Spyware being downloaded
Sunday, August 31, 2003 by korkster | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
Im sure you are aware, but I am a bit dismayed that you have spyware being downloaded on many of your download pages. TargetNet is a legitimate spyware product and I think it would be more responsible if you asked if it could be downloaded rather than doing it by force.
For others:
Spybot Search and Destroy can innoculate your computer from downloading it to your computer.
For others:
Spybot Search and Destroy can innoculate your computer from downloading it to your computer.
 |
|
Page 2 of 3 | |
|
|---|
sig101
Reply #22 Monday, September 1, 2003 3:59 PM
Reply #22 Monday, September 1, 2003 3:59 PM
Ah, I'm slow. More posts have appeared. Oh well. Still... I sit by what I typed. 
Koasati
Reply #24 Monday, September 1, 2003 4:21 PM
Reply #24 Monday, September 1, 2003 4:21 PM
| Oh well. Still... I sit by what I typed. |
odd, ain't it........... I'm sitting by it too... 
SelfExiled
Reply #25 Monday, September 1, 2003 4:32 PM
Reply #25 Monday, September 1, 2003 4:32 PM
I'm sure the administrators appreciate your apology and your concern.
But Dude, you are blowing a Cookie out of proportion. Look dude, if a site wanted to promote itself on Wincustomize by the use of cookies, I would have no problem with it. Many firewalls will block cookies that you don't like. And just because a advertiser used a harmless tracking cookie doesn't mean they are bad either. Just because Spybot says its Spyware, doesn't mean its etched in stone. Meaning, that just because Spybot alerted you to a tracking cookie, it doesn't mean that your system is compromised. Spybot called some of my Soundblaster files spyware, and there are files on your computer that you can't normally delete that save all you internet history to track you. Some people don't even know about cookies, so now you know. Spyware is mainly something that harms your system by chewing up resources or retrieves personal information about you, like your telephone number, name, and stuff like that. Cookies do none of that. The most they do is track which sites you visit after leaving their site. What's all the whine about a cookie when they are easily blocked? Dude, its just a cookie. Sheesh. 70% of the sites you visit online will have advertisers that will want to send you a tracking cookie. How can they make money? Tracking cookies are harmless. Please, some people want to call it a flame, but take Internet 101 and understand the usage of the internet. All I'm trying to say is that you need to gain more knowledge about the internet and the program you are using and what it is doing(I.E. Spybot-Search & Destroy). It is basically helping to make you anomymous and trying to protect your identity. If you have some concern about something you are doing illegal, then don't blame a cookie. Just stay away from the Child Porn, don't make online terrorist threats, don't hack any government systems, and don't create viruses, and if the FBI comes to your house, you should be safe.(tidbits from Intro to Internet 101) I'm just having fun because this is so silly. But, I'm trying to help you too. If you can't take a little joking, oh well. I do have a paypal account open and I'll send you Internet 101 for $15.00 US. OMG Just kidding.
[Message Edited]
But Dude, you are blowing a Cookie out of proportion. Look dude, if a site wanted to promote itself on Wincustomize by the use of cookies, I would have no problem with it. Many firewalls will block cookies that you don't like. And just because a advertiser used a harmless tracking cookie doesn't mean they are bad either. Just because Spybot says its Spyware, doesn't mean its etched in stone. Meaning, that just because Spybot alerted you to a tracking cookie, it doesn't mean that your system is compromised. Spybot called some of my Soundblaster files spyware, and there are files on your computer that you can't normally delete that save all you internet history to track you. Some people don't even know about cookies, so now you know. Spyware is mainly something that harms your system by chewing up resources or retrieves personal information about you, like your telephone number, name, and stuff like that. Cookies do none of that. The most they do is track which sites you visit after leaving their site. What's all the whine about a cookie when they are easily blocked? Dude, its just a cookie. Sheesh. 70% of the sites you visit online will have advertisers that will want to send you a tracking cookie. How can they make money? Tracking cookies are harmless. Please, some people want to call it a flame, but take Internet 101 and understand the usage of the internet. All I'm trying to say is that you need to gain more knowledge about the internet and the program you are using and what it is doing(I.E. Spybot-Search & Destroy). It is basically helping to make you anomymous and trying to protect your identity. If you have some concern about something you are doing illegal, then don't blame a cookie. Just stay away from the Child Porn, don't make online terrorist threats, don't hack any government systems, and don't create viruses, and if the FBI comes to your house, you should be safe.(tidbits from Intro to Internet 101) I'm just having fun because this is so silly. But, I'm trying to help you too. If you can't take a little joking, oh well. I do have a paypal account open and I'll send you Internet 101 for $15.00 US. OMG Just kidding.
[Message Edited]
Jafo
Reply #26 Monday, September 1, 2003 4:39 PM
Reply #26 Monday, September 1, 2003 4:39 PM
ChasUGC.....relax....the 'blowing out of all proportion' is more on your shoulders than anyone's. What say everyone just moves on....
Fuzzy Logic
Reply #27 Monday, September 1, 2003 11:52 PM
Reply #27 Monday, September 1, 2003 11:52 PM
...and stop calling everyone 'dude' - makes you sound 20 years out of date
EventHorizon
Reply #28 Tuesday, September 2, 2003 12:36 AM
Reply #28 Tuesday, September 2, 2003 12:36 AM
| and stop calling everyone 'dude' - makes you sound 20 years out of date |
IPlural
Reply #29 Tuesday, September 2, 2003 7:47 AM@FR pointing out the dude factor 
But Dude is so dynamic, I mean there is dude, Duuuuuude, DUDE!, duDe and the one I love best, DUDE! Wheres my car?
Reply #29 Tuesday, September 2, 2003 7:47 AM
@FR pointing out the dude factor 
But Dude is so dynamic, I mean there is dude, Duuuuuude, DUDE!, duDe and the one I love best, DUDE! Wheres my car?
SelfExiled
Reply #30 Tuesday, September 2, 2003 12:26 PM
Reply #30 Tuesday, September 2, 2003 12:26 PM
I'm sorry to disappoint you Fuzzy Logic and EventHorizon but I won't be baited into anger. You'll have to get your entertainment from someone else like UzEE. 
neophil78
Reply #31 Tuesday, September 2, 2003 1:30 PM
Reply #31 Tuesday, September 2, 2003 1:30 PM
Spyware or not spyware, what about that point ??? https://www.wincustomize.com/msgboard.asp?BID=WC&id=182618#182618 
IPlural
Reply #32 Tuesday, September 2, 2003 1:39 PM
Reply #32 Tuesday, September 2, 2003 1:39 PM
neophil78, nope not Spyware in the least...
boggling
boggling
SelfExiled
Reply #33 Tuesday, September 2, 2003 11:36 PM
Reply #33 Tuesday, September 2, 2003 11:36 PM
Interesting subject that you proposed there, Neophil78. Can you tell me why PaintShop Pro would need to communicate? My old Version of Object Dock would crash if it didn't have full internet access. I stopped using it. This version has a weather dock that obviously needs it. But, I wonder??? Windows Update??? I wonder. Am I paranoid. I wonder?
neophil78
Reply #34 Wednesday, September 3, 2003 12:10 AM
Reply #34 Wednesday, September 3, 2003 12:10 AM
I've send an email to support@Stardock and waiting for an answer and explanation ...
As i said i remember in the very early time i used WB (think at the begining of it ) that it was asked on first install if i accept or not to let WB send to Stardock what skin i'm using. But since this time i've changed my PC and install newer versions of WB and i never saw that message again ...
As i said i remember in the very early time i used WB (think at the begining of it
) that it was asked on first install if i accept or not to let WB send to Stardock what skin i'm using. But since this time i've changed my PC and install newer versions of WB and i never saw that message again ...
neophil78
Reply #35 Wednesday, September 3, 2003 12:12 AM
Reply #35 Wednesday, September 3, 2003 12:12 AM
ChasUGC : Windows XP, more than 28 features to send to Microsoft all about your PC, how u use it and so on ... without any alert of any firewall ...
kona0197
Reply #36 Wednesday, September 3, 2003 7:36 AM
Reply #36 Wednesday, September 3, 2003 7:36 AM
Oh great I feel another Microsoft bashing thread coming on....
>
>
KarmaGirl
Reply #37 Wednesday, September 3, 2003 7:50 AM
Reply #37 Wednesday, September 3, 2003 7:50 AM
| #34 by neophil78 - 9/3/2003 12:10:19 AM I've send an email to support@Stardock and waiting for an answer and explanation ... |
This is what I emailed you in response:
"Are you running an old version of WindowBlinds? What version are you running? We used to (a long time ago) connect and report the "most popular skin". But we have not done that since WC was developed. If you installed over an old version, you may not be actually using the new version if it did not overwrite WBload. I would suggest uninstalling, rebooting, then installing the newest version of WindowBlinds in Stardock Central."
IPlural
Reply #38 Wednesday, September 3, 2003 8:28 AM
Reply #38 Wednesday, September 3, 2003 8:28 AM
Thats why we know your such a sweet lady KarmaGril and Dir of Ops "your rational"
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 2 of 3 | |
|
|---|
Reply #21 Monday, September 1, 2003 3:57 PM
And as I noted above, there was a previous instance in which an ad on WC was indeed doing something untoward and it was possible for someone to get spyware on their PC if their IE browser settings were at the more insecure default settings. That was the advert company's fault for not abiding with their agreement with WC to not run such things here. But the person who reported here on the board was indeed correct in saying that spyware was being downloaded. When KG confirmed that and had the proof, she contacted the advertising company for them to pull that ad.
Anyway, the guy's initial post wasn't nasty or a flame, so no reason to keep on pummeling him IMO. People don't know if the site owner is or is not aware what ads (and their capacities) the advertising company may be displaying on their site or if the site owner isn't deliberately subjecting them to third party tracking cookies or spyware. I'm sure WC had a hitbox cookie here. And while some people don't like even onsite tracking, it's not the same as some other tracking cookies like doubleclick and others. It remains to be seen what the TargetNet cookie's source is and what purpose it serves.
It takes more time and effort than flaming but it is far more useful (and nicer) to try to dialogue with people who post what they've noticed (especially if they're not being nasty) and get info that may help KG if the advertiser is again not abiding by the terms of the agreement regarding the kinds of ads displayed here. Besides, the info exchanged might be helpful in future to some lurker. Flames are not.