Spyware Analysis of P2P Software

rhizome writes "Benjamin Edelman, a PhD candidate in Economics and a Law student at Harvard, has analyzed the hidden (or not) additions to a user's machine when they install some of the major Windows P2P clients. He analyzes the length and readabilty of their licenses, what is revealed or hidden in the software's installer and includes screenshots for illustration. Clear, concise and eye-opening."

Comments

It's not the spyware, it's the black hat hackers..

[shanen]

I'm not so worried about spyware. At least not the commercial type, since you can figure out their motivations. Actually, I think the best response there is not spyware blockers, but a commercial response. There should be an anti-spyware organization that gives negative publicity to the companies that benefit in any way from spyware, and positive publicity to their competitors. If they're doing it for money, then you hit them in the wallet and they'll wake up.

However, the think that really worries me is the intersection between P2P and black-hat-hacking skills. That's too much power in one place, and we already know that power corrupts. (The only redeeming point is that sometimes the corruption is pretty funny, like the Gannon/Guckert case.)

Re:It's not the spyware, it's the black hat hacker

[AviLazar]

No such thing as bad PR. If we had such an organization, every little company would want to get on that negative list because it would give the double advertisement. In the end, people will rmemeber the company name - not what they did.

Re:None of the Open Source ones checked?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's impossible by definition. If it is an open source share app with spyware it will last like fifteen seconds before someone else gets sick of that and releases it without spyware. :nod:

I don't think you'll see any out there with spyware, if any at all :confused:

What's that smell...

[SkyWalk423]

The bias is right there, bookending the article in small print (Ok, so the whole page is in small print, you get the point).

From TFA:

"One program in my sample is notable not for its inclusion of bundled software but for its omission of such software. Not only did LimeWire not include bundled software, but in my testing it also did not show any advertisements beyond promotions for the paid version of LimeWire."

"This article builds on paid consulting I conducted for LimeWire. I thank LimeWire for their willingness to let me share my findings with the public."

Something stinks...

Re:What's that smell...

[Tropaios]

I'd have to disagree with you here. From where I'm sitting I think everything is just peachy, you see, he fully disclosed his involvement with Limewire.

What this does is let, you, me, and everyone else decide wheter or not to take his words at face value or with a grain of salt.

Not unlike when Slate runs a piece on MS or when Slashdot posts an article about OSDN. I think it speaks to his integrity that he disclosed this since he likely could have written his article without the disclaimer at all.

No conspiricy here, everything is fine, go about your business.

peace

Is anyone actually surprised?

[suitepotato]

I mean, how much does it take to just guess that some of these programs might be loaded with gunk code that doesn't belong on your machine?

eMule runs fine, finds most anything I bother to look for, and doesn't come with crud. Between that and minor torrent useage, who needs Kazaa of any kind?

W/regard to the RIAA and company, how long until they come up with a P2P sharing program put out through a front company to engage in a sting? Tinfoil hat maybe, but as stupid as they are, sheer statistics alone suggest they will eventually hire someone with more than the two brain cells otherwise required to be at the RIAA/MPAA.

Re:Lawyer, economist, and paid shill?

[jmorris42]

> why he was givng LimeWire such a clean bill of health, when my
> experience has not been so good.

I too remember helping Windows victims recover from being assaulted by LimeWire in the past. But they have seen the light and repented of their wickedness, including no spy/adware with more recent versions; and the software itself is Free Software, available under the GNU GPLv2. They even have a CVS repository. With those conditions, spyware would be a bit hard to get away with.

Go look at www.limewire.com and then www.limewire.org and see for yourself.

It makes perfect sense for Limewire to pay people to research the scum who compete against them in the P2P space and expose them. It ain't libel when it is true ya know, and the other players really are pond scum trying to get rich off of wanton copyright infringement by selling the warez kidz' souls to Claria. (Not that LimeWire isn't also encouraging the same infringement.... but they are now Free Software developers ya know; heros of the Open Source Revolution and all that jazz. And I have downloaded legit stuff from P2P so I don't have a problem with them existing.)

Re:How satisfying to see...

[Taladar]

Bittorrent taking up a high percentage of all Internet Traffic does not mean it is the most popular, it is just the one popular with the people sharing the biggest files (whole seasons of TV Series, DVDs,...).