Re: iDownload/iSearch responds to Spyware Critics

From: bkfsec (bkfsec_at_sdf.lonestar.org)
Date: 03/11/05

  • Next message: LSS Security: "Ethereal remote buffer overflow #2" 
    Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:58:57 -0500
To: Paul Laudanski <zx@castlecops.com>

    Paul Laudanski wrote:

    >Slashdot ran two stories earlier on how iDownload/iSearch sent letters to
    >anti-spyware companies/websites telling them to [
    >http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/23/1830243&from=rss ] stop
    >listing their brand as spyware or malware. The spyware critics [
    >http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/02/0229222&from=rss ]
    >responded back indicating they do not agree with iDownload's assertions.
    >iDownload has now responded back to the spyware critics. Two sites to
    >date received replies, read [
    >http://castlecops.com/article-5793-nested-0-0.html ] CastleCops and [
    >http://sunbeltblog.blogspot.com/2005/03/idownloads-response-to-sunbelt.html
    >] Sunbelt Software for details. Other sources picked up this story
    >including [
    >http://news.independent.co.uk/world/science_technology/story.jsp?story=615884
    >] The Independent, [ http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/60608 ]
    >Broadbandreports, [ http://castlecops.com/article5772.html ] Robin, and
    >ZDNet Blog [ http://blogs.zdnet.com/Spyware/index.php?p=28 ] Spyware
    >Confidential.
    >
    >
    >
    What's truly interesting is that the legal counsel for iDownload/iSearch
    indicates that there is a "lively debate" going on on the internet about
    whether or not their program is spyware or not.

    Maybe I'm not looking in the same places, but I have never seen any
    debate regarding the classification of these programs, at least not a
    lively one.
    As for my own experience, I've witnessed iSearch/iDownload packages
    being installed on systems during adware/spyware infestations. Only one
    conclusion can be gained from that: You guys are on the right side of
    this argument and these people need to be opposed.

    Their assertions are laughable.

                   -Barry

  • Next message: LSS Security: "Ethereal remote buffer overflow #2"
    • Quantcast