Webroot\SpySweeper withdraw from COAST

[TeMerc]

BOULDER, Colo., Feb. 4 /PRNewswire/ -- Webroot Software announced todaythat after careful consideration, the company has decided to withdraw itsmembership from the Consortium of Anti-Spyware Technology Vendors (COAST).The company issued the following statement: "Webroot has always considered our obligations to our customers as ourmost important mission as a company. We believe their protection, privacy andpeace of mind are paramount and have developed products and supported publicpolicies that reflect that view. Our founding of the Consortium ofAnti-Spyware Technology Vendors, or COAST, also reflected that position. Of late, we have become concerned that COAST is moving in a direction withwhich we cannot agree. We have long championed an open dialog amonganti-spyware solutions on standards criteria for defining spyware. However,we are not comfortable with the idea of COAST as a certification body or as amarketing tool for member companies. These concerns required Webroot tore-assess our affiliation with COAST and after careful consideration, Webrootis resigning from COAST, effective immediately. The company will continue toplay an active part in public dialogues about these issues, and will continueto participate in alliances and organizations that share our views and goals."Full Read @ PRNewswire

[Jeber]

Too bad they didn't elaborate on

the idea of COAST as a certification body or as amarketing tool for member companies

. As a user of the paid version of SpySweeper, I'm very supportive of the product and the company behind it, and recommend it frequently. As long as they maintain their current standards, I'll continue to do so.

[muckshifter]

Too bad they didn't elaborate on.  As a user of the paid version of SpySweeper, I'm very supportive of the product and the company behind it, and recommend it frequently.  As long as they maintain their current standards,  I'll continue to do so.

Spy Sweeper has a small price-tag well worth paying for. I'll continue to support them.

[rbdietz]

I wonder if the timing of their withdrawal had anything to do with180solutions Joins Consortium of Anti-Spyware Technology Vendors?

[muckshifter]

Hey ... good Find.

[Rons]

Hey ... good Find. 

Like letting the fox into the hen house.

[JackR]

If you look at this page: http://www.coast-info.org/members.htmThe Membership list is not very impressive.The top paragraph states."Membership in COAST in and of itself does not imply or expressly guarantee that the Member product or service is, or in the future will be, spyware free ".Unless you are certified.Let me Guess certification is Not Inexpensive.

[Corrine]

Lavasoft dumped COAST in December, 2003:

Worst Practices - Why we have decided to leave COASTNicolas Stark Computing AB (Lavasoft) announces that we will no longer tolerate, support, or participate in the COAST (Consortium of Anti-Spyware Technology Vendors) organization. The current leadership's overt agenda to concentrate on revenue generation flies in the face of the spirit of the original mission Lavasoft set forth when we founded COAST. Not only do their current efforts shed a bad light on COAST, but also reflect badly on the entire anti-trackware industry.

Much more here: http://www.lavasoft.de/news/20031216.shtmlJackR, it isn't only the cost for certification, as that is in addition to the annual membership fee:

How is charging an emerging anti-trackware developer $2,500.00/year or a large software development company up to $5,000.00/year just to join COAST equitable or even fair. The current Consortium plan is to have software developers (makers of applications the industry has added to their collective databases) apply and pay to join, then to charge them a certification fee to review their separate applications.

[TeMerc]

Aluria joins the fray, too little too late:http://www.aluriasoftware.com/index.php?me...news&link=coastMore on Aluria:http://castlecops.com/article-5722-nested-0-0.htmlSuzi gives her opinion too:http://netrn.net/spywareblog/archives/2005...cline-of-coast/Summary of COAST situation\downfall:http://castlecops.com/article-5721-nested-0-0.html

[TeMerc]

And now, Mike Healon, of Spyware Info:http://www.spywareinfo.com/articles/spywar...st_implodes.php

[TeMerc]

Eric posted this over at the DSLR thread:http://www.broadbandreports.com/forum/rema...80063~mode=flat

Hi All:The Seattle Post-Intelligencer has a decent story on the crack-up of COAST:said by John Cook:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Anti-spyware group unravels over directionBy JOHN COOKSEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTERThe Consortium of Anti-Spyware Technology Vendors was established to help computer users remove unwanted software and put pressure on those companies that distribute invasive online advertising technologies.But just 20 months after it was founded by four leading anti-spyware companies, the organization -- known by its acronym, Coast -- has fallen into disarray.Two of the founding members of the group withdrew yesterday and a third is expected to pull support next week -- moves that come just three weeks after the controversial admission of Bellevue-based 180solutions. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Full article: »seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/210875..Best,Eric L. Howes

I for one found it very interesting how Mr. Carlson negelcts to inform the writer of Alurias key role in dragging in WhenU into COASTs membership. Or, perhaps the writer didn't know about it? I would hope its neither, as it points to a rather poorly trained journalist. He should have done some homework and if Carlson had not mentioned WhenU, he should have.Also an interesting point as Carlson points to 180Solutions as one reason they left the organization, but feels WehnU is OK. LOLOh, wait, I forgot, they are now Spyware Free Certified...........LMAO

[rbdietz]

Alliance of Security Analysis Professionls? Shouldn't that be -Alliance of Security Analysis Professionals.

[TeMerc]

Whatever do you mean?

[Corrine]

If there was a typo, I guess I missed it too. rbdietz, you can get more information here on the Alliance of Security Analysis Professionals, including member sites.

[TeMerc]

A high-powered coalition of anti-spyware vendors has collapsed amid a rash of acrimony and finger-pointing.The Consortium of Anti-Spyware Technology vendors (COAST) was rendered toothless when three founding members—Webroot Software Inc., Aluria Software LLC and Computer Associates International Inc.'s PestPatrol—withdrew from the group, citing separate reasons for quitting.Another founder, Lavasoft Inc., pulled out of the consortium earlier and accused COAST's leadership of adopting an "overt agenda to concentrate on revenue generation."The latest withdrawals stem from the decision by COAST to allow membership to 180solutions Inc., a Bellevue, Wash.-based search marketing company that uses questionable tactics to install ad-serving software on computers.In statements released over the weekend, Webroot and Aluria listed different reasons for leaving COAST, and although the inclusion of 180solutions was not mentioned, company executives made it clear that they were uncomfortable with the idea of adware firms using COAST membership as a marketing tool."Of late, we have become concerned that COAST is moving in a direction with which we cannot agree," Boulder, Colo.-based Webroot said in a statement. "We have long championed an open dialog among anti-spyware solutions on standards criteria for defining spyware. However, we are not comfortable with the idea of COAST as a certification body or as a marketing tool for member companies."Full Read @eWeek

[balo]

Thanks for the articles. Quite interesting. There is no doubt that Webroot, whose products I use, is correct.

[Guest LilBambi]

I too have purchased Webroot's Spy Sweeper and run it every night, as well as using it conjuction with MS AntiSpyware weekly. I only use Spy Sweeper's realmode.Still keep Ad-Aware (for now*) and Spybot S&D as well and run them periodically too.* Links on this article on my Blog: Ad-Aware delisted WhenU!!BTW: I just checked and Ad-Aware's TAC listing has not added WhenU back in as yet. Really bad timing. And PestPatrol isn't much better .. they also delisted WhenU. So what are folks to do if they are stuck with old defs for 'non-conforming' iterations of WhenU? :thumbsdown:Webroot's Spy Sweeper has not delisted WhenU according to Webroot's posting on Spyware Warrior forum and have no intention of doing so.

[Corrine]

The initial release of the WhenU uninstaller has been released: http://www.lavasoftusa.com/support/download/

[TeMerc]

The initial release of the WhenU uninstaller has been released:  http://www.lavasoftusa.com/support/download/

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What I don't get is, how will you know if you have it installed, if Ad-was-aware, no longer detects it?Sadly, Lavasoft has lost all credibility by giving in to the WhenU legal team. I can only imagine the party they are having at Lavsofts expense.And now ISearch\IDownload is following suit:http://www.broadbandreports.com/forum/rema...33617~mode=flatIts just a matter of time before the next known x-ware installer gets their lawyers to get action going.I can almost see the CWSI Transponder Gang lining up to say they are a 'legal' adware company too.

[Corrine]

Hi, TeMerc. I beta tested the uninstaller last night. Since I spend 99.9% of my computer time on the various security sites, I don't even get a tracking cookie to remove. However, using the uninstaller on a clean machine, I got the message that WhenU was not detected. Being a good beta tester, I installed WhenU on my computer. Please note that an Ad-Aware full system scan with SE1R28 did turn up WhenU BHO's. However, rather than removing with AAW, I ran the uninstaller. I got a message that WhenU was detected and to reboot ASAP. Running the uninstaller and Ad-Aware after reboot did not detect WhenU. In addition, I followed that with HJT, which also did not show any WhenU remnants on my machine. There may be additions that need to be made to the uninstaller, but it appears to me that the idea was to get the fix available as soon a possible. As to all the other speculations, I am not at liberty to discuss the bits & pieces of information that I have picked up behind the scenes. All I can say is that the issues are being dealt with. I also need to point out that I think it is most inappropriate for you to say Lavasoft gave in to the WhenU legal team. If you can provide verification of that statement, I would certainly be interested in seeing it. I have not seen anything published in that regard.

[TeMerc]

I guess I should have closed that comment about Lavasoft caving in as just my opinion of the way things appear.And, I might add, in the overall security forums, which I too read often, that is the general concensus.From a lay persons point of view, taking into account the amount of legal mumbo jumbo, and all of that, one can't dismiss the possibility. I might add that, as has been noted over at the DSLR thread, that Lavasoft was at the very least, slow in its response over the issue in question. And the things they did say for the reasoning behind it were less than fulfilling.If the clamour over this had not been brought up, you know, as well as I, Lavasoft would not have bothered to add WhenU back into its defs database, nor develope an uninstaller for older variants of WhenU. Fortunately, we have the likes of Eric Howes among others to keep an eye things and point them out.That alone, tells more of the companys concerns more than anything eles. And of course, by not addressing these issues quickly and succinctly, Lavasoft has now gotten it self into a corner, because with each and every defs release, everyone is going to be tearing them apart to see whats been added or changed, and then, be asked to create an uninstaller for anythnig that happens to be along the lines of WhenU.And I give you credit for standing behind them, as I know, given their poor accounting of things they did, the long overdue explanation of why they did what they did, I could never stand behind them.I, in all lieklyhood will be removing the app from my machine, and installing MS\AS once it is in final release.(more power to you beta testers!)Lavasoft has lost my trust with this single, poorly handled situation.

[nlinecomputers]

TeMerc,I tend to agree with you about Lavasoft but OTOH what choice do they have. It is one thing to stand on your principles, it's another to pay the legal fees to stand on your principles.Would it be better if they were driven out of business?

[TeMerc]

TeMerc,I tend to agree with you about Lavasoft but OTOH what choice do they have.  It is one thing to stand on your principles, it's another to pay the legal fees to stand on your principles.Would it be better if they were driven out of business?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If they were to go out of business, which is highly unlikely, they would have no one but themselves to blame. There is no way you can make a decision based on your own standards then, come about a day or so, (or 3-4 as the case turns out to be) and reinstate that which you just removed, and do it with a suddenly newly created system for defining what is or is not removed by your app. It defies all logic to me.Had they come out and said: "You know what, after further consideration, we have determined this x-ware does meet our definition of something which users may not want."By making that type of statement, or perhaps, even stating that: "due to our client base\user groups reaction, it would seem this software is apparantly an unwanted item, regardless of our system of determination." With a statement of that nature, I could see a new 'category' perhaps of defining what users want, such as making it 'optional' for removal, by user discretion.Imagine the good will that would have created, especially since there are numerous proofs of the software in question having unethical and suspicious installs\removals\EULAs and so forth.No, from every angle you look at it, Lavasoft screwed themselves.And I won't even get into the forums and how they had, and have in the past, had threads which defered or was not in good light, completely removed. There are many instances and proof of that too.When you lump it all together, it paints a none too pretty picture of a company and its tactics in dealing with the people who helped make them what they are\were if those people should object or have a different opinion of their practices.

[nlinecomputers]

Spoken like someone who has never been sued. Sometimes you truly can't afford the moral high ground. We don't have a system of justice is this country. He who can buy the biggest lawyer wins. Lavasoft is not that big a company and they give most of there potential product away. Just how can they afford to not cave in to the Scumware peddlers and their crooked lawyers? I don't think there actions are by choice. It's responding to gangster style legal tactics of lawsuits to extort these companies to stop scanning for the spyware. Yes they HAVE been co-opted. But the malware producers are threating to "break the knee-caps" of company that try to stop them. I really don't see what you expect them to really do.Does this surprise anyone? The one really good thing about Microsoft buying Giant is that Billy Boy has deep pockets. He is the 800lbs Gorilla and he can throw more weight around then Lavasoft, Spybot, or any of the other anti-spyware crowd.

[Guest LilBambi]

Temmu, Glad you read my blog. I agree it is scary! And it is getting worse all the time with spyware/malware, scumware, whatever you want to call it. Cuz now the lawyers are in full swing and out for blood!Unfortunately, Lavasoft will have to deal with their choices and the market will decide whether they will continue to be a front line for folks.I think they have become a selective spyware removal program due to their own choices.Folks will need to find another option for a front line spyware scanner. Fortunately for XP users, right now that may well be MicrosoftAntiSpyware.For some that will be Webroot's Spy Sweeper.For me it is both of them because together according to Eric's comprehensive data collection and analyzed by http://www.WindowsSecrets.com, we have found out that even with both Webroot's Spy Sweeper and Microsoft AntiSpyware, the detection rate is still only 70%. Leaving 30% undetected. And apparently that's the best we can do right now.Sad but true.

[TeMerc]

Spoken like someone who has never been sued.  Sometimes you truly can't afford the moral high ground.  We don't have a system of justice is this country.  He who can buy the biggest lawyer wins.  Lavasoft is not that big a company and they give most of there potential product away.  Just how can they afford to not cave in to the Scumware peddlers and their crooked lawyers?  I don't think there actions are by choice.  It's responding to gangster style legal tactics of  lawsuits to extort these companies to stop scanning for the spyware.  Yes they HAVE been co-opted.  But the malware producers are threating to "break the knee-caps" of company that try to stop them. I really don't see what you expect them to really do.Does this surprise anyone?  The one really good thing about Microsoft buying Giant is that Billy Boy has deep pockets.  He is the 800lbs Gorilla and he can throw more weight around then Lavasoft,  Spybot, or any of the other anti-spyware crowd.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I do not think size has anything to do with it. Its more integrity as far as I'm concerned.Look at Spybot & Patrick Kolla, surely he isn't a fraction of what Lavasoft is, you don't see him backing down to such intimidation tactics.All I expect of anyone I do business with, be it my own mechanic, my customers or anyone one else, just be honest, admit an honest mistake honestly, make amends, and carry on. No one is perfect, by any stretch, and I wouldn't expect anyone to be so. People will not punish you when your upfront and to the point, as opposed to being evasive and demeaning to your clcients and user base.But integrity is something you cannot afford to waste, look at all the bad press Lavasoft has gotten over this. One can only hoope they have learned an invaluable lesson from all this.

[rbdietz]

For me it is both of them because together according to Eric's comprehensive data collection and analyzed by http://www.WindowsSecrets.com, we have found out that even with both Webroot's Spy Sweeper and Microsoft AntiSpyware, the detection rate is still only 70%. Leaving 30% undetected. And apparently that's the best we can do right now.Sad but true.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

(@#$%! I didn't mean to press the mouse button yet.)Seventy percent of components are detected and successfully removed.No figures are given as to percentage detected but not successfully removed.No figures are given to indicate the percentage of products Effectively Disabled.

• Disabled = some components not removed but product has been rendered temporarily inactive.
• Effectively disabled = some components not removed but product has been rendered permanently inactive.

Edited February 23, 2005 by rbdietz

[nlinecomputers]

Look at Spybot & Patrick Kolla, surely he isn't a fraction of what Lavasoft is, you don't see him backing down to such intimidation tactics.

Really? And how many of his search items are now turned off by default? And is he still being threaten with lawsuits? I like Spybot but I don't expect him to survive. At some point somebody is again going to sue him and he will have to give up. It's only a matter of time. Same story with Lavasoft. They will either be sued out of existence or become less effective a tool because of it.

[Guest LilBambi]

Lest we forget the valiant fight of other warriors among us:C|Net - See you later, anti-Gators?

In an effort to improve its corporate reputation, adware company Gator has launched a legal offensive to divorce its name from the hated term "spyware"--and so far its strategy is paying off.In response to a libel lawsuit, an anti-spyware company has settled with Gator and pulled Web pages critical of the company, its practices and its software. And other spyware foes are getting the message. "There is this feeling out there that they won the lawsuit, and people are starting to get scared," said one employee of a spyware-removal company, who asked not to be named. "We haven't been sued, but we've heard that other companies are being sued for saying this and that, so we've changed our language" on the company Web site.

Although in the article, I seem to think they don't know Dave (PC Pitstop) very well.But here's the clincher in the article:

A Gator executive said the suit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, was part of a larger strategy to educate spyware-removers about the company's software--and to put an end to the practice of calling it "spyware.""If we find anyone publicly calling us spyware, we correct it and take action if necessary," said Scott Eagle, Gator's senior vice president of marketing.In addition to going on the offensive against detractors, Gator has spent significant time in court defending its practices against the charges of companies that run Web sites that Gator has targeted with its ads.Gator in February settled litigation brought against it by the New York Post, The New York Times, Dow Jones and other media companies. The Washington Post, L.L. Bean and Extended Stay America have sued the company, and their consolidated lawsuit will be decided by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation in Washington, D.C.Meanwhile, the courts have smiled on a company that operates a similar ad network. Last month, WhenU survived a legal challenge brought against it by moving company U-Haul after WhenU served ads for U-Haul's competitors on top of U-Haul Web pages.

Doesn't it just get your goat!And if that's not bad enough ...Check out this article: Adware maker joins federal privacy board Edited February 24, 2005 by LilBambi