Stop Forming Groups To Fight Spyware, Start Fighting Spyware
from the just-a-suggestion dept
A year ago, a coalition of firms that had been created mainly to fight spyware fell apart, mainly because parts of the group agreed to let in adware firms who had less than stellar reputations. Since that time, new groups have formed… but that seems like about it. Some are noticing that there are now four major coalitions designed to fight spyware, but it’s unclear if any of them are doing anything particularly useful. Of course, having four different groups also leads to confusion and potentially conflicting strategies. Either way, it’s not particularly encouraging.
Comments on “Stop Forming Groups To Fight Spyware, Start Fighting Spyware”
I agree. We need to start taking some real tangible actions against the companies which try so hard to make our internet lives miserable. Spyware is invasive of our privacy rights and needs to be eliminated completely, not to mention the burden it places on our computers which slows them to a crawl. With the current technology, we are able to find where the spyware originates. Since the internet is newer than most of our laws which are supposed to protect our rights, we need to update our laws so we can prosecute offenders to the maximum penalty.
I disagree. I think that the less government in internet, the better. If we let the government in, the UN will eventually control it, and it will become another federal pawn. In the event that governments go bad, they will be in a much better position to censor websites if we let them in. Technology and independant companies are much better ways.
Re: Re: Spyware
The UN control it? The US more likely. The US tends to do what it wants dispite the UN, and would probably take control first. But I do agree with you. Less government in the Internet is good, to an extent. We need some general laws for the internet, though.
Re: Re: Spyware
I agree the less government the better, however, how do you fight something as dispersed and enigmatic as spyware producers without government intervention on an international level?
BTW, between UCANN and initiatives like what the Chinese are doing it is clear that government regulation/control of the internet is on the way, as soon as politicians get savvy enough to phrase laws so they appear to be “in our own good”
Re: Re: Re: Spyware
I agree entirely with the statement: “I think that the less government in internet, the better.”
However, as someone else mentioned, we are already heading in that direction.
What is unfortunate is that while the government or Media organizations can effectively “monitor” our internet usage, there’s no law against bone-fide spyware doing it.
The government should either step out entirely, and let the Internet be (including trying to police copyright infrindgement by allowing the misuse of the Judicial system,) or it ought to at least protect the privacy of the citizen just as much as it protects companies that misuse obtained innformation.
I guess we just have to accept the fact that information is now a greater commodity than ever before, and it will only get worse.
Regarding different anti-spyware programs detecting each other or different items, the finally decision should and already is in the hands of the user. E.g: If “Spyware Bleacher” and “Spyware Buttwiper” detect each other as spyware, who cares, because we can always do our own research and see who we trust more.
The government needs to get out and stay the hell out of the internet completely and let it be our best tool for free speach and sharing information.
It should be common sense that Government and Information are a bad mix!
Re: Re: Re: Spyware
I couldnt agree more. WE have read on here and the government is finally noticing what the iPod is and etc. it will be only a matter of time untill the freedom of internet is shut down. I dont agree with suicide sites or bomb site or anti Government or whatever but, I think we should be able to do as we damn please on the net and I believe the net will be a far more censored place in the next 10 years
Let us decide...
This is slightly off-topic, but it does relate to spyware…
I think all these lawsuits against anti-spyware companies such as Symantec claiming that Symantec is falsely labeling company X’s product “spyware” is ridiculous!
Why doesn’t Symantec just create a list of questionable actions that various apps perform:
[ ] Programs that send your search queries to a third-party.
[ ] Programs that record and report back to the software maker that you have run their product.
[ ] Etc.
And let the end user of the anti-spyware app check off the actions that are objectionable to them. This way, *I* can choose which type of apps I deem as “spyware” and want the anti-spyware app to remove. Thus, there will be no reason for a software maker to accuse anti-spyware company’s to mis-classifying their product as spyware, since the end user decides what type of apps they want removed. Simple huh?
Re: Let us decide...
I can see a program of that sort being somewhat more useful than Spybot; however, I don’t see Symantec making it for the simple reason that people that buy Symantec products are looking for something they install and touch once and again. They don’t want something complex that will take up lots of their time. Granted, I am saying most and there might be one or two “powerusers” out there that would like this from Symantec, but I doubt we’ll see it.
Re: Re: Let us decide...
“are looking for something they install and touch once and again.”
Simple…the app could have all the check-boxes “checked” by default – which would indicate that the user wants to block ALL suspicious apps/actions. But, by allowing the user to de-select certain actions/apps eliminates Symantec from liability that they forced users to accept that the app from xyz was spyware.
How about instead of filtering and blocking. They just rework how email works. Right now I could send out an email saying it was send from firstname.lastname@example.org. Obvoisly I don’t have such an email account; and that seams to be the biggest flaw in email. The server that sends the email with *@microsoft.com should have the DNS rights of that domain.
The USA government unable to stop spyware it seems
It seems the government has been spy on Americans since 911. This includes all transmissions in and outside of the US. They are looking for anomalies and specific words with sophisticated top-secret equipment and software. I consider worm, spyware and viruses on the internet anomalies and believe anyone with intelligence would concur. Therefore, I ask you, with the hundred?s of billions of dollars being spent on national security, why are we unable to detect a simple virus on our internet?