Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Denies Claria got Spyware Exception
daria42 writes "Microsoft has denied its AntiSpyware application has given adware-maker Claria special treatment. The denial has been issued amid reports MS is looking to buy Claria, and is in response to security researchers' reports stating AntiSpyware had downgraded the threat level posed by Claria's adware products. The downgrade in threat level merely represented an effort to be "fair and consistent with how Windows AntiSpyware (Beta) handles similar software from other vendors," according to a statement published by Microsoft." As reader jfengel writes, though, "they neglected to mention what software that might be, nor did they publish the analysis."
Evidence please. We use their corporate product and would be very irritated were this true.
From the bottom of that ZDNet article:
"'We firmly believe that people should have complete control over what runs on their computers,' Microsoft added."
Anyone else find that funny?
MS's anti-spyware tool isn't the only one available, it isn't bundled with the OS, it doesn't attempt to prevent the user from installing other anti-spyware tools - in short, it is one option of many and you are free to install others as well or instead of MS's one.
Why is this in YRO? What right is being infringed or threatened? If you don't like MS's anti-spyware tool, don't use it!
It's official. Most of you are morons.
fair and consistent with how Windows AntiSpyware (Beta) handles similar software from other vendors,"
So, um, what other program has had it's threat level changed?
Your sig(k) has been stolen. There is a puff of smoke!
It's a bird...it's a plane...it's AstroTurfMan!
Microsoft's AntiSpyware worked well because Microsoft didn't write it...Giant did. Back before Microsoft got their hooks into it, it was a fine piece of sofware...past tense.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
For me, I am interested in open source spyware removal. I would like a product designed by people with a mindset like mine (anti all spyware). One of the issues is that anti-spyware/virus companies are getting sued by adware companies for slander etc. for calling the adware, well, adware.
That is part of why a program that installs itself, logs your keystokes, saves your credit card info, and turns on your webcam while you are in the shower is a "petentially unwanted program" As long as anti-adware companies are suable entities, we are going to have these issues in addition to absolutely egregious issues like MS buying a spyware company.
Next thing you know Cancer will have to be called "potentially unwated cells."
And let us not be of the mindset, if people can't figure out how to keep spyware off their computer, they deserve it. A lot of those people are our parents and grandparents.
Can you imagine spyware clippy- It looks like you are writing a letter to a bankruptcy attorney. Would you like me to set you up with my rich exiled Nigerian uncle?
And All I Ask is a Tall Ship And a Star to Steer Her By
I prefer to use three products in combination. Microsoft Antispyware on a daily basis, and periodical runs of AdAware and SpyBot S&D seem to do the trick for now.
MS is going to buy off all businesses that have anything to do with delivering any kind of unwanted software to users' computers. This maybe part of their plan for security on MS platform :)
You can't handle the truth.
"Please take off your tin foil hats, guys!
Please take your head out of the sand.
"One might say that Microsoft is primarily responsible for the entire spyware issue..."
No, thousands of knowledgeable people *do* say it.
"I suspect Firefox's track record would be worse, albeit better than IE, if it were as popular"
That's a moot point.
"MS AntiSpyware is a fine piece of software..."
Penicillin is a fine medicine, but its makers don't go around spreading syphilis.
It is good that the Claria stuff is still being detected, and maybe it is not necessarily bad that the default recommendation has changed, if one were to assume that all similar products were treated in the same way.
However, with some programs having the "ignore" recommendation, and others having "quarantine", it will probably give users the impression that Claria is at least somewhat ok, or something like that, which it is not (at least in my opinion).
Actually, what kind of impression does that give someone who doesn't know any better?
Something is detected by the spyware scanner, but the default recommendation is to leave it there.
"Hey, this one is ok because it only spies me or invades my privacy a little bit."
- Donny was a good bowler, and a good man.
anti-spy software ignoring certain results will only be a problem if they also intentionally (or "unintentionally," or "incidentally" or whatever they call it when they are discovered) disable competitors' anti-spy software. I run lavasoft and spybot regularly, I have reasonable confidence in the integrity of both programs' developers. I run both because some find spyware that the others don't. If a company intentionally missed spyware, it would be underhanded, but the effect would be no different than if a company just didn't update its definition file yet. That's why you run 2 or more scanners.
Now antivirus software, that is dangerous, because in some cases they really do interfere with each other, and therefore you have to rely on a single product to catch everything.
More music, fewer hits
If someone has VNC on their computer and doesn't know it, then it is dangerous. Any program that lets you remotely control another person's computer is very dangerous. Don't be a dumbass
That's actually the principle cause of all their problems. They don't have an adequate trust model for modern computing, being stuck in the single-user era.
Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
I don't know if you guys know this, but Webroot's Spy Sweeper is also delisting obvious spyware.
This is why people should not be supporting commercial entities that are selling spyware detection/removal software.
This should all be free, open source, software that includes a community updated database of spyware junk. That way money and corruption stay out of the mix.
But please, don't fall into the fallacy that if Microsoft didn't exist, that you would have no way of earning a living, or any of the other variations along the continuum.
The Microsoft monopoly hurt the computer industry including everybody in it from consumer to worker to investor to competitor. Monopolies charge prices that are too high and that depresses economic activity and that hurts people. It's that simple. That is the beef, and you are free to hold all the other opinions you have.
How much preformance loss would having multiple in-memory agents create?
Less than GATOR......
www.aleo.no
Microsoft is only a Marketing Company, I hear that alot, and it makes sense.
When microsoft bought Giant their antispyware program was one of the best. When microsoft re-launched it under Microsoft AntiSpyware (and marketed as a new product), it got raving reviews.
The effects are that people will start to trust MS antispyware, and will be starting to ditch their other antispyware programs. As soon as the majority of the people are used to the program, microsoft can dictate their own terms to what is spyware and what is not. Ofcourse microsoft will never go too far, but the changes will be "subtle", not enough to get angry about and still have solid bunch of supporters defending the program for microsoft.
Honestly, how long will this continue?
Before around '98 you needed only 'antivirus' software mainly. Then with the broadband spreading came the 'personal firewall'. In the last few years came Ad-Aware which is 'needed' if you want to get rid of spyware. In the last year and a half i was starting to see reports about needing both Ad-Aware and S&D, and now people are starting to suggest that someone needs 3 independent spyware/adware removal tools to clean up!!! Not to prevent infection, but to clean up!
Seriously folks, when will the madness stop? You can't patch a broken design combined with user unawareness by semi-working cannot be trusted commercial programs!
Personally i stopped using windows around the time XP arrived in 2001. I just had enough. I don't need no antivirus software, firewall software, ad and spyware removal and detection software and to fight an uphill battle trying to contain IE with an alternative browser. It is absolutely ridicoulus what someone needs to put up with.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
Ok, show me once instance of spyware installing VNC. If you can't do it, then it shouldn't be listed.
How about showing me where MS Antispyware lists Remote Desktop as a potentially dangerous application. Can't do it? That's what I thought.
Don't be a dumbass.
The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
The real issue is "where does Microsoft want to go tomorrow"? Today they downgrade the recommendation on what to do with Claria. Microsoft revolves around the long-term strategy and to believe that this is one of the few times when one of their decisions isn't a stepping stone towards something else is to take the bet on the horse with the longest odds on the field.
If the g'vt kept the data on you that google does you'd better believe you'd be calling it "doing evil"
If there is such a problem with lawsuits over labels, simply change the labelling system. INstead of calling it "adware" or "spyware", use description off the vendor's site. For example, Gator says
The GAIN Network has a unique permission-based relationship with tens of millions of users. The GAIN Network enables consumers to download and use some of the Web's most popular software applications -- for free. In return, consumers agree to receive targeted promotions/ads from GAIN Network advertisers
Instead of ad-ware removal tool, call it permissions-based Universal Uninstaller of Various Advertisment Delivery Applications.
Personally I think we should be honest about the whole thing and refer to spyware removal tools as shitscoopers from now on.
If they actually went so far as to embed ads into the desktop, that would cement my defection to Linux.
"Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber" -- Plato
How about
"If you want to be taken seriously, shouldn't you give interviews to people you don't have the ability to fire?"
=======
Science -- Sealed, Delivered.
"It's much better than spybot or ad-aware, in fact"
Not from what I've read from numerous people who have tried it, here and on Usenet.
It finds some stuff the others miss, it protects against some stuff the others miss - but so do they in relation to it.
Adding the MS product to your bag of tricks is reasonable, but dumping any other antispyware product would be a mistake, as you said.
But saying it's MUCH better than Ad-Aware or Spybot I think is incorrect.
And finally, the point of the article is: you can't trust it anymore. That simple.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
About the only law I imagine I could stomach would be along the lines of full disclosure. In other words, whether the software did something out of the users control and without his/her consent.
Unfortunately, you'd have to do some work around what is always allowed and/or implied. If you download a browser, are you implicitly allowing access to websites? What about sending info back to websites you didn't explicitly select? For instance when images are loaded from another site, with cookies and/or query data (doubleclick, anyone?)
Would that be the fault of the browser?
Such things are extremely hard to define for the general case.
Seriously, the law needs to stay out until a clearly defined problem has enough impact that legislation is appropriate.
Otherwise, we'd be hampered more than helped...
First I do think it's important to keep the definitions clear. What you describe is spyware - it tracks users without their permission, and steals information.
AdWare is very different IMHO - it displays ads in the program in lieu of you paying for it.
Now, I think adware can work as a business model - it works for most websites for instance, no reason it can't work for some software - like Opera for instance.
Spyware should be flat out illegial - anything that installs as part of another program, or like GAIN pops up windows to display ads is just wrong. It's one thing to have an ad that is clearly part of the program chrome, and you know what program it's associated with as well as presumebly why it's there and another to cause more pop-ups on the web.
Opera, Proxomitron-Grypen,GPG 0x0A1C6EE3