Slashdot Mirror
A Day in the Life of a Spyware Company
prostoalex writes "Business Week has a detailed expose of Direct Revenue. The article has some juicy details on the everyday workings of a spyware outlet, talks about the the business model and advertisers who funnel cash to Direct Revenue, and even mentions Direct Revenue's anti-spyware achievements (the company's installer blasted away competing spyware apps, so that the user's computer wouldn't be overwhelmed with redundant pop-ups)."
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/07/155 1237
It's the same article in a different place.
Additionally, it's in a different place, but it's the same article.
there is no need to sign your posts. this isn't usenet. your username is right there above your post. stop it.
"and even mentions Direct Revenue's anti-spyware achievements (the company's installer blasted away competing spyware apps, so that the user's computer wouldn't be overwhelmed with redundant pop-ups)."
The crack dealer on one side of the street achieved a victory against crime today when he killed the competing dealer on the other side.
I very much doubt that their reasons for blasting away competing apps were for the benefit of the user. Most likely, they don't want the user's computer to slow down enough for them to notice and do a spyware sweep.
by spamming this story multiple times
actually I am happy to see you, however that is in fact a banana in my pocket.
Latitude, longitude, altitude.
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
So if you run their program and their competitor's program at the same time, they will kill each other off? Who needs virus scanners now?
How to stop them in three easy steps:
find executives
kill them (or pay a crackhead to do it)
rejoice
Thus illustrating the old saying "for every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." When it becomes OK to kill anyone that does something you don't like, it also becomes equally possible that others will kill you when you do something they don't care for. But of course you're a good enough troll to know that already.
And for every truth, there's a way to simplify it to the point of idiocy. When someone's doing something that causes you a significant amount of hardship and is making money doing it, they aren't just "doing something you don't like".
That said, I think killing them would be a bit harsh (unless the spyware managed to lock up a computer doing something truly important, but taking a two-by-four to some non-vital parts of their body would be appropriate. That's about what most people would do to an adult they caught vandalizing their car.
How about we vote? Me: give him death via organ donation
Long ago I stopped reading email bounce messages. If my email bounces, oh well. It's just lost. I get hundreds of bounces each day for emails that spammers sent in my name.
My email does bounce though, all the time. It bounces because everybody and their dog invents a brutal spam filter, each one differently flawed.
Just today I failed to communicate with somebody. Gmail sends from *.google.com instead of gmail.com, which is enough to bounce and/or silently delete the mail.
Even after filtering, much of the email I get is spam.
Lately, I don't even bother reading email that claims to come from banks that I actually do business with. Figuring out the legitimacy multiple times per day is too time-consuming.
Email is my primary communication method. It has been ruined. I can no longer rely on messages to be delivered and read. This has been a grave loss for me. I'm just one of many. So yes, the spammer should die. Humanity loses too much from this sort of behavior.
Did it cause you a significant amount of hardship, comparable to what the average person would have if their computer were disabled for a few days or their car was vandalized? Did you have to hire someone to fix something that no longer worked, or take an hour to do it youself?
Try reading the post again, without skipping words, because you aren't arguing against something that I said.
What do the items on this list have in common?
- Cingular Wireless
- Vonage
- Kazaa
- JP Morgan Chase
- Delta
- Travelocity
- Priceline.com
All companies that will no longer have my business, ever. (not that Kazaa would anyways)
I just wish I had the complete list
Douglas Kee, then Direct Revenue's chief of quality assurance (QA)...
Isn't having a quality assurance branch for a spyware company kind of an oxymoron?
That's like having an "ethics department of sudan" or "NSA oversight committee".
Sigh...
The Secret of Life: Proteins fold up and bind things.
even the link is the same
Yes, here's some physical proof to save you all some time, but note the slight difference (you will see it because its the only bold text).
BusinessWeek: ( JULY 17, 2006)
Consumers have strong opinions about Direct Revenue's software. "If I ever meet anyone from your company, I will kill you," a person who identified himself as James Chang said in an e-mail to Direct Revenue last summer. "I will f------ kill you and your families." Such sentiments aren't unusual. "You people are EVIL personified," Kevin Horton wrote around the same time. "I would like the four hours of my life back I have wasted trying to get your stupid uninvited software off my now crippled system."
MSNBC: ( Updated: 5:51 p.m. CT July 7, 2006 )
Consumers have strong opinions about Direct Revenue's software. "If I ever meet anyone from your company, I will kill you," a person who identified himself as James Chang said in an e-mail to Direct Revenue last summer. "I will f------ kill you and your families." Such sentiments aren't unusual. "You people are EVIL personified," Kevin Horton wrote around the same time. "I would like the four hours of my life back I have wasted trying to get your stupid uninvited software off my now crippled system."
The text is exactly the same, only the date is different. Seems like this cover story that was either launched too early or it was an unintentional error. No big news here.
>death via organ donation
Impractical. Tissue matching is hard enough when the donor is human.
PMITA prison for 20 years should chill some of these guys out... Considering what a big impact this kind of behavior has on our economy, I'm surprised there isn't more action to stop it by our law enforcement officials.
I do believe Dante mentioned these people. The were suposed to have a place reserved on the lowest ring.
- Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
I think it would be significantly less effort for you to transition to a new email address. This time, don't give it out to anyone you don't trust. Get a throw away address for that and filter/forward it.
And for every truth, there's a way to simplify it to the point of idiocy.
/., or otherwise on the net is going to capture the subtle nuances, complex sets of laws and traditions, and the many an varied moral issues dealing with people who could perhaps be considered "mass vandals." So far they haven't put any lives in danger (typically one of the prerequisites for capital punishment, though it varies by state) - they merely cause inconvenience / reversable "damage" to a large number of improperly secured computers. I feel this is reasonably generalized in my previous statement, and stand by my assertion.
/.), it's better to deal with more general arguments that require less amounts of specific information. Without this generalization/simplificaiton, no discussion on Slashdot would be remotely possible.
No discussion on
Sometimes if you're not going to delve into significant depth (and we are not, this is
I do believe Dante mentioned these people. The were suposed to have a place reserved on the lowest ring.
We can dream, at least... or maybe if we are even luckier, they will be stuck in a crowded elevator for all of eternity, listening to "It's a small world after all."
What are they thinking when they go about ruining peoples computers. I feel bad for all the windows users that complain about their computers getting slower. Its probably this companies fault.
How about we vote? Me: give him death via organ donation.
It's fun to think about these guys being tortured to death for what they do to everyone, but seriously, what you suggest is a far worse punishment than we give to most people convicted of raping children or serial murder, despite being the only western nation that even has the death penalty. Sometimes there are better ways to solve a problem, and I cannot condone capital punishment for nonviolent crimes (even violent crimes are not considered bad enough for that in most of the western world).
just like they do in russia
t ml
http://mosnews.com/news/2005/07/25/spammerdead.sh
When Geiger counters are outlawed, only mutants will have Geiger counters
Spy vs. Spy!
Resolving the references in the title and content of this comment is an exercise left to the reader ...
To err is human. To forgive is good system design.
For persons concerned about spyware it should be pointed out that the important thing is not the spyware company,
It is the companies which employ them.
The article glosses over that with only slight mention. . .
As a victim of the Aurora trojan on a Windoze box I became intimately aware of Direct Revenue and the damage they have caused to many people. Until this article, however, I always assumed they were supported by pr0n sites and spammers.
Instead it turns out Vonage is their main customer!
It's bad enough that Vonage plasters their annoying ads all over the net, and plays their annoying jingle on every channel of TV. Obviously, though, that is not sufficient. They must also use spyware to hook customers and violate more US and International laws.
Vonage has a history of this type of illegal behavior (in chronological order):
1. Its Chairman, Jeffrey Citron, was charged by the SEC with Securities violations due to illegal trades, while he was Chairman of Datek Securities, before starting Vonage.
2. Vonage has consistently engaged in anticompetitvive behaviour against its competitors by blocking SIP calls, and locking down their devices to prevent customers from using the devices with competitors.
3. Vonage has consistently engaged in deceptive advertising when selling their equipment and services by not disclosing that the equipment is not really owned by the consumer (it can't be unlocked to work with other providers).
4. Vonage has consistently engaged in deceptive marketing by convincing customers to LNP port their existing phone number to Vonage when the LNP port could not be done. Even though Vonage could not port the number due to lack of a CLEC in their area code, Vonage reps would tell the customer it could be done "soon".
5. Vonage deceptively operates a web site at Vonage-Forum.com. Only recently has a notice gone up that the site is not operated by Vonage. The site, however, uses the trademarked Vonage name and logo, and has Vonage ads on it.
6. The whole Vonage IPO stock fiasco: not surprising if you noticed item #1.
If Vonage doesn't qualify for U.S. Federal Prosecution on at least ONE of these items something is clearly wrong with our legal system that supposedly was fixed after Enron/Worldcom.
An article about internet advertising that makes me click through 5 pages for just one article. Its a shame I didn't click past the first page.
That comment almost made you spit your latte out over your PowerBook at Starbucks, didn't it?
Is it just me or is something broken around here? This story has been up for hours, and still only 2 comments, none of which are above the default viewing threshold? huh?
They were only copying what Xerox, Apple and others had already done.
If computers could only be used by people who knew how to administer the, then there would be far fewer computers in use. Most people do not want to learn about computers, they are not interested. Ease of use is necessary.
It is also perfectly possible to have an OS that is easy to administer and reasonably secure. I have friends who no absolutely nothing about computers who have no problems with Macs. My father finds Ubuntu easier than Windows (although I initially installed it for him and occasionally give him some help).
It is not ease of use that is the problem. It is bad design, poor implementation and simply not caring about security.
I have seen first hand that Norton and McAfee don't work on this. Simply run Ad-aware and ewido, both free, and both get the job done. But people seem to spend millions each year on crappy programs that perpetuate spy-ware and viruses. Stupid humans. I wonder if one can sue a company such as Revenue Direct for, well, I don't know, messing up someones computer? If only sleep could be caught.
Jesus, what a load of crap. I run a stable XP box with a combination of a virus scanner and a hardware firewall, and I have no problem with spyware or viruses (you know, the actual plural of virus), and the only time it goes down is when I (rarely) shut it down. The one time I had a problem with spyware that a good dose of Adaware couldn't fix, I just went back to the last system restore point. I don't need to know how Windows "really" works to be able to use it. It's a tool. Do you know how your car really works? Your dishwasher? Your microwave? Could you build one from scratch? You don't need to, as long as you don't crash your car or put your foot through your microwave. Same goes with Windows - don't download stupid crap, and you'll be fine. "Insightful", indeed...
It amounts to stalking, spying, possibly breaking and entering, and stealing, and the porn pop-ups break federal laws.
When you go to many websites, such as Amazon or Adam & Eve, you can expect as much privacy as in a local mall. But if someone were to follow you around from store to store, at that point it would be stalking.
Now when that "someone" (spyware company) breaks into your property (your computer) to install something without your consent (spyware programs), it's beyond just your typical stalking and into spying. Add to the charge that this "person" didn't have permission to enter your property in any way and you can add breaking and entering to this.
To run this program that you didn't consent to having uses power you are paying for. If it causes your system to crash, if you are someone who can't fix it, you've got to pay someone to repair it for you. Money out of your pocket. Theft. At the least of your own time to fix it.
When you go to a porn site, you usually have to click something saying you are at least 18 or of legal age to view sexually explicit material, and that you consent to doing so. If you were to sit a minor in front of the computer, or were to allow a minor to be nearby while viewing said material, you've commited an offense for which you could be required to register as a sex offender. But yet porn pop-ups happen on sites that aren't sexual in nature, sites that kids sometimes visit. The spyware company is giving no notice whatsoever that sexual material is about to pop up, no chance to consent or for children to be removed from the room first. Would this not be a violation of federal laws by the spyware companies by exposing minors to sexual material?
So I repeat, why is spyware not illegal?
It's a girl!
"think it would be significantly less effort for you to transition to a new email address. This time, don't give it out to anyone you don't trust. Get a throw away address for that and filter/forward it."
Tried that - doesn't work. Why?
Well, a lot of the people I email use Windows (I know, I know) and they are frequently compromised. The attacker gets their email list and Bingo!
Actually it does work, for a while. But then the rot starts and slowly, but surely the spam mounts up again.
As long as they don't have Linux support, I'm not interested!
It's one of those things that's hard to define. You know it when you see it, but providing a hard and fast definition, which is what you need for a law, is very difficult. Every one I can think up either is too lax, and so it would not be useful because spyware companies would just find ways to modify their software to be legal, or is too strict, and bans useful software. For example you might be inclined to define it as software that downloads things to your computer in the background without you specificly initating it. Sounds good, until you realise this bans things like Firefox's auto updater. Ok so you add a provision saying "but it's ok if it informs you." So now the spyware comes with a big legalese contract that "informs" you (much of it already does).
Unfortunately, I don't think that over all we can have a law that makes spyware illegal, but doesn't ban useful software.
But that isn't the point. The point is that MS products are closed-source. You couldn't know how your 'trusty' windoze data warehouse (after all, that's the point of the 'tool') worked even if you understood how computers worked, which you probably don't if you claim to have a "stable" XP system you've had to restore just once. Windows users have been electroshocked into thinking that "stable" means "don't have to restore or reinstall this week". You are the exact prototype of the person MS invented Windoze to serve: oops, bandwidth gone ... oops, disk space gone ... oops, data gone ... oops, data compromised ... oops, identity stolen. Oh well, I can always go back to the last system restore point and all's fine again. NOT.
I will not run windoze. Malware/spyware/viruses (gee, thanks ... as if I didn't know that) and plain old crappy engineering are the reasons. I don't waste time or risk data re-installing a faulty OS. I haven't ever had a problem with spyware, and I've never had to run a virus scanner. But I've listened to seemingly millions of people tell me all about it. I've seen enough windoze boxes stopped dead cold to keep me away from it.
Had you read the article, you would have read that you don't have to download stupid crap any more. That was 1996 state of the windoze invasion art. It's 2006. Your windoze box can be infected by simply visiting any one of a number of web sites. They're inventing new ways of infecting your machine faster than the virus scanners can be updated. Are you sure you're not infected? I wouldn't be too sure, especially if you don't know how your machine works. Would you understand infection if it stared you in the face? Do you accept cookies? Do you run DirectX? Do you ever open e-mail attachments? It's not as simple as avoiding dumb downloads any more.
A virus scanner shouldn't be necessary. But for survival with Windoze, you must have one; and even then you're not safe. By definition, the malware writers are one step ahead of your scanner. This is the end result of running the worst-designed OS available today combined with greed. The greed starts with MS and ends all the way at the advertisers. Your windoze box is just the tool to expose you to their messages and get to your wallet.
Founding member: He-Man Windoze Hater Club
On the upside there would be much less spam. On the downside, there, ah, uhm, well, I am sure there is a downside somewhere.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Let us imagine a scenario: A single spam mail is a minor inconvenience. Like a pin stuck in your body in a random place.
Not such a big problem, isn't it? Not even a reason for lawsuit.
But if someone pinned 10,000 such pins in your body, that would be considered a murder with extreme cruelty.
Except if the pins are distributed over 10.000 people. For each of them it will be a minor inconvenience.
But now multiply the number of people who pin these pins in. Say, you get 200. This hurts like hell. You can barely move. But each of these who put them in, put only one, a minor harmless case... So the moment half the population of Earth gets killed by 10000 pins each, there is still no guilty. Each of them was only putting one harmless pin into body of their victims.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Well, if they were doing it in response to you installing spyware on 100 million computers, I seriously doubt that any jury in North America (that hasn't been living in a cave for the last decade) will convict you for beating them with a 2x4. Heck, if the guy was found with a knife sticking out his back, a dozen bullet wounds with entry from the back, etc, it would quickly be ruled as a suicide.
So, I was going to ignore your personal attacks and reply to this properly, but then I saw your sig: "Founding member: He-Man Windoze Hater Club" and realised I might as well go bash my head against a brick wall for a bit instead. I'm not a zealot, I run Linux as well, I know when to use the right tool for the job. I'll leave you to your Hater Club.
Jesus Christ, all you have to do is get a new email address. Better yet, 3 of them. One is your spam-me address, which you don't even read but simply delete all the messages once a month; one is a "business" address in case you do online shopping or sign up for discussion boards, etc; the last is your personal address which you only give out to actual human beings. It's not the end of the freaking world.
Virus scanner: free, hardware firewall: wireless router, and as I said, Adaware and system restore are rarely needed (with the system restore being a one off). My Win2k box has been running for 4 years, and that is a crappy Dell machine. All you have to do is follow good pratice and be sure what you are downloading/accepting etc. Oh and don't use IE, because I agree, it is a piece of crap.
How about an ironic punishment by having to fix thousands of spyware infected computers - arrest these fuckers, put them in a room and feed them spyware infected computers and order them to fix them. A machine proved not to be squeaky clean by the owner on return earns, oh, 20 lashes and a night with Hairy Bob. Hairy bob likes company.
When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
"My opinions are my own, and I've got *lots* of them!"
What if the car that is being vandalised is making a critical delivery for my business or taking a gravly ill relative to the hospital? then can I kill the fucker?
Doesn't work with Firefox 1.5.0.4 either. Of course, this is MSNBC.com....
Flamebait. But, hey, gotta give you credit, that is the LONGEST piece of flamebait I have ever seen. Somebody should give you a medal. A flaming one.
I was browsing 4chan the other day, in their Random section, looking for interesting (ha) pictures to add to my new website that's been in the works for way too long, and bam -- I get tons of popups, a bunch of icons appear on my desktop, and I've got three freakin' toolbars (unhideable toolbars, mind you) in all of my Explorer windows. What's more -- I was using Firefox. I have IE's settings set to the highest possible security, so that even in the worst case that IE lauched for any reason, I won't get screwed. But wow, I certainly did not expect Firefox to be vulnerable to spyware. (I have since reformatted -- I tried everything to get rid of the toolbars and extra crap. I eventually got rid of most of it, but the thing made it so I couldn't right-click anything except for icons in Explorer. Arrrr. Why didn't I view 4chan on my Slackware box? -- More digression: the spyware managed to install some crappy program, which was actually listed in Add/Remove Programs, but the program was using over 10 MB. How can spyware install so quickly if it's so large?)
I see a lot of computers with spyware. Most, if not all, of the computers that I fix have been completely demolished by malware, spyware, adware, and just general crap. A lot of times, it's from user ignorance (the kind of people that don't even skim EULAs). However, many times, it's from them visiting a website that looks just fine, and the website using some kind of hole in IE to screw over the viewer.
So I must ask, how is exploiting security holes a legal business method? It's obvious that most spyware-creating companies use this tactic, since it's obvious that no one in their right minds would accept spyware voluntarily. Since many times it is known (through thorough searches and whatnot) who created the spyware with which one's machine is infected, I find it hard to believe that no serious legal action has been taken up with these companies.
I am truly displeased to see even Firefox becoming a serious target for these jackasses. If Opera felt better (I have this thing about the "feel" of some programs that I can't explain) I might think about almost downloading it.
If you have to remind us that it should be funny, then it wasn't funny.
-1
I've been thinking about this alot lately, and why *not* make Site Operator's or ISP's liable for the client's activities?
I mean, If an advertiser or client becomes a liability, wouldn't spyware go away on it's own without having to be illegal?
I'm sure this angle has been covered before.. but it's early and I'm still on my first cup of caffiene.
Companies have the right to advertise, but (imho)they don't have the right to install *anything* on your PC. (For that matter, what is acceptable advertising on the net?)
Don't you mean ActiveX instead of DirectX? I think something used for game programming and the like isn't going to help much with getting spyware from web browsing. ActiveX, however, would.
Yeah, but Moz' based browsers are extensible!
$10 says the site renders fine, minus some dodgy JavaScript or weird CSS hacks.
Direct Revenue has struggled to fend off a lawsuit filed in April by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer. The state court action alleges that Direct Revenue crossed a legal line by installing advertising programs in millions of computers without users' consent. Shining a light on the shadowy spyware trade, the suit asserts that the company violated New York civil laws against false advertising, computer tampering, and trespassing.
Why aren't these guys in jail? Computer tampering is a federal felony criminal offense. If one of the infected computers ends up being a government machine, under the USA Patriot Act, this could be a capital crime. Why is the NY AG dicking around with some boneheaded civil lawsuit? They should march into the offices with federal marshalls and put these guys in chains.
My favorite page-1 quote from that article would have to be Some advertisers say their messages have appeared in pop-ups without their permission.
How STUPID do they think we are? As an advertiser, you don't accidentally advertise for someone that's not paying you. When's the last time you saw a commercial on TV that the retailer denied they paid for? The spammers are charginng a lot for their service, and there is no shortage of customers, so I'm quite certain they are only spamming for paying customers.
More than likely these are cases where someone in marketing got the brilliant idea to advertise with spyware and started it without really letting their uppers know what the fallout was going to be. Then six months later when the CEO's in-box is piled high with complaints they deny they had anything to do with it.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
FTFA: by accepting its ads, consumers get popular software applications free of charge that otherwise can cost up to $30 apiece.
Wow, I can save $30 by making my $500 PC unusable.
--- http://davidnehme.blogspot.com
Sounds good; the only problem is what then happens if one of those addresses is 'harvested' between sender and receiver.? The more people using that one name to contact you, the more people you have to update with that one name.
I bought my own domain name ($15/year from www.directnic.com) and all I do is use the mail redirector - I have a virtually infinite number of email names and can block any at-will. I use some for business reasons, relatives and friends use their name (at) my domain, and several companies use their name at my domain. The redirector also lets me have email lists for multiple recipients.
Everything comes to me and when I see I'm getting investment crap from Aunt Betty then I only have the one name to change (add a 1/2/3/etc to her name and put the old one on my banned list). If a company sells the name they use to someone I'll update them once and if THAT one gets sold too then the company gets banned in its entirety.
Seven years now and I have a bit more than two dozen names on the list; most harvested, five to ten names sold/banned, and I don't get nearly the spam everyone else is bitching about.
"It's time to take life by the cans." ~ Bender ("Bendin' in the Wind", ep. 3-13)
who invented the market for computer operating systems for people too stupid to run and administer a computer.
I thought that was the Mac. Or atleast that's what I have been told here.
...how can I prevent my ads from being served by spyware? How about a clause in my contract with the advertising company that says "Ads served by provider and any subcontractor will not be served by pop-up, and will only be served as the result of a user willfully navigating to a web page which serves ads, and may not be served as the result of any additional software installed on the user's computer. The definition of 'pop-up', 'willfully navigating' and 'installed' remains at the discretion of the customer, and we reserve the right to terminate this contract if the advertising agency is unable to assure us that it meets these criteria."
For some small business this wouldn't work too well, but if big companies started doing it, and it became standard operating procedure for corporations, it would help a lot. Suddenly, other advertisers will just stop dealing with these guys.
Nailing down the definitions is a bit tricky, and IIRC there was a case where some company sued over being designated as malware, so this approach isn't a cure-all. Going after the actual technical definition of something is a bit more effort, but it quashes the arguments of companies that might complain they are being singled out prejudicially.
Also, pornographers and other shady businesses will always do stuff like this, but at least we'll maintain the association of sleaziness with pop-ups and spyware, which is where it belongs.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
they're pulling in enough money that the execs will just get replaced.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The only problem with this is--the companies don't care how their ads are served. They don't care if spyware or adware is installed--it gets their ads there, in the consumer's face, and they don't have to pay much. Cheap ads, and none of the parties involved (except the consumer, whose opinion doesn't matter (yet)) care how the ads are shown, as long as they bring business and they don't have to pay much.
Unlike most politicians, lawyers, and idiots in clerical robes, I will give you the following answer: Yes, you may kill the fucker. I, for one, will applaud you, though I cannot guarantee that agents of the current illegitimate government will not try to arrest you.
Good idea, and I actually did the same thing myself. Well, actually, I set up a website and used their 999 available email addys to do something similar. The only problem I've noticed is that AOL likes to block emails from my domain, so I have to use my real isp email to talk to those folks who are stupid enough to still use AOL.
I feel bad for all the windows users that complain about their computers getting slower. Its probably this companies fault.
Nono, didn't you see that part about removing competitors adware? This is the GOOD spyware company.
There would be no one to recieve real e-mails from?
Centralization breaks the internet.
NetBSD...because installing UNIX was less humiliating than having to flash plastic at smug fucks in the Apple Store.
That has happened with Microsoft's so-called "Windows Genuine Advantage"
Not hardly. A computer running a Microsoft OS by definition can't be doing anything important.
It is also perfectly possible to have an OS that is easy to administer and reasonably secure. I have friends who no absolutely nothing about computers who have no problems with Macs
X _hacked_under_30_minutes/0,2000061744,39241748,00. htm
The problem is that there are people that have trouble using an operating system that is "easy to administer". Unless the OS administers itself, we will always have a problem with people and securty. It is the weakest link in the chain.
I don't think any OS is secure (windows,OSX, or linux). Take a look at this recent article about macs (The article is from March of this year):
http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/soa/Mac_OS_
There are also similar claims with various distros of linux and windows.
So, please explain how have far fewer computers would be a bad thing. Especially if the remaining ones would be run by people who actually give a shit?
for starters, the Internet would probably still be an experiment in a University. The fact that we have so many people using it may be shitty because of spam, but it has also brought it to new levels of information, which is a great thing.
Personal email at one point was getting so bad that I was concidering telling people to send me a fax instead of an email.
I do have a fax machine so if it would come to that crunch, I have it in preparedness. It has an added bonus that people who send junk faxes can be easily prosecuted.
No sig. Move along - nothing to see here.
As long as "raping children" doesn't mean "a 17-year-old wanted it", they can die too. I'd require strong evidence of either sadistic behavior or a pre-pubescent victim.
My first thought is always along the lines of "tortured to death". It feels good to have them suffer, and what better way to deter them? Burn them at the stake, with just enough fuel to kill them within a couple days.
My second thought is that we should be cheap and efficient about this. Toss them into a container where they rot to produce methane fuel, then grind the remains for fertilizer. That is an excellent way to dispose of bodies, but...
The organs are valuable because we have shortages. These people need to repay their debt to society. Hey! There is a perfect solution. For the diseased ones, well, medical students need something to practice on. How else are you going to train a surgeon? Some good should come out of this.
Every time there's a story about Windows insecurity, there are several posts like this.
"Well, I don't have any problems, because I have programs X, Y, & Z running, so you must be an idiot."
If somebody sold me a car, and the only way I could get it to work without it busting into flames and immolating me immediately was to install several aftermarket parts, in addition to rebuilding the engine, I'd be pretty pissed off.
Even with SP2, Microsoft is selling a broken product, and in today's day and age (what with the billions of exploits available) they, not the average user, are accountable.
The Secret of Life: Proteins fold up and bind things.
The economy has been damaged.
Now sure, even the Great Depression was reversable in some sense, but it really wasn't. History was changed. A whole alternate set of people were born, different people got married, different people died...
>But since Linux is free, I don't really understand why would anybody insist
.exe email attatchments, though it's not a bad idea to have one anyway - of which there are many completely free ones (admittedly beer rather than speech). I've certainly never got either a virus or spyware, and only one BSOD with XP (which was my own fault anyway, and hardware related). Your "90% of machines running Windows I've seen" are as they are because the users do not even know enough (do not even want to need to know enough) to follow those basic steps. So how on Earth would they cope with Linux?
>Windows is any good when there's an alternative that actually works
I installed Ubuntu a week ago. I'm not going to uninstall it, but I've gone back to Windows as my day-to-day OS.
Why? I could use your car analogy: Ubuntu is like a powerful supercar engine, controlled by a few small, elegent pairs of switches. A great underneath, a pretty surface, but the latter simply not well matched up to the former.
Let me explain. Ubuntu works excellently if:
1) Everything works perfectly immediately, and
2) You have a perfectly normal setup and are unlikely to want anything else.
Otherwise you have to abandon the pretty bank of switches and reach underneath to control the engine directly.
Now, I have a certain interest in computers; obviously, or I wouldn't be on Slashdot. But there's a certain point when I want everything to Just Work. Linux doen't let you do that. Just getting it to read my other two hard drives required a couple of hours of forum searches, arcane terminal commands, editing configuration files, etc, etc. Ditto for getting sound to work. Ditto for almost everything that I'd gotten used to Just Working. Even deleting a simple redundant empty folder that I'd just created took nearly an hour, since despite me just creating it it seemingly required root permissions to edit. Using sudo in terminal didn't work since the folder name had a space in it (I hadn't learn't at that point that it's safer with Linux to stick with one word, lower case) and it kept interpreting what followed the space as a command. Using Nautilus didn't work since, despite being a file manager for a permissions based operating system, there is NO WAY to invoke administrator permissions for an operation from within it. The kind souls of the support forums seemed astonished that I'd not thought of using gksudo. Come on, I'd already been using Linux for nearly four hours, surely I'd learnt most of the command line functions by now?
And the thing is, they're right. By the end of my first day, I already had a tenuous grasp of command line syntax, a working knowledge of chmod parameters, and the work "sudo" permanently etched into my brain.
Another example. For configuring your monitor, Ubuntu provides a little dialogue box that allows you to select screen resolution and refresh rate. Fine. But I have a two screens, and the little dialogue box couldn't cope; it wouldn't allow me to select anything other than 1280*1024 at 60Hz. As for actually getting a proper dual-screen setup, certainly it's possible, but not with the little bank of switches. And I just couldn't bring myself to face another day of the Ubuntu support forums, editing configuration files in a way that may or may not break the fragile equilibrium that had established itself and render the system unbootable, and The Bash Prompt.
Yes, I want an operating system that's configurable. But I also want one that could pass the Grandma test, that is capable of Just Working when I get tired of configuration files. And Linux, at the moment, doesn't qualify.
It's actually not that hard to keep Windows clean; don't use IE, keep it updated, don't disable the inbuilt firewall -- that's pretty much it. You don't even really need an antivirus unless you commonly open
I had really wanted to like Linux. I love the Ubuntu philosophy, and Windows, I admit, is
What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
People would still learn to spook somehow, just like they do with IP addresses. And anyway, think of the poor trees!
I mean, come on... I had never heard of 4chan, but after just bringing it up then in my browser and just looking at the links on the front page (girls sucking horses, Japanese Lesbians etc.) then I'd say you've pretty much only got yourself to blame.
Sorry, but true.
Yes, spyware is damn evil, and if they would just go away, the web might be a nicer place. BUT you browsing a porn site (and not a reputable one either... such as Playboy or the like) are just asking for trouble.
And as you were saying you were looking for images for your site, insomuch as 'taking without permission', I have no sympathy.
You play in filthy places you're going to get dirty.
* With your ridiculous 'windoze' spelling.
* With your incomplete understanding of the operating system you're bashing 'DirectX vs ActiveX'
* With your lack of any kind of empathy for people who may wish to, oh, I dunno, play games on their PC as well as just surf the web and read emails.
* I just DON'T get viruses, malware, spyware or ANYTHING like that. Yes I do have a virus checker running, but it's a free one (AVG) and I don't even notice it doing it's job... and it hasn't found anything for years now, so it's hardly required. So your ridiculous "I'm not prepared to spend time on all that stuff I don't want to", while at the same time you DO have to spend time working out how to install programs etc. in the Linux world... I'm quite happy with double clicking on 'setup' thanks.
"By definition, the malware writers are one step ahead of your scanner."
Or... I don't get ANY popups, slowdowns, unwelcome websites or ANYTHING.
So, really by definition... you're talking out of your butt.
Oh, man! Bing, I wish I had mod points!
I'm stealing that for the sig file.
Well done!
Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
The thing that sucks is Revenue Direct could sue McAfee or other antivirus companies. Think back to the Sony rootkit - where f-secure were negotiating with Sony after they had already produced a fix but would have run the risk of being sued out of business by Sony if they released it without clearing it with Sony. These spyware companies are not big but could still cost an antivirus company a fortune in legal fees. Spybot and others survive by not being commercial products - once a lot of people start making their living out of something they become scared of what others can do to shut the whole place down. We've allready seen spammers take legal action against those who report them in Australia, so imagine what could be done with some of the weird US laws over spyware - paticularly the IP angle and investigating the spyware in order the block it. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that someone could go to jail for reverse engineering spyware under the DMCA or similar bit of stupidity.
Assuming it was proved, I think they would still convict you. It's not about justice it's about upholding the law. The judge may well decide it was provocation and not impose a heavy sentence but to not convict in the face of evidence is slightly more serious. You're describing mob rule.
they are in the business of making money, not of causing problems for the user (that, to them, is merely an unfortunate side effect) - likely some people at that job slept easier knowing at least their software did one useful thing.
You are way too kind to this scum. Their rationalization was that there was money to be made but not for long and that only those who struck hardest would make it. The dirt bag interviewed admitted this by quoting Douglas, "Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them." The business model only worked as long as there were only a few dirt bags trying to impose the maximum tolerable burden. They knew that everyone who could care less would jump into it and soon the burden would be intolerable to anyone.
The only thing that made them feel better was the money they were making as they burnt down your computer. Hopefully, most of that money will be taken away.
The same thoughts can be applied to WGA.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
The judge has absolutely no say as to guilt or innocence in a jury trial, and you can be damn sure you're going to exercise that right in such a case. He can tell the jury what the law says, but the jury is free to ignore the law, as a matter of law.
It happens all the time. People acquit because the case doesn't pass the "smell test." Remember, the law is whatever a jury says it is. They are the ultimate arbiters, and when too many acquitals go against existing statutes, the statutes get rewritten. A good example today are states with laws against gay sex - a lot of states no longer have such laws, and the few that still do, don't dare even try to enforce them. Another example - abortions.
So yes, if you want to call a jury "mob rule", it fits.
I have mod points, but I couldn't decide if this was a troll, funny, or just plain insightful
Meh
I bought a car, and never had any problems with it. I've only had to replace the fuel pump, the water pump, and the intake manifold gaskets. Nope, never had any problems at all, just like your Windows system.
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
These spyware programs must talk to their host, so why hasn't someone reverse engineered the protocol, and written a program to flood them with crap. Make it look like someone clicked on their ad's a million times. Report back as a billion infected machines. If their statistics always come up as crap, their "customers" might get pissed off enough to quit paying them. It might also help to mask information being stolen from real people.
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
Cripple IE (what I did)
:P
:P So now rouge IPs have to have your IP address and some security hole in Windows to get in...
Turn off ActiveX, paste operations via script, IFRAME support
Use a 'dumb' browser to browse 'media rich' sites like Slashdot
Good, but 'dumb' browsers
Lynx - Text mode only
Off By One - No javascript/activex support (no driveby downloads!)
I use this to browse Slashdot. Slashdot looks like crap now in IE5 which came with Windows 2000...
This will help keep spyware out of your PC or you can use a Mac like all the Apple snobs say to do...
PS: Turn off the Messenger service so you won't get 'IPspam' that way.
PS: Use a good hosts file to block the adware/spyware IPs such as
http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm