Re: [SLUG] Hackers drop spyware into popular tool -> utility used by Unix, Linux and BSD

From: Frank Roberts - SOTL (sotl155360@earthlink.net)
Date: Fri Aug 01 2003 - 22:31:20 EDT


Hi Tim

Well that is one point. Not the one I was trying to make.

What I posted the reference for was actually as a response to a number of
articles I had raid that regarding e-mail spammers, advertisers, and other
assorted unsavory marketing types who are are placing cookies, programs, and
other tracking components into desktop computers. Admittedly most of this is
happening to MS boxes but admittedly 95% of desktops are MS boxes too. What
my referenced showed was that it was possible although harder to do the same
to Linux boxes with out the owner user noticing.

>From a legal point I do not understand how it is legal but in reality that is
irrelevant. The relevant point there is that it does happen and that it can
trash Linux boxes and/or you are followed around the net. Maybe there is
something wrong with me but I don't like that. In fact I hate it so much that
when Netscape was the only browser I hated to use it because I always thought
of it automatic acquisition of the latest news in the email windows as
reporting in to Net Central Command. You know the place at AOL where the have
the complete files and dossiers on all Americans using the internet.

Now admitally top level hackers may be able to find such malicious code but
realize that there is an awful lot of code in a Linus box so then again they
may not be able to find it if they knew it exist.

All this rambling brings me back to the point of how can one configure a box
so that pop-up adds do not occur while allowing pop-up information web pages?

I do know that it can be done in Mozelle sometimes but Mozelle is nothing more
than the Linux sanitized version of Netscape so I am never sure that Mozelle
is not secretly reporting to Net Central Command. Don't know that it is but I
don't believe it is not. The good old FBI has an adequate about this: Once a
slime ball always a slime ball except they don't use the words 'slime ball'.
Simply don't trust the people since they proved not to be trustry worthy in
the past.

The other immediate possibility is Galeon but Galeon in Md 9.1 is not as good
as Galeon in 9.0 for some reason. Don't know but I believe Genome went to a
higher level and there is some more adjustments required for Galeon and
Genome to function as well as it did.

Konqueror which I like does not have filters for pop-ups.

Then of course there is Opera. Now you may pay that bunch of fools money but
not me. Besides this looks like it reeks of the Netscape disease - reporting
in to Command Central.

Lets regress back a bit to the part of pop-ups. How does one get rid of pop-up
adds with out getting rid of pop-up information windows [since they are using
the same code, only the information is different] using Mozelle and visiting
general sites without doing more work than simply closing the offending
pop-up is beyond me. I haven't figured out any way to filter out the adds
which I don't want without filtering out content which I do want before the
first visit to an unknown site. Like I haven't figured out any way of setting
up the filters without spending more effort to set up the filters than it
takes to close the offending pop-up. I would imagine that a large part of
that indeterminable in quantity of effort is due to my usage of a dial-up
line instead of a higher speed line. In my case normally all I see is a blank
pop-up window. In the case of a high speed line I imagine I would see the
pop-up which would offend me sufficiently that the effort of finding
effective filters would be exerted.

Which all leads back how does one get rid of such trash?

Thanks
Frank

On Friday 01 August 2003 17:12, Timothy L. Jones wrote:
> The difference here is that because source code was modified it is possible
> for any C programmer to do a recursive diff between all versions going back
> and find/remove exactly what was changed. It can also be fixed and
> redistributed with the full confidence, assurance and accountability of the
> developer who is willing to stand by his work.
>
> In order words, we don't have to rely on Bill and Ballmer saying it's okay,
> while shoveling unrelated "fixes" and EULA changes down our throats.
>
> tlj
>

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked
Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages
posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 15:54:09 EDT