RE: Incorrect Classification of iDownload's Product as Spyware...

["Roger A. Grimes" <roger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I've got a solution for this litigation problem for the anti-spyware
companies.

Create a new classification called Recognized Software.  In the
description, tell end users that Recognize software contains both wanted
and unwanted software. The software is in this category because many
users consider it and its actions unwanted. 

Ok, not spyware, just unwanted recognized software.  Easy to prove in
court, not slander, no lawsuit. Let's not quibble over
name-calling...and get to the root of the intent. Does end-user want
this particular software to keep on being installed and used if it knew
its true actions?  

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Laudanski [mailto:zx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 8:47 AM
To: bugtraq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; full-disclosure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Incorrect Classification of iDownload's Product as Spyware...

In a letter received by CastleCops from a law firm representing
iDownload/iSearch Toolbar:

http://castlecops.com/article-5762-nested-0-0.html

It has been found out that another website has received a similar form.

In the next link is our response, with more information on the other
website, Spyware Warrior Blog:

http://castlecops.com/article-5765-nested-0-0.html

Other security sites have picked up the story:

http://netrn.net/spywareblog/archives/2005/02/22/idownloads-product-is-n
ot-malware/
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12733617%7Emode=flat
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/60608
http://www.revenews.com/wayneporter/archives/000429.html
http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=67648

--
Regards,

Paul Laudanski - Computer Cops, LLC.
CastleCops(SM) - http://castlecops.com
http://cuddlesnkisses.com | http://justalittlepoke.com |
http://zhen-xjell.com