×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

McAfee lists Adware in Top 10 Viruses

CmdrTaco posted more than 9 years ago | from the calling-a-spade-a-spade dept.

Security 272

joelethan writes "In the new sensitive, caring world of Windows security McAfee Virusscan detects adware/malware, just like its competitors. A surprising consequence is that the McAfee's Regional Virus Info now regularly shows adware in its infection top ten. It feels so good to see old favorites like 180Search and DFC listed. "Now for your listening pleasure it's Adware.Gator at number 7 with a bullet..." "

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

272 comments

Tums! (4, Funny)

HackHackBoom (198866) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275672)

ADWare is actually a secret conspiracy from the guys who make tums to capture a whole new generation of geeks..

Geek: "Helpdesk, how can I help you?"

Hapless Worker Drone: "I have all these funny ads that keep popping up!"

Geek: "Did you install that nifty new weather bug, or that 'Gator' thing?"

Hapless Worker Drone: "I didn't install anything! This is your fault! You guys are supposed to protect us!"

Geek: "See that socket over there? It's the automatic anti human virus protecter, stick your finger in and call me in an hour"

Re:Tums! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275728)

Apart from the last line, that is precisely what I do all day. It's very painful.

Re:Tums! (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275852)

It would be less painful (for you) if you DID use the last line. Eventually.

damn.. (-1)

techefnet (634210) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275675)

this is the reason why i dont use windows.. one minute after your installation is done, you already got lots of spyware.. heh.. cant stand it..

Re:damn.. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275703)

Are you retarded? It's easy to keep a Windows machine clear of Adware. You just don't do stupid crap like install Gator. If you're capable of handling a non-Windows machine (Macs excluded) you should be more than able to not do stupid stuff to your computer.

Re:damn.. (2, Insightful)

techefnet (634210) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275725)

No? What about people borrowing my computer? One click away and a lot of spyware is installed. What about i forget to pull the networkconnection before i start a fresh windows installation. Etc. You dont have to be retarded to get spyware. To avoid them you need to regulary run windowsupdate and run scan with software like Ad-Aware.

Re:damn.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275773)

Why the hell would you run your computer as an Administrator?

Simply create another few accounts without high privs and use those for you and your friends who borrow your computer.

Do you run everything as root on unix style systems?

Same thing.

Spyware cant do much that deleting and re-creating a "user" account cant fix.

Re:damn.. (0, Flamebait)

techefnet (634210) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275787)

Yeah. But its still just working around the problem.

Re:damn.. (1)

Mant (578427) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275920)

Yeah. But its still just working around the problem.

That isn't a workaround, that is basic security that you would use on any multi-user OS.

Re:damn.. (3, Interesting)

underpar (792569) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275721)

this is the reason why i dont use windows.. one minute after your installation is done, you already got lots of spyware.

Not every computer related problem has Microsoft to blame. Though it is tempting to blame them...

Re:damn.. (1, Insightful)

techefnet (634210) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275744)

I dont blame them on microsoft. I never said that. But spyware and virus problem is there, you cant deny that..

Re:damn.. (5, Informative)

Mant (578427) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275826)

I dont blame them on microsoft. I never said that. But spyware and virus problem is there, you cant deny that..

Only if you don't know what you are doing. I've been running XP for two years, and not one virus, or spyware, and pretty minimal effort on my part.

  • Keep windows up to date with auto update
  • Use something other than IE and Outlook/OE
  • Use a firewall
  • Use anti virus and have it auto update
  • Run scans with some anti-spyware software now and then (although I've never caught anything I wanted removed). It looks like this will soon get absorbed by AV software.
  • Don't run dodgy executables, office documents and the like

The problem is there, no denying, but the solution is way. What is more, it isn't windows specific anyway. Keeping your machine in order and secure is something you should be doing on any OS.

Re:damn.. (1)

Mistlefoot (636417) | more than 9 years ago | (#10276004)

Minimal effort?

MS caters to the masses.....to the people who don't change their own oil. The average users buys a computer to surf. They get windows for ease of use. Windows has, like it or not, as a central feature IE. To ask a user to follow the 6 steps you have outlined is taking away from that ease of use.

Not use one of the central features? Use a firewall and have to figure out once a month why something can't connect? Add the 3 maintenance scans you suggest (updates, anti virus, spyware) and the intimidated user is bowled over.

Re:damn.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10276083)

Oh, so you don't mind Alexa then ?

It is automatically installed on every never version of IE and it gets reinstalled every time you get an update to IE...

I tend to kill it every time but it seems you do not mind...

Re:damn.. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275828)

Not every computer related problem has Microsoft to blame. Though it is tempting to blame them...

Considering there is zero spyware for Macs or Linux... you're damn right I'm going to blame Microsoft.

Re:damn.. (1, Insightful)

Mant (578427) | more than 9 years ago | (#10276026)

Considering there is zero spyware for Macs or Linux... you're damn right I'm going to blame Microsoft.

Damit, this thread is turning me into an MS apologist. How, exactly, are MS responsible for the spyware? There isn't a single thing about Macs or Linux that prevents someone writing spyware for it, or bundling it with other programs.

It really is just a matter of them not being worth targeting. Probably part market share, and part Mac and Linux users often being more savy and careful what they put on their box.

Now, if you want to blame MS for some dodgy browser code that lets sites slip spyware onto the machine without them knowing, that is fair. But blaming MS for the mere existance of spyware on Windows is just silly.

Right.. (3, Insightful)

Kjella (173770) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275729)

..let's stick to some realism. I don't have any spyware on my Windows machine. Unlike viruses, the user has to actually install them (though that may involve just clicking "yes" in IE). Poor judgement can not be solved by technical solutions, OSS or not.

Kjella

Re:Right.. (5, Informative)

eddy (18759) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275802)

>..let's stick to some realism.

Yes, let us.

>Unlike viruses, the user has to actually install them (though that may involve just clicking "yes" in IE).

No, that's wrong. You can get spyware just by visiting a website, which then exploits your browser to install whatever they want to install.

I wouldn't call that "the user has to actually install [it]". I'd call that viral behaviour (even though the installed software doesn't live off a host file or process).

Again; no clicking "yes" required.

Re:Right.. (2, Informative)

throughthewire (675776) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275806)

Unlike viruses, the user has to actually install them (though that may involve just clicking "yes" in IE)

They might not even have to click 'yes.' If they're not fully patched, someone can sent them a 'cute' e-greeting card which hijacks their home page, and the hijacked page can start installing all kinds of mayhem. No explicit approval by the user is necessary. I recently cleaned up a machine that had been compromised in just that way. Don't Click That! [blogspot.com]

I've been pleasantly surprised by how well McAfee's consumer software works at keeping crapware off of the machines I've seen using it.

And Trend's PC-Cillin 2005 is in beta test [rsc03.net] until September 30th - you might still be able to participate.

Re:Right.. (2, Insightful)

Richardsonke1 (612224) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275835)

Yeah, that sounds good, but it's FALSE [sans.org]. Lots of spyware is installed using known browser security holes. So, a user doesn't even have to click a button, they just have to be using Internet Explorer, and who can fault the normal user for using the browser that came with their computers. Most users don't even know there are other web browsers out there.

Re:Right.. (1)

cbiltcliffe (186293) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275841)

I don't have any spyware on my Windows machine. Unlike viruses, the user has to actually install them (though that may involve just clicking "yes" in IE).
Oh [symantec.com], really? [pcworld.com]

Re:damn.. (1, Funny)

kahei (466208) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275877)


Unless, of course, you do it properly. But complaining is so much easier, eh?

My, I'm really turning into one of those bitter old posters who just goes around smacking down teenagers :/ I blame society.

Re:damn.. (2, Insightful)

swordboy (472941) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275893)

Actually, this used to be a valid point. But with XPSP2, IE is configured to disable ActiveX installations (but allows the user to run them, if so inclined).

I support LOTS of PCs on the side and this has eliminated 99 percent of the adware/spyware related issues. If people are no longer prompted with a "yes/no" type choice, then there is no problem.

Kudos to Microsloth on this one.

Re:damn.. (1)

SimbaK2K (713315) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275896)

Just rip out IE and stuck mozilla on and you shouldn't get any spypware. Might also want to whack on some Sygate firewall to keep away the other nasties aswell.

All we need now.. (1, Redundant)

superhoe (736800) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275676)

.. is Adware to be made totally illegal as to design, manufacture and spread it. Like viruses are.

Re:All we need now.. (1, Funny)

big ben bullet (771673) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275751)

don't forget to forbid spyware by law too!

might as well also include spam while you're at it...

ohw, and hardware vendors should not be allowed to release a new product without working linux drivers! Punishable by making theirs specs 'open'...

Man, if i could only rule the world! It would be a much better place... or would I be easily corrupted? ];)

Re:All we need now.. (1)

Twylite (234238) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275843)

No, there is perfectly legitimate adware out there. I'm thinking of software the is free (beer) subject to it downloading and displaying ads while you run it. A number of software producers use this technique in a forthright and legitimate manner to supplement income and encourage the purchase of "professional" version of the product.

What we need is a restriction that prohibits any software from installing itself without the consent of the PC owner/user, from using any system resources without disclosing to the user up front and in an obvious and straightforward way what resources it will use and why, and requiring that all software can be simply and completely uninstalled on demand.

Re:All we need now.. (1)

MindStalker (22827) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275918)

Actually I think there is a anti-adware law that is coming down the line that actually says just that.

Re:All we need now.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275964)

Yeah, but who determines what is illegal, with the Claria types arguing that it is indeed useful and isn't meant to cause any harm (even if that is a side effect). Do we need to take each adware manufacturer to court to have a judge decide if the result is classified as malicious? It's especially difficult when they can provide evidence that some people actually want Gator, or when you have applications install it after you've agreed to their license terms and forgot to uncheck the boxes.

Most novices I know don't read the licenses and don't know what the checkboxes mean. I think it's a gray area.

/didn't read TFA

Re:All we need now.. (1)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275977)

Adware is (at least can be) perfectly legitimate, you're upset about spyware.

Is the free, ad-supported version of the Opera browser illegal or wrong?

Re:All we need now.. (2, Informative)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275980)

would it work? slashdot is adware as well, remember that.

spyware.. now that's something that should be illeagal, installing software without the user knowing what the software will do(and without asking the 'victim' if he wants it or not).

Re:All we need now.. (2, Insightful)

evslin (612024) | more than 9 years ago | (#10276062)

Yeah, that's gonna happen. Last thing we need are civil rights groups everywhere screaming at the top of their lungs that illegalizing adware is stifling free speech!

Claria... (3, Funny)

Staos (700036) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275677)

Uh-oh! They'll get sued by Claria!

Re:Claria... (5, Funny)

JaffaKREE (766802) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275694)

I know not of this "Claria" company, but they sound like a bunch of upstanding folks. Not like those Gator bastards... man I'd like to see them strung up. Hooray for Claria !

Re:Claria... (4, Insightful)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275788)

Companies that change names to a made-up word usually need to be given a closer look... they usually have soiled their first name so badly they can't use it anymore.

Time to cut your virus count (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275680)

1) Switch to better web browser that dosen't have activeX spyware infecting it [spreadfirefox.com]
2)Destroy spyware [lavasoftusa.com]
3)Switch to a secure operating system. [mandrake.com]
4) ???
5) Profit, by not having to waste time with viruses!

Re:Time to cut your virus count (5, Funny)

Trigun (685027) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275702)

Shhh! If you have everyone doing that, half of us will be out of jobs!

Re:Time to cut your virus count (0, Offtopic)

slimak (593319) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275737)

FYI: Keeping coffee in the freezer is not a good idea as it destroys the flavor. Your best bet is to buy whole beans and grind as needed.
I have seen your sig a few times and finally thought I had to comment.

Re:Time to cut your virus count (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275916)


I can still do that with women, though, right?

Re:Time to cut your virus count (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275930)

Speaking of sigs, shouldn't yours be:

Karma: Excellent

shorter and perfectly understandable to us

Re:Time to cut your virus count (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10276110)

FYI: Keeping coffee in the freezer is not a good idea as it destroys the flavor. Your best bet is to buy whole beans and grind as needed.

Keeping coffee not in the freezer is even worse. Grinding causes it to lose flavor faster, no matter how you store it.

The best solution is to use freshly roasted beans. Since that's not always possible (unless you order them direct from the roaster [peets.com]), the next best solution is to buy whole beans in small batches and grind them before you use them. However, even beans start to lose their flavor once the vacuum-pack is broken, so if you buy beans in larger quantities than you can use expediently, freezing the beans is a good option. Grinders will handle frozen beans just fine.

Re:Time to cut your virus count (1)

Staos (700036) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275724)

I prefer Spybot [safer-networking.org]

Not that I use windows or anything...

Re:Time to cut your virus count (3, Informative)

irn_bru (209849) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275770)

Preference doesn't come into it: USE BOTH. I've had experience of either one of them missing something that the other one has then picked up.

Reminds me of the joke:
Q. Why does and Irishman wear two condoms
A. To be sure, to be sure...

Re:Time to cut your virus count (1)

freeze128 (544774) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275943)

5) Profit, by not having to waste time with viruses!
But *my* time is worthless....

Gator is at number 4 (5, Informative)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275685)

However, Netsky still completely wipes the floor with the adware. Over 10 times as many instances of Netsky were discovered than Gator.

Re:Gator is at number 4 (0)

Spudley (171066) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275819)

What I want to know is how they find out which are the top ten spywares. Are they spying on our computers? ;-)

Re:Gator is at number 4 (1)

backslashdot (95548) | more than 9 years ago | (#10276091)

The stats are "infected files" ... what does that really mean? You can have a virus that only infected two PC's but attached itself to eveyr file on there .. would that boost it's ranking? I'm more interested in "machines with infections" or "infected users" instead.

List linked in summary not that great; look here (4, Informative)

Echnin (607099) | more than 9 years ago | (#10276097)

The link in the summary shows how many infected files that have been found in North America in the last 24 hours. It's more interesting to make it show the number of infected computers, globally in the last month: Like this. [mcafee.com] Spots 1 and 2 are taken up by "exploits"; I guess these are just unpatched machines. And then on 3, 4 and 5 are the spywa-- or wait don't sue me -- adware infestations, with Gator leading at an 8.28% infection rate.

Gator beats any virus in infestation rate if you look at the more relevant statistics.

It's about time... (5, Interesting)

Pig Hogger (10379) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275688)

But when will the financial geniuses at Symantec decide to start exacting a "fee" to spyware vendors to remove their malware from the list????

Re:It's about time... (1, Insightful)

garcia (6573) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275718)

Or when will the viruses start coming from those that are supposedly protecting us from them?

Re:It's about time... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275727)

If they don't do that for viruses, why would you expect them to do it for spyware?

Re:It's about time... (2, Interesting)

Richardsonke1 (612224) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275749)

Beacuse spyware is, at this point in time, *legal*. Try suing spyware creators for illegally placing it on your machine. You'd have quite a fight on your hands to prove you didn't install it yourself.

Re:It's about time... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275768)

Viruses may be illegal, but not removing them isn't.

Re:It's about time... (4, Interesting)

throughthewire (675776) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275919)

Try suing spyware creators for illegally placing it on your machine. You'd have quite a fight on your hands to prove you didn't install it yourself.

After having researched [blogspot.com] a spyware infection recently, I disagree.

The folks at the CTD filed a complaint [cdt.org] [warning: PDF] with the FTC that explains pretty clearly how the crapware can be installed without explicit user approval, and how difficult it is to remove.

And Tom Liston might make a nice expert witness: Follow the Bouncing Malware [sans.org]

Re:I'm going to be laughing at this one for days (1)

Blue Stone (582566) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275986)

" But when will the financial geniuses at Symantec decide to start exacting a "fee" to spyware vendors to remove their malware from the list????"

Soon, if they're the geniuses you say they are - before anyone realises the list is run by their competitors - McAfee! :)

Re:It's about time... (1)

SnoBall (778388) | more than 9 years ago | (#10276056)

There's at least 3 reasons why spyware is on that list.
It invades privacy
It reduces system performance
It corrupts the underlying OS
That is mainly why spyware is on that list, and its there because they share some similarities with viruses.

USE THESE (5, Informative)

RenHoek (101570) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275698)

Because there are still people who don't know:

Ad-Aware [lavasoftusa.com]
Search & Destroy [safer-networking.org]

To keep your pc running fast and without too many crashes..

Unfortunately... (1, Insightful)

Kjella (173770) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275797)

...I think you're preaching to the choir. If we're going to make a difference, it would be "Force a (l)user to use these:"

And this... (4, Informative)

garcia (6573) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275800)

While not exactly *required* as AdAware and SpyBot are it is certainly a nice addition to the list.

SpywareBlaster [javacoolsoftware.com]

I would have posted AC to avoid the karmawhoring but Slashdot isn't allowing my subnet to post anonymously anymore. So blame them for the "Continual Karmawhoring".

Re:And this... (1)

DragonGolem (715033) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275937)

I'd call SpywareBlaster "required" for those still using IE... it prevents [mostly ActiveX] spyware installation instead of just cleaning it up (referring to free versions of AdAware/Spybot only).

Of course I think we all know the *real* alternative... :)

Re:USE THESE (2, Informative)

CheechBG (247105) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275848)

*ahem*

HijackThis. End of story.

http://www.downloads.subratam.org/hijackthis.zip

VirusScan Enterprise 8.0i (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275709)

I have just upgraded to Enterprise 8.0i at work to test it out and I am very impressed with it. Good scanning times as well as some handy features like Buffer Over Flow protection. McAfee may have crappy home user products but the corporate stuff is top stuff!

ADWARE WORSE THAN VIRII! (2, Interesting)

enigmals1 (667526) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275720)

rather one of my users have a current-day virus than a malware product anyway! Virii don't invite all their little friends to come and play like malware does either or slow the box down to uber crawl speeds!

ADWARE OWNZ JOO!!

And the only thing worse than Adware (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275856)

is people who can't turn 'virus' into a plural properly.

Viruses, Viruses, VIRUSES!

Re:And the only thing worse than Adware (0, Offtopic)

enigmals1 (667526) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275924)

WHAT THE!!! Merriam-Wesbter says... You're right!

When'd they change that?!! Apparently Engrish OWNZ ME! ;-) Thank you for making the world a little better place by setting me straight on the correct pluralicy of the word virus.

(But at least I post with an account.) :p

Re:And the only thing worse than Adware (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275996)

Which is why you have fuck all Karma. You clearly have nothing interesting, indsightful nor informative to say.

I'd even suspect you used another of your accounts to mod the grandparent "underrated" as it obviously was not.

Re:And the only thing worse than Adware (1)

enigmals1 (667526) | more than 9 years ago | (#10276119)

First of all I've never even personally modded a post... ever--nor have I ever posted as anything but this ID. Second, I can't help if people don't mod up some of the really informative posts I have made--like the greek speech says people see the bad and never the good. Third, I'd rather have bad karma and still have the courage to show my face than post as an anonymous coward. It's very easy to talk big when no one knows who you are so I don't see how you can comment on posting at all since as far as we know you have NEVER posted anything intelligent. :p

*get's off soapbox* That is the last I'm going to waste in this topic just retorting back to your worthless posts and wasting perfectly good post space. My original comment was valid and anything else from/to you is simply a waste of these good people's time.

P.S. I love how hostile you got even when I actually even said you were right. Interesting. Just sounds like a troll trying to stir crap up.

About time... (5, Interesting)

salvorHardin (737162) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275776)

..it was recognised for what it is. Here, in the UK, such software falls foul of the Computer Misuse Act (which is due for an update). Personally, I already spend far too much time removing Adware [wikipedia.org], Spyware [wikipedia.org], BHOs, et cetera from Windows machines, especially at one site, where they seem to actually think CoolWebSearch [bbc.co.uk] really is cool.

Re:About time... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275853)

I installed Morpheus last week which proudly claimed to be spyware free if you uncheck all it's "offers". It didn't fucking matter though and went ahead and installed the shit anyway. Took me 2 hours to finally clean it all up and get that god damn IBIS toolbar crap off my computer.

Re:About time... (2, Interesting)

joelethan (782993) | more than 9 years ago | (#10276064)

I submitted this story with glee. While Adware, Spyware and BHOs do seem to break the terms of the (UK) Computer Misuse Act I don't see anyone being prosecuted. Would you care to join me in a test case http://slashdot.org/~salvorHardin [slashdot.org]? I'm sooo up for this.

It was no idle talk. I have given so much of my precious free time to bail friends (and, yes, myself) out of the Adware trap.

Oh yes, I'm feeling mighty litigious! /JE

good move/about time (4, Interesting)

Chuck Bucket (142633) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275779)

This is a good move, currently I'm helping my mom's next door neighbor trouble shoot her Dell...1000 miles away! My mom has dial up, but her computer is just chocked by viruii and adware. She's new to the internet, so she thinks if she just does whatever she'll be ok.

Also, the McAfee trial she was using didn't catch much, I suppose she didn't have updated pattens, but with a dial up, is it possible/easy to get updates?

I'm leaning on her to get Broadband, and then let me put Linux on that Dell...

CB_)EW____>>>

Re:good move/about time (1)

lachlan76 (770870) | more than 9 years ago | (#10276089)

but with a dial up, is it possible/easy to get updates?

Yes. I did it yesterday over a 33.6k dial-up link, so I don't see what the problem for most people would be - especially with Service Pack 2 to remind them.

BItCH (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275795)

Are 7000 users an3 exciting; our cause. Gay Comprehensive

Linux sucks!!! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275805)

When did you stop beating your mongoloid wife sir?

Your silence only incriminates you further!

Gator's methods should be illegal (2, Interesting)

Lord Graga (696091) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275812)

The way Gator tries to install is absolutely unacceptable. I really think that it should be stopped, one way or another.


Claria sounds like some sexual desease.

North Americans are clueless (-1, Troll)

HermanAB (661181) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275823)

According to the McAffee stats, the worst infection rate is in North America. This must be due to outsourcing all geek jobs to India...

Re:North Americans are clueless (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275874)

No, we just have lots of rich, stupid people. We encourage it, actually.

Re:North Americans are clueless (-1, Troll)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 9 years ago | (#10276010)

You have cause and effect backwards.

The jobs are going to india because the American geeks suck at them. Indians work for about a dollar an hour, which is more than most of the "IT experts" I've met stateside deserve to make.

AdAware? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10275827)

Clearly I'm the only one who read this as Ad*A*ware and thought McAfee was listing competition as a virus.

So the FBI can safely install spyware et al... (4, Interesting)

h00manist (800926) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275866)

Magic Lantern, carnivore, omnivore...

So how do you keep the feds from snooping [theregister.co.uk] you?

Re:So the FBI can safely install spyware et al... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10276016)

Vote for congresspersons who oppose the Patriot Act and the Freedom of Information Act?

One step forward (-1, Troll)

Deliveranc3 (629997) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275872)

... but not there yet. What about microsoft, when it hits number one the virus companies will be done.

I never saw much of a difference... (3, Insightful)

woodsrunner (746751) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275909)

...Other than malware/Adware starts with a team of lawyers on staff, where as virus writers don't get a lawyer until after they are busted.

And while most malware may not be self replicating, it does have viral components in that it is predatory non-living creature that lives off its host. And good malware, like a good virus goes undetected. Cheating the system of confidentiality and resources. Sending it's host to places that suit it, and exploit the host.

Does it really matter that they aren't totally self replicating like a worm... early viruses were just malicious macros using MS Office and WP as a vector to be passed around by unsuspecting knobs.

A lot of smart viruses use their host to infect others. HIV, for example isn't very good at replicating itself... it relies on humans to do most of the work. It just sits in the blood stream. Other viruses use multiple species to get passed around where some species are adversly effected and other species in the chain don't even notice it's benign precence.

Similarly, code like Roings or Gator, are a great malware/virus hybrid. They just sit around and wait to be downloaded from from blog sites like Xanga or P2P networks like Kazaa... it uses other users to actually recommend to their friends to get the infection. Now that is using relational marketing!

Why bother writing self replicating code when you can get guillable fools to do the replicating for you.

As far as spyware for linux, I suspect it is out there. My browser (mozilla) has been hijacked a few times, I haven't figured out how. Has anyone else experienced this? I am not trying to start a flame war, I know I probably have something missing or misconfigured, but how... I don't know.

It's about freaking time (1)

davidbrit2 (775091) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275939)

I've been saying for a while now that we just need the anti-virus software publishers to recognize adware and its heathenous kin as being in the same category as Code Red or Klez for the public to start taking it more seriously. It's actually more of a threat now than just plain old "viruses" (in most everyday cases, anyway).

it's true (0, Redundant)

tazanator (681948) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275954)

I got hit by ads234 or also called midADDdle ... It is a VIRUS, spybot adaware even hijack had problems removing it. It had 4 copies running and when you deleted one file it reinstalled all 4 changing the names. It even had a few process in the backgound checking to make sure it was all there running. I had to ripe the whole system apart to fix it. I never aproved or wanted it but man removing it was harder than getting rid of the stoned monkey virus.

adware - Adaware??? Foncusion (-1, Redundant)

DrKayBee (769192) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275965)

Was it only me that misread the article summary that it's adware and not AdAware http://www.lavasoft.de/ [lavasoft.de]? Its been some time since I used that product....(MS-free for a year now)

Re:adware - Adaware??? Foncusion (3, Informative)

statusbar (314703) | more than 9 years ago | (#10276112)

And also just to clarify that Adaware is NOT available at http://www.adaware.com/

http://www.adaware.com/ is actually a Ada software site who is taking advantage of their name to sell spyassasin. Kind of underhanded as it doesn't SAY it is spyassasin.

--jeff++

Prosecution? (4, Interesting)

Renraku (518261) | more than 9 years ago | (#10275987)

Could companies be prosecuted for exploiting bugs and vulnerabilities to install their garbage on people's machines? I don't know how many reinstalls I've went through, forgot to turn off the fifteen different settings in IE, and ended up with webpages spamming my desktop and taskbar as hard as they could by going to a seemingly harmless website, or mistyping the name of a popular website.

I recently fixed someone's computer that had so much spyware, it was running like a 66MHz machine on Windows 98SE. They were using a 2.5GHz with 512MB of RAM. The start button would take three seconds of griding to hit, and hitting it made three or four spam windows pop up, mostly about gambling, porn, or pills.

Yes but does it work man. (1)

cermanius (814292) | more than 9 years ago | (#10276052)

From what I've heard, some of the Virus scanners out there, like Norton, will detect but not remove AdWare. So, the question here is, will McAffe actually remove it, or does it just detect it. Plain old detection is useless. That's like a virus scanner popping up and saying "HEY STUPID! You have a virus but guess what, I don't feel like doing anything about it. I would just like to inform you of you gross incompetence."

Does Linux have a Top Ten list yet? (1)

barks (640793) | more than 9 years ago | (#10276054)

I'm just throwing this out here in a weak attempt to avoid RTFM...but is there a top ten list of viruses or spyware for Linux?

I've only been using Gentoo for about 2 months now and have been for the most part naive about looking further into security; firewalls; and virus scanners for Linux; my easy breezy KDE; and Gentoo in specific.

What other competitors do they mean? (1)

Warlock7 (531656) | more than 9 years ago | (#10276065)

Symantec NAV certainly doesn't detect any Adware/Malware/SPYWARE. That would be their biggest competitor in the anti-virus market, after all.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...