Microsoft?" the answer will be NO!

  16. "spy agencies", defines by jmulvey · · Score: 4, Informative

    The poster takes a lot of liberties with the defintion of "spy agencies". Here's the limitations, according to the current version of the Bill:

    SEC. 5. LIMITATIONS.

    (a) Law Enforcement Authority- Sections 2 and 3 of this Act shall not apply to--

    (1) any act taken by a law enforcement agent in the performance of official duties; or

    (2) the transmission or execution of an information collection program in compliance with a law enforcement, investigatory, national security, or regulatory agency or department of the United States in response to a request or demand made under authority granted to that agency or department, including a warrant issued under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, an equivalent State warrant, a court order, or other lawful process.

    (b) Exception Relating to Network Security- Nothing in this Act shall apply to any monitoring of, or interaction with, a subscriber's Internet or other network connection or service by a telecommunications carrier, cable operator, or provider of information service or interactive computer service for network security purposes, diagnostics or repair in connection with a network or service, or detection or prevention of fraudulent activities in connection with a service or user agreement.

    (c) Good Samaritan Protection- No provider of computer software or of interactive computer service may be held liable under this Act on account of any action voluntarily taken, or service provided, in good faith to remove or disable a program used to violate section 2 or 3 that is installed on a computer of a customer of such provider, if such provider notifies the customer and obtains the consent of the customer before undertaking such action or providing such service.

  17. Section 1B and Verisign? by babybird · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Section 1B would seem to me to cover what Verisign did a while back when they were redirected unregistered domain names, or am I mistaken? Any lawyer types care to comment?

    --
    Keith D.
  18. Not immune. Act has nexus in US. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is an American law affecting American companies, american citizens, and american institutions. Set up shop outside the border and you're immune, sadly.

    'Fraid not.

    Installing spyware on a computer in the US (even if you do it from outside the US) is an act that has a nexus in the US (the instalation of the spyware). It's the same case as a civillian in Mexico or Canada firing across the border and killing someone in the US. So the US has NO problem in declaring that a crime has been committed in the US and going after someone outside.

    If the jurisdiction the bad guy is in also has such a law and an extradition treaty with the US he may just be shipped over here.

    Alternatively, he can be captured and brought back extrajudicially (i.e. by a bounty hunter) or grabbed while in US territorial waters, international waters, on a US-flagged ship, on a plane that touches down in a US airport, or a number of other ways. While the snatch might not be legal where he was, that will cut no ice with the courts once he's here.

    Or he can be tried in absentia and any assets the US can reached siezed.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  19. in the libertarian fairy forest lives a... by gad_zuki! · · Score: 4, Interesting

    >They only get installed via user consent.

    No.

    I spent a couple of years working with laywers and asked them to decode a couple of these spyware EULAs. They really couldn't. The language is purposely bad and misleading and written in a way to play down any privacy violations. If people knew what they were getting into they wouldnt install this stuff.

    Spyware by its nature already is illegal in many jurisdictions.

    Some "installers" are really just browser exploits.

    >You don't outlaw mere annoyances.

    Yes you can. At 3am my neighbor can't blast his stereo and keep me up all night. Its illegal to leave dog poop on the street. etc. I live in the real world not in the libertarian magical fairy forest.

    Lastly, Ron Paul is richer than you and me and can easily pay someone to clean out his PC every so often. This is not an option for most users. It should be self-evident that "libertarianism" is just a fancy way to say "classism" as those with wealth can get goods, services, peace and quiet, etc that others should have access to.

    See also: the cronyistic Ownership Society

  20. Mod Parent Down by MrNonchalant · · Score: 5, Informative

    Dude, it was a cookie. I've gotten plenty of Spybot warnings about Avenue A as well and every last one of them have been about cookies. What you're seeing is a third party advertiser attempt to set a cookie from their ad in order to track you. I think I'm not alone in saying that I'd prefer not to be tracked, but wouldn't call it Spyware and wouldn't blame Microsoft one bit for allowing a cookie to be set.