RSSCoalition Finalizes Spyware Definitions
By Nate Mook | Published January 13, 2006, 1:09 PM
The Anti-Spyware Coalition has published a final draft of criteria to use in defining whether or not a software application is spyware. The document is designed to help anti-spyware vendors properly categorize malware and avoid legal attacks from companies who claim their software is unfairly targeted.
With 43 percent of Internet users reporting they have been infected with spyware, tools to detect and remove the malicious applications have become a prerequisite for PC users. But much confusion still exists on what constitutes spyware and adware, which has led to improper classification and even lawsuits.
The Anti-Spyware Coalition, headed by the Center for Democracy & Technology with support from industry giants AOL, Earthlink, Microsoft, and Yahoo is attempting to set the record straight with a series of guidelines. A draft of the "risk modeling" document was issued in October and opened for comments.
The ASC says the final version reflects input from over 100 comments.
"By demystifying the process of identifying and flagging spyware, the risk-modeling description gives consumers a clearer understanding of how anti-spyware software protects them. It should also begin to aid software developers in making safer, more consumer-friendly software," said Ari Schwartz, deputy director of the Center for Democracy and Technology.
With the document complete, the Coalition will hold a public workshop on February 9 entitled "Defining the Problem, Creating Solutions." The event will include government regulators, state technology and law enforcement officials, as well as individuals from public interest groups and Internet companies.
The ASC's work has not been without criticism, however. In order to join the group, a company must pay $10,000 each year and be voted in unanimously by current organization members. Some smaller companies have claimed this barrier to entry makes it impossible for them to take part in the process.
Hopfully Dell has joined so they can keep their Web Search redirection "utility," installed on every brand new pc's they sell.
Score: 0
Reformat any PC you buy. Kill everything.
Score: 0
I agree with bourgeoisdude. The lawyers love having a definition that they can find away around. I also agree we ought to have Unwanted Programs/Files remover. But, we should have a legal remedy to prosecute those companies responsible for installing them without our knowledge or permission. There should be a requirement that all installers must have an explanation in lay terms (just like medical informed consent) as to what is being installed, monitored, and reported by software. If the medical community can do it at every medical facility in the country so can the tech industry. Failure to do this should result in heavy penalties and the possibility of being legally prevented from writing and marketing software. This would be similar to removing a doctor or nurses license to practice. I personally am sick and tired of this anything for a profit attitude.
Score: 0
Well spyware adware virus trojan whatever. I'm in the business of often having to remove junk like this, so i'll decide what to remove and what not to, based on my own determination, whether they say it's bad or not. And i hope all you others do the same. Think for yourselves. Remember these are big corps and ultimately only really have their own best interests in mind. Some of which may - or may not - be shady. We just don't know.
Score: 0
I'm also in the same business, and I agree, joeshmoe7. If its hyjacking, spying, or otherwise screwing up a customers net traffic, it gets removed. People keep asking "How'd that get there? I didn't ask for it!" As far as I'm concerned, it needs to go.
Score: 0
yes and in my opinion, this "coalition" ought to pay Merijn Bellekom a million bucks to join, for the work he's done and the legend that is the HijackThis program. Also not to mention, the other guy from spywarewarrior, who has done much to uncover rouge anti-spyware apps. These companies ought to be BEGGING these guys to join in my opinion. Otherwise i remain suspicious to their motives and/or intelligence. To me these guys are the real heroes.
Score: 0
Before everyone blows a collective gasket, check the member list of the ASC. A majority of the list is comprised of (mostly) trusted companies that I feel are fairly reliable. Panda, Sophos, Eset, Webroot, Lavasoft, Safer-Networking, and plenty more like them make up the list of members. I didn't see WhenU, 1800Solutions, or Cydoor listed. A couple of the companies may have dubious connections or have made bad decisions, but they're greatly outweighed by the better entities. No reason to panic.
Given the current makeup of the panel, I'm actually not too worried about things. If the panel starts making poor decisions or becomes infiltrated by intrusionware companies, then I'll do the thing that actually works: I'll vote with my wallet. If enough customers ask for refunds or switch to another company when it's time to renew and actually take time to tell the company why, then there's a chance to affect how they vote.
Score: 0
Webroot is a liar.
Score: 0
"company must pay $10,000 each year and be voted in unanimously by current organization"
Q: Who was the first company to get voted in, and who did the voting? This all seems kind of fishy to me. I work in Virus Removal, and I've never had anyone dispute the fact that a virus is a virus, and that spyware is bad.
Score: 0
Yeah, you have to pay to join an organzation for the priveledge to decide if something is spyware? What's that? I agree, its fishy.
Score: 0
A repost of my previous comment.. *Edited for content*
By rijp posted Oct 27, 2005 - 2:23 PM
I don't care what definition they deem spyware, spyware is ANY program that infringes on a users ability to function. There is no "acceptable" limit to this type of activity. If a program STARTS harmless and BECOMES a nuisance, its spyware. Period. The word "spyware" may have become an all inclusive term to blanket cover programs that do other things, but maybe the term should be coined "nuisanceware". Either way, investigating software in add-remove programs is very revealing. People have items that they didn't put there, nor do they want it.
AOL could be deemed spyware/nuisance if you have multiple versions, and the removal program only removes "known" versions, and previous versions persist, THAT's spyware.
If you have programs that get installed ALONG with a acceptable or wanted program, then THAT program should be termed SPYWARE. Programs that facilitate other programs infiltration is spyware.
If you commit a crime, and you do it with someone, that someone is guilty by association of you are found guilty. Same with software, guilty by reason of affiliation. That's spyware!
What I don't want is a bunch of programs on my machine that fill it up, and I didn't SPECIFICALLY put it there, it shouldn't be "ignored" simply because some committee doesn't think its harmful. Its harmful, if I say its harmful and we USERS say its harmful. If AOL won't remove from my system, after the deletion routine is finished, and AOL continues to infiltrate and infringe or interfere with proper operation of my system, that's SPYWARE! Even if it wasn't to begin with, it is now, and should be removed. Its not considered a hostile program
OK, that's a drastic measure, but the old addage, if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and acts like a duck, it MUST be a duck!!!!! It can't be anything else.
If companies make programs that APPEAR to retain spyware like activity or programs simulate spyware activity, then maybe there is a problem there.
This is a prime example of not including the people this ruling will affect. The people.
We use it, *WE* should be able to vote on the outcome, but no, instead they leave it some committee. If a few months from now, I have sypware I can't remove and my anti-spyware is updated to ignore it, I am going to be very upset, and there will be hell to pay.
Score: 0
Fine, don't call it spyware then, call it crapwear. "Your program is crap and people don't want it on their systems". Don't call it a spyware remover, call it an unwanted program remover.
Score: 0
Agreed. All this is going to do is provide spyware companies' lawyers to have a solid defense. This helps them more than us in the end. Technology changes so much that the definition of spyware CAN NEVER BE final, as it is always changing. They will figure out how to get an out from the definition, you wait and see.
Score: 0
Yes, I agree as well. If I didn't put it there, I don't care what tag it has, its unwanted as you say and I want it removed. Period. If I didn't put it there, than that program should be considered "spy"ware.
Score: 0
Spyware spys on you. If it's not spying on you, it's not spyware. Why is that so hard to understand?
Score: 0
morriscox,
Agreed! You cant throw every piece of software people find obtrusive under the title "spyware".
Thats why there is Adware, Maleware, Trojans, Key Loggers etc. People should educate them self before deeming everything as spyware.
Score: 0
Adware, Spyware, Malware, Trojans, Keyloggers. Fear them, and ban them all.
Score: 0