Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy

Spyware Makers Resent Cleaned-Up Versions 340

Posted by timothy from the have-some-injury-with-your-insult dept.
Tri0de points to a ZDnet artcle on a programmer who's taken it upon himself to release spyware- and adware-free versions of popular file-sharing programs. "'He's done Grokster and iMesh. And he's not alone. His work, now available through the Grokster and iMesh networks themselves, joins that of other programmers who have previously "cleaned" programs such as Kazaa and Audiogalaxy in a campaign against "adware" and "spyware." Is the shoe on the other foot?'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Spyware Makers Resent Cleaned-Up Versions More

Spyware Makers Resent Cleaned-Up Versions

Comments Filter:

  • Of course! It's their $$ (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Jon Howard ( 247978 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @07:15PM (#3412720) Journal

    Where's the funding going to come from?

    • Re:Of course! It's their $$ (Score:5, Funny)

      by magicslax ( 532351 ) <frank_salim.yahoo@com> on Thursday April 25, 2002 @07:22PM (#3412764)
      1)Create client for swaping music
      2)?
      3)Profit!!!

    • Re:Of course! It's their $$ (Score:5, Insightful)

      by peddrenth ( 575761 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @08:21PM (#3413108) Homepage
      It's quite unfortunate that they use this as an example of "without the advertising revenue [from spyware], people can't create free software any more"

      They're right that "without this spyware advertising revenue, commercial advertisers can't continue giving their commercial software away without charge", but it's quite insulting to see it compared to free software
      • What most of the /. and *nix community in general tend to forget is that for the rest of the world free software is just that, software they don't pay money for. So for example, while AnalogX's programs are 100% free for me to use, they don't fall under a small minority's definition of "free software" just because it's not open source. Everyone needs to realize that software isn't free because it fits under the GNU "perfect world," It really is "free software" because the end user wasn't charged anything for it and that is not degraded in any way. I would say a good definition of free software is any software that's free to use and has no ads.
      • but it's quite insulting to see it compared to free software

        In a world where the vast majority of individuals have never heard of GNU, Richard Stallman etc.etc. this product is free.

        Yes it's free as in "free beer" and not "free speech" but the reality is that the masses don't give a flying fuck about the "free speech" bit.

        For them, the criteria for something being free is:

        1. Do I have to pay for it?
        2. Am I prevented from making copies of this and giving it to my mates?

        If both answers are "no" then it's free. Period.

        Whereas we like the idea of having the source code, being able to modify it and pass it on, your joe sixpack just wants to know if he's going to get the police come chasing after him if he gives it to a load of mates. He doesn't care about the source code (mainly because he can't read it and wouldn't know what to do with it) and he's certainly not interested in making any modifications and redistributing it.

        Under this, the following products (and many more) are considered free:

        • Internet Explorer
        • Kazaa
        • Winamp

        and so on and so on.

        So the point here is that although it's not "truely free" it can and will still be considered "free".

        And until the GPL is known to the majority of the people in the world, this is the way "free" is always going to be considered.

    • Re:Of course! It's their $$ (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Broccolist ( 52333 ) on Friday April 26, 2002 @12:29AM (#3414107)
      Funding for what exactly? The FastTrack network (of which Kazaa is a client), being self-organized, costs very little to run. All they need to set up is a few login servers.

      Furthermore, the company that developed the FT tech has, AFAIK, disbanded, and development is over. These guys were pretty bright: in order to avoid a Napster-type fiasco, they decided to just develop the software and make others take the risk of running the servers. Kazaa just licensed the software and is now attempting to milk it for cash.

      Frankly, Kazaa is run by a bunch of sleazebags and I wouldn't want to give them money in any case. They've done amazingly unethical things. They're like the anti-Google. There's the obvious: installing of spyware, trying to run a distributed network behind people's backs, and basing their business model on running a piracy network (though this last point is not considered unethical by some).

      But the worst is what happened to Morpheus. You may have heard of it: it was a FT client identical to Kazaa in every way (being the same licensed software). Although they tried to keep this under wraps, here is what seems to have happened: Kazaa, wanting to grab ad revenues from Morpheus, released an "upgrade" to Morpheus which had the effect of destroying it. Their trick worked, too.

      This is $$$MAKE MONEY FAST$$$ level sleaziness here :). I hope Kazaa dies, and good riddance.

    • Re:Of course! It's their $$ (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Oliver Wendell Jones ( 158103 ) on Friday April 26, 2002 @11:41AM (#3416266)
      How about charging some nominal yet affordable fee?

      I'd gladly pay $1 - $3 to download a utility like Bearshare or Kazaa that is completely spyware free.

      How much can the spyware people be paying per download?

      I prefer to use Bearshare simply because they give the me the option to opt out of installing the adware... they make you feel guilty about it, but they give you the option.

  • Be VERY wary (Score:4, Insightful)

    by grahamsz ( 150076 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @07:18PM (#3412735) Homepage Journal
    I'd be very suspicious of 'cleaned' applications floating about on p2p networks.

    Whilst it's likely the author had your best interests at heart there's some chance he didn't.

    It wouldn't be too hard to build a trojan into one of these, and if it were done well you could have your trojan version of kazaa send requests onto the network that immediately identify to anyone watching that it's an infected copy.

    That'd would mean that the trojan wouldn't have to either 'phone home' or be detcted by randomly portscanning subnets.

    however this still might be the lesser of two evils.

    • Personally.. (Score:5, Funny)

      by JippyNickers ( 560086 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @07:26PM (#3412792)
      It wouldn't be too hard to build a trojan into one of these..... however this still might be the lesser of two evils.

      Yeah.. I'd rather have a message come up on my screen once a month saying "You have been Own3D!!" then have any god damn popup ads over and over and....

      =-Jippy
    • Does anyone know if there's a non-spyware version of CuteFTP?
      • I used to use CuteFTP, still have the box from the retail version, but when I had to reregister it after a format, I had to email them THREE times to finally get a response to get the proper registry file in order to have it become fullware instead of shareware.

        I got tired of CuteFTP's crud, and moved on to a free Windows FTP client that is a little better than CuteFTP. It's called SmartFTP, at http://www.smartftp.com/

        Check it out, well worth the look, and completely free.

    • Re:Be VERY wary (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Jon Howard ( 247978 )

      I'm really sorry if this comes across as rude, I certainly don't mean for it to be, especially because I consider you to be extremely correct.

      How is this Insightful?! If people don't know not to run untrusted binaries from untrusted sources, we need a serious wake-up call!

      Come on people! This should be as obvious as "never pick up random hitchhikers stumbling in an alley in the middle of downtown Shanghai - especialy if they're impeccably dressed!".

      • Re:Be VERY wary (Score:4, Insightful)

        by gwernol ( 167574 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @08:16PM (#3413063)
        How is this Insightful?! If people don't know not to run untrusted binaries from untrusted sources, we need a serious wake-up call!

        Come on people! This should be as obvious as...

        Well just because its obvious to you does not mean its obvious to everyone. There are lots of people who are just learning to use P2P networks and sites like Slashdot. How are they supposed to learn the "obvious" things if we're not allowed to tell them?

        Kazaa et al. are new services themselves. They've only been around for a couple of years, and they've been in the "mainstream" for considerably less time than that. Plenty of people don't work on Internet time, they don't rush out and adopt every new technology within a few days of its launch. And yes, a lot of these people (I'd guess) read Slashdot. Don't forget that the vast majority of Slashdot readers don't post; therefore posters like you and me are highly unrepresentative of readers.

        I don't think we're anywhere near the point, even in the Geek community, where we can stop giving out these warnings because they are "obvious". So yes, I think this was an insightful post.

    • Self-interest (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Faust7 ( 314817 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @07:36PM (#3412848) Homepage
      Whilst it's likely the author had your best interests at heart there's some chance he didn't.
      Some chance, but in my opinion very very little. Even virus writers and whatnot love P2P networks. Users are what allow these networks to exist, ergo, it doesn't make sense to attack them. I doubt someone would be willing to sacrifice access to music and warez just to see some trojan or virus succeed. And I don't think this is naive; after all, the networks haven't self-destructed thus far.

    • Re:Be VERY wary - Who do you trust more? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Glorat ( 414139 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @07:37PM (#3412855)
      That's hitting the nail on the head. Who do you trust more? Do you trust the original authors who hid the spyware in your program but are possibly giving some legal notice in the EULA (bleh), so they aren't completely rogue, but are ripping you off? Or do you trust the rogue programmer who claims to have fixed the spyware but maybe has slipped his own trojan in instead?

      In the case of Kazaa Lite, I trust the rogue coder but I won't have that attitude on patched software for long. I think I would rather wait for my Slashdot peers to "beta test" these patched versions and find out if their computers die, before I even consider downloading patched up pirate software
      • Actually this is easy to answer. Crackers are less likely to include malware in their products than commercial vendors.

        Cracker groups release thousand of key generators and patches every month. MS wants you to believe that these are full of trojans and whatnot, but afaik there has never been a single reported case of a scene group deliberately releasing an infected crack.

        All the shit that people are getting is coming from legal software, either as spyware or through outlook.
      • Yeah, sure, I'm gonna be flamed. But how is it possible for "the original authors" to be "ripping you off"? They wrote the code. Not you. How is it a rip off? Do I have a serious logical gap? It seems to me that the reverse is true. I don't like spyware/adware/whateverotherinsidiousnameyouwantto callitware. So I use linux and avoid such program completely. It seems to me that people using programs like adaway/adaware/whatever are in fact ripping off the original programmers. As are the people who designed said programs. If you don't like what these companies (e.g. the Kazaa people) are doing with their software, don't use it. The chief principle of the GPL is almost entirely that. If you don't want to use it as they say you can, you cannot use it. If someone violates the GPL there's a general uproar. Yet someone violates a different software license and people are complaining about the writers of that license? Stop and think about what I'm saying for a minute before I get mod'd to never-never land. That's all
        • How is it a rip off?

          I was referring to embedding extra features (aka spyware) into their product without making it clear that they are doing so (except in a EULA less clear than a tax form). I consider a rip off is when you don't get what you bargained for and that is how I view Kazaa today

    • Re:Be VERY wary (how to roll your own kazaalite) (Score:5, Informative)

      by shird ( 566377 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @07:45PM (#3412904) Homepage Journal
      In the case of Kazaa, its actually quite easy to make your own 'lite' version, there are plenty of sites with instructions on how to do this. Taken from a post to usenet:

      /* Install KaZaa 1.6 */

      1) Install the new KaZaa, then close the application when all finished.

      /* Begin Brilliant Digital Uninstall */

      2) In Control Panel, click Add/Remove Programs and find "b3d Projector".
      Uninstall this application (make sure all browsers are closed or it won't
      work)

      3) Find a folder called "b3duninstall" located usually directly in your
      Windows folder. Delete this folder.

      4) Locate the following files:

      > bdedownloader.dll
      > bdedata2.dll
      > bdefdi.dll
      > bdeinsta2.dll
      > bdeinstall.exe
      > bdesecureinstall.cab
      > bdesecureinstall.exe
      > bdeverify.exe
      > bdeverify.dll

      They are usually located in your Windows/System, Windows/System32 folder.
      Rename each file adding a ".bak" to the end. (or Delete them if you don't
      care about backing them up)

      -->Note to Borland users: Borland software creates files that start with
      "BDE" as well, so be careful.

      /* Brilliant Digital Uninstall done, proceed to Cydoor crippling */

      5) Download the dummy cd_clint.dll package at
      http://www.cexx.org/cd_clint.zip

      6) Go to your Windows/System32 folder. Find "CD_Clint.dll" and rename it to
      "CD_Clint.dll.bak"

      7) Extract the "CD_Clint.dll" file from the package you got in step 5 into
      the Windows/System32 folder (thus replacing the old CD_Clint you backed up
      in step 6).

      /* Cydoor crippled. */

    • The original programs WERE trojans. Who knows what the hacked versions have. It's so much better to use software you can trust and we all know that the only sofware you can really trust is free software [fsf.org]. People who are out to make a buck with restrictive licenses like:

      Kazaa's agreement, for example, states: "Except as expressly permitted in this License, you agree not to reverse engineer, de-compile, disassemble, alter, duplicate, modify, rent, lease, loan, sublicense, make copies, create derivative works from, distribute or provide others with the KaZaA Media Desktop Software in whole or part or transmit the application over a network."

      are NOT your friends.

    • I'd be very suspicious of 'cleaned' applications floating about on p2p networks.

      Whilst it's likely the author had your best interests at heart there's some chance he didn't.

      It wouldn't be too hard to build a trojan...

      ...and how, exactly, is this different from the spyware-infested version you get directly from Kazaa (or whoever)?

      Getting back to the original article for a minute, one of the legal tacks being considered by Kazaa is that they claim you can't (among other things) pass along derivative works. Has anyone considered distributing spyware-free file-sharing clients as patches to the "official" releases? You're not distributing a derivative work. LAME began life as a patch to the ISO (?) reference MP3 encoder, and that worked well enough until they could write a new encoder from scratch.

    • Whilst it's likely the author had your best interests at heart there's some chance he didn't.

      This is where an application like Virtual PC [connectix.com] comes into its own. I have a clean virtual machine, with W2K installed (and kept up to date with patches etc.), a few file sharing clients and nothing else whatsoever. This machine is never used. Instead, I make a copy of it and run that. Then, every couple of weeks or so after the adware has become unendurable, just delete the copy in use and replace it with a new copy from master.

      Works perfectly. Spyware can try spying all it likes - I'm not using the machine for anything except use of their own networks, so there's nothing there for them to look at. Also, even if I am '0wn3d' through some obscure hack, it's only an isolated virtual machine and it'll only exist for a maximum of a week or two.

      Cheers,
      Ian

  • Well whoopdie do (Score:2, Insightful)

    by batobin ( 10158 )
    Great. Spyware makers resent cleaned up versions. But guess what? CONSUMERS RESENT SPYWARE!

    In my own opinion, spyware makers have no right to complain. Is there something I'm missing?

  • Who pays (Score:2, Insightful)

    by jimson ( 516491 )
    I know that we are all frustrated with ad-ware/spyware, but I look at these things like commercials on TV, its a necessary nuisance if we want these things for free. Obviously there is a point were such *ware becomes too intrusive, but I think that we have to put up with some pop-up ads while we are getting free things.

    • Re:Who pays (Score:5, Insightful)

      by grahamsz ( 150076 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @07:24PM (#3412783) Homepage Journal
      My main objection to this is that the software is marketed as FREE! Go to any of these sites and you'll see ads for their FREE software.

      This software is blatently not free. If they changed the flashing stars on their sites to say "This software will be paid for by an agreement where we watch your surfing habits, consume your processing resources and bombard you with adverts" the i'd be a lot happier.

      Also they dilute the value of real free software. We dont want the general public tainting linux with the Kazaa brush.
      • This software is blatently not free

        Actually it is. Read here [slashdot.org] to find out why people consider it to be free.

        The point is, until the GPL is known to the majority of the people in the world, this is the way "free" is always going to be considered.

    • Re:Who pays (Score:4, Interesting)

      by sallen ( 143567 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @07:42PM (#3412890)
      I know that we are all frustrated with ad-ware/spyware, but I look at these things like commercials on TV, its a necessary nuisance if we want these things for free. Obviously there is a point were such *ware becomes too intrusive, but I think that we have to put up with some pop-up ads while we are getting free things.


      I would normally agree. However, even though I've never downloaded a Kaaza or Napster program, the end result effects me. The ads are one thing. But I think the company that installed additional software without acknowledging it went far over the line, particularly if it could be 'turned' on to use the persons computer through another peer-to-peer network for another's benefit. While I'm not sure I agree with hacking the original software, and certainly IANAL applies, but IMHO, I wouldn't at all be opposed to some bright young prosecutor taking an in depth look at federal hacking laws or theft of service laws and see just how some of those might apply. (I seem to recall Georgia has some pretty strict statutes.!) If it's installed without the persons knowledge, I don't see how the distributer would not be liable. Then again, just an IMHO and IANAL, so who knows.

      • Re:Who pays (Score:2, Interesting)

        by _repressor_ ( 459527 )
        The network admins at my university are preparing for the worst if they decide to start using their distributed processing via the kazaa network. The admin told me he estimates that the residence pipe will likely get in the neighbourhood of 2mbit/sec dedicated just to this distributed computing system in place by KaZaA. They're already trying to figure out the best way to block it. 2mbit/sec on a 4.5mbit/sec line (on a university residence line this gets eaten up quickly anyway) for the residences is a huge burdon. And I'm not the one using the stupid file sharing programs either, I'll just have to put up with having even less bandwidth.

        The worst part is these are the users we talk about who don't read the EULAs etc. Heck, these people have trojans all over their system (which put themselves up on the LAN network shares) because they run .vbs, .bat, .exe etc. files that call themselves songs on these file sharing networks. *sigh* Spyware and stuff that runs background processes? They don't care, as long as they get their mp3s etc. Then they'll whine to everyone that there isn't enough bandwidth, just as an added bit of irony. And I get to pay more for residence to cover the cost.
    • You presumably pay for your network connection and your disk space. The whole point of a P2P network is that the users contribute to it, and they benefit from the facts that people have more resources than they have any use for and that when you give someone information, you still have it.

      As the name suggests, it's the peers that make peer-to-peer networks worthwhile. The people who are looking to make money aren't the ones doing the most work.

  • Kazaalite download (Score:5, Informative)

    by shird ( 566377 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @07:22PM (#3412765) Homepage Journal
    For those still not using the 'lite' version of kazaa, its available for download here:
    http://www.kazaalite.com/lite/

    The kazaalite.tk site doesn't seem to be up anymore.
    • Why don't people just make it available for download on Kazaa? I thought that P2P networks were good for distributing files that people want despite the wishes of corporations and their lawyers...
    • The PHP stuff on that previous site seems to be down, this site contains a working link.

      http://www.kazaalite.nl/

      The previous link was actually mentioned in the story too, it may just be slashdotted.
  • P2P networks complaining that their software has been ripped off, and that pirates -- ermm, users -- aren't treating their intellectual property fairly. Har.

  • Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @07:23PM (#3412773)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:ummm yeah (Score:5, Insightful)

      by miguelitof ( 67742 ) <`gro.retsffib' `ta' `otileugim'> on Thursday April 25, 2002 @07:46PM (#3412906) Homepage Journal
      "They're essentially hackers and rippers," Hemming said. "Basically our brand name is being damaged quite significantly by these activities."

      Apparently the whole Brilliant fiasco didn't damange their brand name. Nor did getting delisted by Download.com. Nor did being accused of being unethical by most of the major tech news sources in the United States.

      The Kazaa brand name apparently came out unscathed by all of this, but just may be damaged by people using Kazaa Lite. Apparently, having a better user experience is going to lessen Kazaa's value in people's minds.

      I am sure I am missing something here, but I just don't know what.

      • They're essentially hackers and rippers," Hemming said. "Basically our brand name is being damaged quite significantly by these activities

        Quite, but what is Kazza if it is not a network for rippers who want to get toons for free. The whole Kazaa business model is to help people take the property of the music industry for free. So just why do these guys get suprised when their not-so-honest customers decide to deprive them of their revenue stream as well? Like just why did they ever think there was a business to be had out of infringement-ware?

        The legalistic approach is somewhat humorous, while they might have a case it would be interesting to see how they would intend to bring it. The problem is that it is rather difficult to bring a suit in a jurisdiction while you are simultaneously evading a suit in the same jurisdiction.

        Another problem they may have is that there is a longstanding principle that the courts do not arbitrate disputes between criminals, nor do they get involved collecting gambling debts or resolving a host of other issues. The defense might well be able to argue that the courts should not intervene in this type of dispute as a matter of public policy. Kazaa is arguably a program to facilitate contributory infringement for which there are no (or marginal) legitimate purposes. So it is iniquitous for the US taxpayer to arbitrate a dispute in which Kazza is attempting to protect its illegitimate revenue stream.

        If the RIAA had a clue they would be in there handing the court an amicus brief.

  • between ad-ware and spyware.... especially since the spyware in RadLight uninstalls Ad-Aware. Sure there's something saything that it will disable Ad-aware buried somewhere in the EULA, but we all know how long and complicated those things are.

  • Fair use? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by grahamsz ( 150076 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @07:28PM (#3412807) Homepage Journal
    These companies are trying to advocate that it is fair use to take something you paid for, rip it into another format (removing some of the superflous data), and trade it on their networks... [personally i agree with that]

    Yet it is wrong to take something you paid for (remember they provide it FREE - they dont provide it in exchange for spying on you and stealing your cpu cycles - they say FREE), rip it into another format (removing some of the superflous data), and trade it on their networks.

    Get real, this is going to cause more damage to their legal cases than anything else.

  • Integrate (Score:2, Interesting)

    by hackwrench ( 573697 )
    Now if only someone would write an integrated client that works across all the p2p networks.

    • Re:Integrate (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Istealmymusic ( 573079 )
      Good luck. FT encrypts all tranmissions except for peer-to-peer downloads. Dr. Damn, as revealed in the interview [zeropaid.com] on Zeropaid, did not change any code. He simply used ResHack to remove spurious dialog elements, and wrote a nifty installer that installs a safe cd_clint. Not to downplay Dr. Damn's software, but it's not feastible to integrate other networks with FT without creating a separate program, and that requires knowledge of the FT protocol.

      Ironically, the RIAA itself leaked an internal memo [dotcomscoop.com] which contains information that could help in cloning FT. Again, the RIAA's internal memo on FastTrack [dotcomscoop.com] is an excellent read. Perhaps, with the help of the RIAA, we can create our open FastTrack client.

  • Why didn't RIAA think of that? (Score:4, Informative)

    by geophile ( 16995 ) <(jao) (at) (geophile.com)> on Thursday April 25, 2002 @07:32PM (#3412831) Homepage
    I think it's very funny that it took another hacker to figure out that kazaa etc. could be disabled in this way. If the RIAA had any brains at all, they would have figured this out and ... uhh ... wait a minute, maybe Yuri == RIAA?

  • Re Hacked Spyware (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Archangel Michael ( 180766 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @07:34PM (#3412840) Journal
    Why doesn't someone come up with a hack that fills the Spyware home Database with useless information? I mean the data fields that phone home should be easy to fill with meaningless information but seamingly valid data?

    This would render any information gained worthless until scrubbed of the offending dirty data. And the scrubbing of dirty data would leave dirt, and/or scrub valid data.

    Another option would be to Flood the home servers with pure junk traffic. Or maybe even both?

    How about sending home a destructive payload? It should be easy to hack the data fields of the database so that it ends up running the DB server into the ground.

    Any other ideas?

  • Brand-name damaged (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kindbud ( 90044 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @07:37PM (#3412854) Homepage
    "They're essentially hackers and rippers," Hemming said. "Basically our brand name is being damaged quite significantly by these activities."

    Yeah I can understand that. After all, consumers have associated the Kazaa brand with intrusive spy software. Removing the spyware does great harm the Kazaa brand, which everyone knows and expects to be full of it.

    • Re:Brand-name damaged (Score:5, Insightful)

      by djmurdoch ( 306849 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @08:04PM (#3413010)
      After all, consumers have associated the Kazaa brand (TM) with intrusive spy software. Removing the spyware does great harm the Kazaa brand, which everyone knows and expects to be full of it.

      You seem to think that the customers are the users. Wrong. It's the same funding model as broadcast TV: the customers are the advertisers. The users are the product.

      Having a significant proportion of Kazaa users avoiding the ads damages its reputation with their customers, who can no longer trust their traffic reports as being surrogates for eyeball counts.
  • sure is funny how the p2p application owners are whining about protecting their IP and copyright when their software is used, primarily, for the sharing of the same type of material.

    now they know exactly how the MPAA and RIAA feel.
  • But as the hacked software movement grows, it is being forced more deeply underground. Already Dr. Damn's ISP has told him it will no longer host his files. He's looking for another provider.

    He could put it on the P2P network :-)

    But then, who can tell if the source is trusted? If I do a search and would receive a reply with "Hello Friend, Use This To Strip The Adware Of Your Client", I wouldn't download it in a million years.

    But then, why keep all these attachment-viri floating around?

    Edwin
  • NEWS FLASH:

    UpEvil.net reporters have just discovered a completely foolproof method for getting around adware and spyware in file/music sharing programs! Even better than the method described in this /. story [slashdot.org], the UpEvil crew has unearthed the following three AMAZING new ways of fighting ALL current (ad || spy)ware!


    Step 1: Uninstall all current file sharing progams on your PC


    Step 2: When finished, simply start accquiring your music/movies through ethical and legal methods, like Emusic.com [emusic.com], or through an secret, ancient technique from the Far East called "Bu Yingt Hecd" (note from UpEvil medical staff: if you experience discomfort at the thought of supporting the corporate system through the given methods, we have found the best way to alleviate this pain is to cease the purchase/accquiring of corporate-produced music altogether)


    (optional) Step 3: As an added bonus, install [redhat.com] a [suse.com] Free [debian.org] operating [freebsd.org] system [linux-mandrake.com] and avoid having to pay for Monopolyware [microsoft.com] too!



    This has been your daily UpEvil "Kazaa-whores-are-a-bunch-of-cheap-whiny-fucks" post of the day. Thank you, and good night.

  • Brand names (Score:3, Insightful)

    by FattMattP ( 86246 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @08:07PM (#3413019) Homepage
    This line was classic!
    "They're essentially hackers and rippers," Hemming said. "Basically our brand name is being damaged quite significantly by these activities."
    LOL! Your brand has already been shot to hell by your deceptive spyware bundling. Someone give this clueless "CEO" a cookie.
  • "They're essentially hackers and rippers," Hemming said. "Basically our brand name is being damaged quite significantly by these activities."

    if anything, their brand is being enhanced. i for one would never use a piece of software i knew to be spyware...

  • Wild theory... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by doorbot.com ( 184378 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @08:17PM (#3413080) Journal
    In classic slashdot fare, I hereby propose my wild, unresearched, and off-the-cuff theory:

    1. RIAA hates P2P networks/P2P users snub nose at RIAA.
    2. Kazaa releases P2P app with spyware.
    3. P2P Users complain about spyware.
    4. RIAA hacks (excuse me, anonymously funds a hack of) Kazaa so Kazaa makes no money through advertising/spying on users (KazRIAA).
    5. P2P users switch from Kazaa to KazRIAA.
    6. Kazaa closes down their network.
    7. RIAA claims victory against the infidels.

  • DMCA (Score:2)

    by csbruce ( 39509 )
    Looks like the DMCA is going to need to have a clause added that outlaws "business-model circumvention" (and all discussion of same).
  • Can't be all that difficult in this economic climate. As I understand it, they are parasites who use the distribution method of paying the file-swapping networks $ to carry their programs... well, where are the spyware companies getting the $ from -- is their ad revenue really enough to sustain them?!

    I'm hoping not, and that therefore, they will soon wither and die, just another dot-com casulaty.
  • P2P companies complaining about their intellectual properties being infringed?!?!?

    HAHAHAHAHA... LOL.

    I'm still an atheist, but if God keeps things up like this, how will I have any choice but to believe?
    • Yep. Has all the irony of shareware console emulators that whine about cracked versions propagating (e.g. iNES, Liberty) and CD copy programs whose authors trojan horse that dare infringe their "intellectual property" (e.g. CDRWin).

      One would think that if one were intelligent enough to write a useful program, that one would understand that ROM downloaders and CD rippers probably aren't the best paying audience :).

  • You know (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jgerman ( 106518 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @09:09PM (#3413350)
    ... regardless of whether or not file sharing is WRONG. It's certainly illegal. Always has been regardless of whether the file is stored on a hard drive or tranferred to a cassette tape or cd. I'm not going to get into a huge debate about the subject, mainly because my opinion on the matter changes from day to day ;)


    But I think that, for the most part, that no one will disagree that there are people using p2p networks for the wrong reasons. The spyware makers have absolutely NO RIGHT to complain. Here's a simple analogy: Guy meets girl with boyfriend, guy steals girl, girl cheats on him, he gets upset. I've got one thing to say to the people who write the spyware for kazaa, you want to swin with the sharks prepare to get bitten.

    • Re:You know (Score:2, Insightful)

      by poot_rootbeer ( 188613 )
      ... regardless of whether or not file sharing is WRONG. It's certainly illegal.

      SURVEY SAYS..... BZZZZT!

      Thanks for playing, have some rice.

      The act of duplicating a file from one computer to another computer is not illegal, nor will it ever be.

      • Re:You know (Score:3, Informative)

        by Planesdragon ( 210349 )
        The act of duplicating a file from one computer to another computer is not illegal, nor will it ever be.

        Allow me to qualify.

        "The act of duplicating a copyrighted file without permission from one computer to another computer is illegal, and always has been, save only for fair use."

        Fair use claims also have to be made in court, btw. :) Good luck.

        (see http://www.copyright.gov/title17/ for more information. IANALBIPON/.)
    • ... regardless of whether or not file sharing is WRONG. It's certainly illegal.

      So it's illegal to share the artwork I make with my friends?
      • Don't give me that bullshit, you knew I meant copyrighted file even if I did accidentally leave it out, so of course copying files you own the copyright to is not illegal.

    • Re:You know (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Here's a simple analogy: Guy meets girl

      ho,ho slow down egghead, can`t you use an analogy involving the tcp three-way-handshake or something this is /. ,remember ;-)
  • For those interested, there's an interview [zeropaid.com] conducted by Zeropaid of Dr. Damn. In related news, Zeropaid recently added several interviews, including: Pablo from Blubster, John Marshall creator of Gnucleus (victim of Morpheus PE rip off), the Limewire Team, Team XoloX, and Travis Hill of MediaEnforcer. Interesting read, a while back Zeropaid also reported on Sharman Network's attitude towards Kazaa Lite [zeropaid.com], the spyware-free Kazaa by Yuri.

  • Kazaa-Lite Still Has BDE? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by JLester ( 9518 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @10:12PM (#3413599)
    I noticed that after running the newest ref file from Ad-Aware that Kazaa Lite stopped working. It gives the message: "You have uninstalled a part of Kazaa that is required to run". I thought my system was clean until the latest update where it found more BDE stuff. I assume that's what made Kazaa Lite stop working. So, it appears that the Lite version isn't as ad/spy-ware free as I thought.

    Jason

    • Ooops.

      Ad-aware removes some files that are part of KaZaA Lite that are meant to fool the modified KaZaA into thinking that the spyware is still there. You probably removed the "dummy files" that need to be in place to fool the KaZaA in KaZaA Lite.

      You probably didn't have spyware afterall, but ended up crippling KaZaA Lite with Ad-Aware :-)

      Anyway, why are you using that proprietary, closed source P2P tool anyway? Check out Gnucleus for Windows, a GPLed Gnutella client with swarming and SuperNode support, and tons of users without spyware, limits, or the RIAA on its tail: (http://www.gnucleus.net [gnucleus.net])

  • Just buy LimeWire - or use IRC (Score:3, Informative)

    by Sean Clifford ( 322444 ) on Thursday April 25, 2002 @10:42PM (#3413717) Journal
    Not to be a troll, but just pop $8.50 for LimeWire Pro [limewire.com] (warning: annoying pop-ups on site). No damned pop-ups or stealthware (that I'm aware of anyway) and they have it for every platform we're likely to use: Linux, OS X, MacOS, and Microsoft Windows(TM).

    Or you could just go with IRC [irchelp.org] (obligatory link for newbies) and screw all that schmansy luser "p2p" crap. :)

  • For everybody who jumped on the bandwagon about the evil in the replacement dll for cydoor I went and did a little research..the code is distributed with the binary and all it is is the Cydoor SDK implemented except all the functions just do nothing or return 1. (www.cydoor.com/sdk helped them out on this one)... If your really that worried about this then just recompile the DLL on your own. The source is in www.cexx.com 's ZIP file of cl_clint.dll... The only thing I've found is that the version of KaZaa I have crashes if I try to use the DLL althought I haven't tried compilig it myself yet... They refer to this as the "AdWare Condom"

  • Biological Response to Unwanted Intruder (Score:3, Interesting)

    by eer ( 526805 ) on Friday April 26, 2002 @08:10AM (#3414982)
    This is a great example of the 'net acting like a biological organism...routing around censorship, and developing its own defensive mechanisms against unwanted intruders. The image of the Internet community as a giant "blob", slowly flowing over, bypassing, and eventually making irrelevant the obstacles created by others reminds me, too, of a volcano - locally powerful, representative of tremendous potential.

Slashdot Top Deals

Beware of Programmers who carry screwdrivers. -- Leonard Brandwein

Close