MozillaZine

Adaware and Firefox

Discussion of general topics about Mozilla Firefox
starframer

User avatar
 
Posts: 18
Joined: July 15th, 2004, 10:41 am
Location: Massachusetts

Post Posted June 5th, 2005, 8:47 am

Does Adaware work with Firefox?

Thanx in advance

DinGo
 
Posts: 81
Joined: June 18th, 2004, 12:29 pm
Location: Stockport UK

Post Posted June 5th, 2005, 9:44 am

It doesn't detect any tracking cookies picked up while using Firefox. Spybot is the better programme to use for Firefox peeps.

RandomUser
 
Posts: 727
Joined: July 7th, 2004, 10:52 am

Post Posted June 5th, 2005, 3:56 pm

I would suggest ditching Lavasoft Ad-aware, or at the very least supplementing it with other programs. I say this as a user of Ad-aware for several years.

Lavasoft really screwed their users these past few months, first with cooperating with spyware makers to allow them to bypass detection, and then later summarily cutting off the moderaters and users of their forums when they started getting complaints, shutting down the technical support forum without any advance notice or thanks to the moderators for years of dedicated volunteer service. Lavasoft recently got themselves delisted from ASAP (Alliance of Security Analysis Professionals) for their recent shenanigans.

DarkOne123
 
Posts: 383
Joined: December 28th, 2004, 10:17 pm

Post Posted June 5th, 2005, 4:03 pm

When did Lavasoft do this? I know i heard a few spyware groups tried to sue a few antispyware programs but thats it

RandomUser
 
Posts: 727
Joined: July 7th, 2004, 10:52 am

Post Posted June 5th, 2005, 4:30 pm

Lavasoft quietly drops WhenU spyware from their detection list in early Feb, probably after threatened legal action from WhenU. They remove WhenU detection from their new definition files without notifying any users or even noting the change in their changelogs and definitions file descriptions: http://netrn.net/spywareblog/archives/2 ... -kool-aid/

A while later, mid-Feb, after a firestorm of complaints from their users. They compromise and put a fix available on their website that is separate from Ad-aware, meaning you need to download and run a separate one-shot program to remove WhenU. They still refuse to put WhenU detection back into Ad-Aware. http://www.spywareinfo.com/articles/spy ... ropped.php

After getting continuously berated by their users, Lavasoft shuts down their technical support forums, ostensibly over "technical difficulties, we'll be right back." They don't even have the guts to admit why they're shutting down the forums, giving a false explanation. But that "temporary technical difficulty" with the forums stretch into weeks and months, still no sign of it coming back up. The volunteer moderators and volunteer helpers on the official Lavasoft tech support forum (just like this firefox forum community) were never advised of the shutdown or given any communication or explanation then or since.

Finally, ASAP decides to delist Lavasoft: http://forums.maddoktor2.com/index.php?showtopic=3841 You can even find many of the former Lavasoft moderators and forum helpers scathingly condemn Lavasoft in that thread.

Basically, the Lavasoft screwup began in Feb with the WhenU fiasco, when they allowed a spyware vendor to influence their decision making. But many long time loyal users like me were willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and wait and see. But this final business with the forums and the delisting from ASAP have pretty much turned me off Lavasoft.

IronFelix
 
Posts: 538
Joined: November 24th, 2004, 10:36 pm

Post Posted June 5th, 2005, 4:37 pm

This is a damn shame...Lavasoft was a reliable and honored vendor for alot of years. Apparently somebody got to them and they didn't have the courage of their convictions. The message this sends to sypware purveyors is if you threaten antispyware vendors with legal action they will fold like a cheap card table.

DarkOne123
 
Posts: 383
Joined: December 28th, 2004, 10:17 pm

Post Posted June 5th, 2005, 5:15 pm

Now I know what company that it, that is the company that said they had made there program legit and somehow got acceptedinto a program where the group says your program is not spyware. SpySweeper was pissed about this they were also part of the group and they said something about nothing has changed etc etc and then they left it.

IronFelix
 
Posts: 538
Joined: November 24th, 2004, 10:36 pm

Post Posted June 5th, 2005, 5:38 pm

Surely there is a common definition of spyware/ adware. To me it is any program or application that sends any data, individual or aggregate from my computer to their computers that is outside diagnostics or download process without my permission on an ad hoc basis. If they are using my CPU, however small, to advance their business interests without paying me, they are stealing.

How do you folks define adware/spyware?

Thumper's Evil Twin

User avatar
 
Posts: 6422
Joined: December 9th, 2003, 3:52 pm
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Post Posted June 5th, 2005, 6:26 pm

Uh-huh, but certain spyware companies maintain that they clearly present a EULA which is no less obvious that thet presented with legit apps. The real judgement factor is who that data is sold to, and in countries which don't have a sane data protection act (such as the US) this is extremely difficult to track in some legislative manner.

- Chris

scratch

User avatar
 
Posts: 4942
Joined: November 6th, 2002, 1:27 am
Location: Massachusetts

Post Posted June 5th, 2005, 7:29 pm

well, in the case that you're okay with the program sending out data, you'd notice what program it is when the spyware detector picks it up and deselect it from removal. i don't think that simply presenting an EULA makes you not spyware/adware.

IronFelix
 
Posts: 538
Joined: November 24th, 2004, 10:36 pm

Post Posted June 5th, 2005, 9:59 pm

Thumper,

You're pretty close to being a Scandanavian ( well geographically anyway- just hop across the North Sea) I hapened to be looking at a digital map of per capita computers by nation and region and then their per capita viri infection rate. The Scandos ( this case was Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Finland) have very high computer density but a comparitively low infection rate. Germany, The UK and France also had fairly a high density rate but a substantially higher viri infection rate. The US had the same phenomenon. Oddly Canada has a higher infection rate than the US as I recall. Their were a number of other statistical anomalies that I don't recall.

Now...What do the Scandos do as a group that reduces their vulnerability?

Basic Computer security education in secondary schools?

Public service announcements on the media?

Legislation?

I have no idea..

I wonder what the Firefox/ Linux rates are among the Scandos.

IronFelix
 
Posts: 538
Joined: November 24th, 2004, 10:36 pm

Post Posted June 5th, 2005, 10:08 pm

Thumper,

You'll love this. The US Government formed a task force to investigate computer privacy issues at the behest of the president. The goal was for the task force to make recommendations to the White House to enhance computer privacy for American citizens. The President;s first appointent to the task force was a Senior Vice President from Claria Corporation. A look at Claria 'sproduct line it is plain the president put the fox in the hen house.

http://www.claria.com/products/

AutomatedFlower
 
Posts: 4
Joined: May 12th, 2005, 1:19 pm

Post Posted June 6th, 2005, 1:51 am

IronFelix wrote:Thumper,

You'll love this. The US Government formed a task force to investigate computer privacy issues at the behest of the president. The goal was for the task force to make recommendations to the White House to enhance computer privacy for American citizens. The President;s first appointent to the task force was a Senior Vice President from Claria Corporation. A look at Claria 'sproduct line it is plain the president put the fox in the hen house.

http://www.claria.com/products/

Don't you think companies that are people's careers should be represented in a committee that will help decide the fate of spyware? Spyware is legal at the moment, when its stated in the license agreement. They say the data is anonymously sent back. Unless, by a judge's order, they are forced to give out their "anonymous" records...it'll take a lot of effort to track the IP where the data came from, and then go to the ip address' ISP and have them track it down....it's a lot of effort to track down a person through legal spyware.

This is a committe made up of industry professionals, its not a Senate committe that makes laws. This committee's purpose is to gather information from industry insiders and share a well rounded view of spyware/data privacy. That well rounded view then goes to lawmakers, who do more research into the subject before creating a bill. Then that bill gets scruntized and researched before it's voted on. And if it passes, then it becomes law. There's a lot of public review from the media in that entire process.

Be logical before cynical please.

IronFelix
 
Posts: 538
Joined: November 24th, 2004, 10:36 pm

Post Posted June 6th, 2005, 9:17 am

In his day and age being cynical IS being logical. Having removed dozens of persistent Claria spybots from my system I fail to see how Claria can add much to the policy dialogue regarding the spyware issue. Claria is there to steer any policy decisions in favor of its interests. Claria's interests are inimical to my interests as computer user.

Your argument that a well rounded view is necessary might have merit if, to counterbalance a ferocious spyware purveyor like Claria, an equally ferocious antispyware advocate was represented on the taskforce. They aren't. Even then, your argument, if extended, would suggest that on a policy board dealing with home security, the notion of fairness requires appointing a professional burglar to represent the business interests of the burglar community.

Frankly both you and I know that spyware/adware is unethical and should be illegal. The proof of the pudding is a form of mens rea. If spyware/ adware were so pure in motive and so august in purpose then why do they take such pains to conceal their bots? Why the deceptive measures? Easy. Because they know that their bots are inimical to the interests of the average computer user. One gander at the millions of computers crippled by spyware/adware around the globe is moot testimony to the problem.

Fair?...I don't have to be fair. It's my damn computer. I paid for it. I pay for the connectivity. I pay for the electrical power to make it happen. If spyware/adware companies wish to use my CPU then let them send a representative to negotiate a price for my cycles. A deceptive EULA is not a negotiation.

The very reason most folks gravitate to Firefox inititally is to dodge the relentless pounding that spyware/ adware purveyors inflict on them. They discover the other benefits secondarily.

Return to Firefox General


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests