[cleverboy12]

Hi There Everyone,

I have been thinking and came up with the suggestion that GeeksToGo is a Top Spyware Helping Site and Help loads of people out everyday.

So Anyway :

Why Not Make A Petition On GeeksToGo To Stop Spyware ?

It Could Be Worthwile.

You could kindly ask the people that you have helped out to just take a moment and take a look at the petition.

Please Comment On This Suggestion.

Thanks

Edited by cleverboy12, 23 September 2005 - 11:39 AM.

[Advertisements]

The thing is, we dont want a law/rule against spyware. If there were such a thing, then they would have to define spyware.

Anyone know what happened when they defined SPAM?

ScHwErV

[ScHwErV]

The thing is, we dont want a law/rule against spyware. If there were such a thing, then they would have to define spyware.

Anyone know what happened when they defined SPAM?

ScHwErV

[cleverboy12]

Hi ScHwErV, Thanks For Your Reply

They Identified SPAM as Unsolicated Mail.

They Would define Spyware as an Invasion Of Privacy and Unwanted Software Without a Users Knowlede Or Consent.

[ScHwErV]

All the definition of SPAM did for us is show the SPAMmers the legal way to spam. It most certainly did NOT slow them down.

ScHwErV

[cleverboy12]

But Spyware Is And Would Be Defined More Serious and it can has much more damage.

SPAM was quite serious because of the annoyance but if we could say which one is worse it would have had to been spyware.

[Guse]

They Would define Spyware as an Invasion Of Privacy and Unwanted Software Without a Users Knowlede Or Consent.

Do you realize how common it is for people to concent to installing spyware without them ever being aware that they just consented?

A lot of people don't read EULAs, and the spyware is installed. I'm not saying this is the only reason or way infections happen, but it's quite common.

[cleverboy12]

yes i am fully aware and was unfortunate myself to experience it.

But what i could be trying to get across is that Spyware could still be legal HOWEVER they could make it more clear in the EULAS and the agreements because people hardly ever read all of the license and even if they did it would be quite hard to understand for a average computer user to know what they are doing.

So they could make it more clear than one small un-understandable line halfway down the page.

I Hope You Understand What I am trying to get accross

[ScHwErV]

They dont need to define spyware. Doing so would hurt sites like this. If we recommended the removal of something because it is spyware, we could get sued. The crap makers could find loopholes in the laws and use them to get us.

IF they are going to outlaw things, then they need to do it by outlawing characteristics.

Dont outlaw spyware.

Outlaw a computer program that sends information back to the creator without the knowledge of the computer user.

That kinda thing.

ScHwErV

[ScHwErV]

As for EULAs, they will always argue (and win) that its not their fault that people dont read the EULAs.

[starjax]

paperghost (http://vitalsecurity.org), eric howes, and others have had several lenthing discussions over this. What it comes down to is two fold. how the "software" gets on the system and their business practices. Right now there is one case in trial going through discovery motions (direct revenue) and several others pending trial.

what it amounts to is a ponzai scheme (pyramid scheme if you prefer). All smoke and mirrors to confuse and hide the truth. It will be a very entertaining story when it all comes out.

You don't make a law against spyware. You go after their practices, methods, and money. Onlly recently has the law and the technical experts come together in the right mix to combat this. In some cases its outright fraud. In others RICO comes into play.

[HarryMay]

I say that if you find these rascals and the businesses that profit from their spyware they should be give mopeds and a list of problem machines in the nether regions of their world they would have to correct.Either that or force 'em to go back to work for microsoft.

[fleamailman]

Perhaps then not a petition against malware, but one could petition Microsoft to go against anything that does not show in, nor is not removable from, the appwiz.cpl in their next os. One would imagine Microsoft already has some new rules regarding this matter; moreover, they must be aware by now that the business comunity , judging by what I see at the airpost business lounge, is moving across to Mac.

btw anyone see BG's latest video saying "Well, we still can't talk to our computers" which I think we can take as a hint that my hunch that computers will go head on against telephones soon is not so odd.

[cleverboy12]

So is GeeksToGo site going to start the petition against microsoft not showing the applications ?

[ScHwErV]

Thats very highly doubtful. In effect, that would kill most small coders and application builders. Killbox doesnt show up in the appwiz, and its a necessary tool in the fight against malware.

ScHwErV

[starjax]

in the next version called vista spyware will be quite different. it has to do with the restricted rights management that ms is implementing.

read http:\\bink.nu for more info on vista. you will have to go back into the archives just a bit to get all the info on this. then google on it from there. there is a lot of info out there for Vista.