Slashdot Mirror
Congress Debates Anti-Spyware Bill
Spy der Mann writes "An anti-spyware bill could clear the U.S. House of Representatives as early as next week, but there are disagreements on how to define the term 'spyware.' A wrong decision could end up in two opposite directions: Either a law too restrictive for legitimate companies, or a "safe harbor" for some malicious spyware distributors. Could this become another CAN-SPAM?"
And they plan to enforce this... how?
Spam and Spyware are like Porn - Hard to define, but you know it when you see it.
what is happening on my pc isn't business of anybody else. period.
a government agency that understands technology, staffed by former professionals in the various fields. Decisions like this shouldn't be left up to those who have no idea what they're talking about.
Do Not Eat iPod Shuffle
From TFA: The average "infected" computer had more than 90 spyware and adware programs.
I doubt I have that many legitimate programs installed in my computer and I don't think these guys have either. The thought that their computers contain more spyware than software is scary.
I don't believe that a law can change this though. It might decrease the number of US based spyware companies, but I doubt the effect will be noticeable.
More secure browsers and user education seem like a better solution.
Last time I checked fruad was illegal too, but guess what...
Life is pleasant. Death is peaceful. It's the transition that's troublesome. - Isaac Asimov
That's about as sensible as a law so that a pet mice won't chip your furniture.
Tell me, how could spyware even *work* if we had OSes that wouldn't allow programs to connect to the net *unless* we authorize them?
Just put the pet mouse in a cage, no law needed.
This article is just begging for a slightly condecending comment about how computers are not yet plug-n-go appliances that the public should be allowed to own without training and/or licensing. But where to point the blame... consumers, most of whom don't know how to change their car's oil or other equvalent activities to computer preventive maintenance? Microsoft ( the slashdot favorite whipping boy) for making it easy to use a computer without knowing anything more than 'click the E for internet'? Dell, for making computers as cheap as appliances? Lawmakers, who think they can wave a legislative wand and make internet miscreants (spammers, bot networkers, spyware writers) behave?
Well, video codex come to my mind, they are stealthily downloaded and installed by the media player.
And most spyware doesnt install so stealthily, at one point the user has to click yes on a dialog (a very obscure dialog it is). So a lawyer could always argue that the installation wasnt stealthy and that the product therefor isnt spyware.
I have discovered a truly remarkable proof for my post which this sig is too small to contain.
Congress should define spyware as any code that runs on your machine that you did not agree to instal (So if I instal FreeGamePack, I expect to get FreeGamePack and not HiddenBackdoorTorjan. I agreed to instal one but not the other). I remember installing debian once, and it had a list of over 1000 packages, each with a description. I would like to see Windows do that, give me choice. Do you want the Internet Explorer pack? Do you want the Netscape pack? Do you want the Mozilla pack?
The second part of the definition is the software is not allowed to communicate to any other machines unless the owner of his machine allows it. That would kill RealPlayer and their crappy hidden settings.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
That trying to eliminate spyware is something like the attempt to eliminate P2P...pretty much pointless and ineffective. It's really a user issue...people just have to be smart about what they install, it's really not hard to avoid the really bad spyware...
Reading at high threshold levels is group-think.
You are subject to US law. Now at some point, these people probably have a US stopping point. Maybe the authors are entirely foriegn, but the ad companies that pay them to make it probably aren't. What good does an ad do if it's for something you can't buy in that country? I'm betting somewhere along the chain, there are people in the US that can be held responsable. In most cases, I'm betting the companies are US based.
It's also possible the US could seek extradition over this. You can't run to a foriegn country and hide, if those countries have extradition treaties. I'm not sure they'd bother for something like this, and the other nations might refuse to extradite if it wasn't against their own laws, but it's also a possibility.
There are too much special interests involved; what law(s)that gets crafted will have loopholes size of oil tankers just to satisify the needs of the said special interests.
Windows XP appears to track program usage (see add/remove program in control panel.) Do you honestly think that M$ keep that information are for entertainment purpose? I consider it without a doubt a market research tool, although I am also certain others would consider it a useful end-user tool. Does that count as a spyware? You can be damn sure M$ will make sure the crafted law(s) exclude that as spyware.
In short, "screwed, we are now."
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
Could this become another CAN-SPAM?
CAN (sorry, couldn't resist) and will.
Seriously, this is an outstanding example of why legislative control is at best worthless, and more likely actively harmful. There's an old legal saying that "good cases make bad law." That is, when we try to achieve a just result in a particular case, we end up with a law that may serve that end well, but ultimately creates more problems than it solves.
This goes double when the law concerns technology. The tech world is noted for the rapidity with which is advances; the legal world is noted for its resistance to change and advancement. When the latter regulates the former, it will inevitably lead to a stifling of future development. Definitions and phraseology become hyper-critical. For example, let's look at "spyware." How do you define it? What would you call a program that quietly looks at everything you type, taking note of some words as being particularly interesting? I'd call it a spellchecker. How about a daemon that goes through your e-mail and reports back to an agent information about how many e-mails you get from a particular sender, what kind of things you talk about, etc.? I'd call it an adaptive mail filter (Bayesian or similar). How about a webmail service that looks at your e-mail, analyzes it, and uses that analysis to present advertisements relevant to you? I think the term for that is Gmail.
Yes, these examples are contrived; I deliberately chose them to demonstrate a point. I'm trying to show that even the best-intentioned law can have dramatic effects down the line, effects that we can't even begin to predict. There's another truism in law that if the case goes to court, the lawyers have already failed. The principle holds true here as well: if the Legislature gets involved, there are no winners, only losers.
Moderate drunk! It's more fun that way!
If the credit card companies were threatened with a charge of conspiracy to promote spam/spyware/all the other immoral or illegal acts commited for money via the itnernet, it would stop overnight.
It exits because the credit card companies profit from it. Take the profit from the credit card companies, and it would not exist.
Nothing in the above statement should be taken to imply that I do not support cruel and inhuman torture and/or death for anyone connected with the promotion/distribution of Spam/Spyware.
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
This problem is NOT solvable by large government. If you want to eliminate spyware, user education is the only way to make it happen. Pure and simple. If anyone comes up with an effective way of educating users, let me know.. please.
What is your penile percentile?
Any anti-spyware, anti-spam, anti-bad-computer-thing that Congress codifies into law will be at best worthless and at worst disastrous for legitimate users. Why? I'm glad you asked. The reason is simple: there are people making money off spam and spyware. People who make money from something are always willing to give money to Congress to keep it coming, and Xrist knows Congressmen are always willing to take money in exchange for their legislative services. On the flip side, what've you got? Are you willing to send money to a Congresswhore to make the Net more usable for the good guys? Can you send enough to offset the DMA?
I depress myself. Time for more hooch.
Learn to spell: nickel, missile, lose, solely, amendment, speech, kernel, probably, ridiculous, deity, hierarchy, versus
"You are about to install MSCFGT38.EXE. Installation of this program will improve your browsing experience, and is required to access this website."
The fact that it is some sort of auto-dialer that connects to a foreign country at a rate of $65/min won't really get mentioned.
Personally I blame Microsoft. They have been trying to hide what the computer is doing for years, undoubtedly out of some misguided notion that when you don't name the problems that you have they will somehow be less severe, even though all it does is frustrate support people.