Be afraid... be VERY afraid...

[va3css]

Just some very scary news from the computer world I wanted to pass on...

In January of this year, two different "popup ad" makers faught each other in court. Seems one found a way to "remove" the other's program while installing it's own. That caused the "other" to sue the "one" in court.

Earlier in February, two makers of anti-spyware programs removed a peice of spyware named "SaveNow," which both had labeled as spyware for a long time. This means that from now on, if you have "SaveNow" on your PC, these two anti-spyware programs will no longer find it - or ignore it.

Early last week, the makers of Isearch toolbar, (iDownload), issued "Cease and Desist" letters to many websites for defaming it's products. The letters threatened lawsuits if the orders were not followed.
www.theinquirer.net/?article=21415

Errr.... ya.

So, from the sounds of it, it's OK for companies to install programs on your machine without your knowledge or authorization, but if you have a program that tries to block that or call them on it, they threaten a lawsuit???















I have all the toolbars I want, and I'll be d**nED if some company feels they have the right to install theirs whether I want them to or not. The computer is MINE. I refuse to give control of it to some advertiser who wants to spy on my keystrokes or log the websites I visit. They didn't buy me this computer - they don't pay for my internet access - they don't even pay for the internet resources I use.

I can see the answer to this developing mess: firewalls that have a "Remote Install Blocker." Only some do now, but soon they all will. Why? Because, of course, NONE of us would willingly allow some no-name unidentified company or jerk to just waltz into our computer and take whatever they want. They have no right, despite what some judges may have said recently.

Let the wars begin.



Related links:

startpagina.nl sues Microsoft to get themselves removed as "spyware"

Spyware maker Claria helps mold anti-spyware laws in CA

Viewpoint Media Player is probably already on your machine - whether you know it or not

Gator Software claims it's not spyware

[va3css]

Two more links related to this story:

Spyware Redux article

Ben Edelman's spyware page

[KD8AQO]

Okay, here we go...

Let's take a look at the webster definition for, HACKING: a : to write computer programs for enjoyment b : to gain access to a computer illegally

Hmmm... to gain access to a computer illigally. ISN'T THAT WHAT THESE COMPANYS ARE DOING!?!?!?! I mean look at the facts. You don't even have to confirm that you want this crap on your computer anymore. It just shows up!

THESE COMPANYS ARE GAINING ACCESS TO OUR COMPUTER AND PUTTING FILES ON THEM TO REPORT PRIVATE INFORMATION BACK WITHOUT OUR CONSENT! Right??? I belive that is HACKING! Gaining access to a computer ilegally ----- or without the VICTIMS consent.

The question is, when are people going to stand up for there rights and put a stop to all this nonsense? The problem is people just let it happen. They don't look at the facts - Hacking is illegal. And thats exactly what these d**n companys are doing.

[va3css]

Hacking encompasses a lot of things, not the least of which is illegal access to computers or networks. Good point.

Now, I've heard the argument from some spammers that say, "If you're on the internet, you've effectively 'opened your door' to whatever comes in from there."

BULLHOCKEY!

Sometimes I walk to the store. That doesn't mean I've 'opened myself up' to being shot at by some gun-toting idiot walking on the same street.

[KD8AQO]

va3css said:

Hacking encompasses a lot of things, not the least of which is illegal access to computers or networks. Good point.

Now, I've heard the argument from some spammers that say, "If you're on the internet, you've effectively 'opened your door' to whatever comes in from there."

BULLHOCKEY!

Sometimes I walk to the store. That doesn't mean I've 'opened myself up' to being shot at by some gun-toting idiot walking on the same street.

Thats why someone needs to take it to court and say "Look i've been hacked by all of these companys". Show them what hacking is, and then compare it to what there doing.

[KC8UKM]

I agree totally. It IS hacking. Maybe it could fall under piracy as well. They are putting software on your computer that you did not purchase, after all.

KC8UKM

[va3css]

KC8UKM said:

Maybe it could fall under piracy as well. They are putting software on your computer that you did not purchase, after all.

KC8UKM

Well, not exactly. Since the software they're sticking on your machine is their own, and they've decided not to charge a fee for their garbage, it wouldn't be "piracy."

It's more like them feeding you a freeware program.
No piracy in that.

But even though it's free, we didn't ask for it in any way. So that's them hacking me, IMO.

[N8BMB]

it COULD VERY WELL be considered "piracy", if you look at it from the point that they are "pirating" your computer to send out info about your computer and internet habits!

[va3css]

Yes, but that doesn't fit the definition of "piracy."

Piracy is when you obtain a copy of software by a manner other than specified by it's copyright owners. ie, get a copy of Windows without paying for it.

These are programs that spammers created specifically to infiltrate your machine, and they didn't ask any $$$ from you to get them.

They also didn't ask your permission to put them on your machine <-- and that's the crux of the issue.

[KC8UKM]

There is a court case going on right now, regarding a city condemning properties with the express intent of taking them over to sell to a private investor. The reasoning the government is using is that it will generate more tax revenue. The people are fighting to keep their homes. If the government should win, it will prove that the courts are more interested in companies' rights to do business than they are with people's rights to a happy home. The telemarketer cases have proven time and again that the courts favor the telemarketers' right to do business over a homeowner's right to privacy. If the spammers were taken to court, I feel they would be able to win using the same arguments. After all, if the courts don't respect the home, why would they respect your computer?

KC8UKM