Jump to content


Who's Next?

  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 mrrockford



  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 13 posts

Posted 22 February 2005 - 05:36 AM


#2 Swandog46


    Forum Deity

  • Retired Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,190 posts

Posted 22 February 2005 - 11:25 AM

From iSearch's EULA:

By installing the Software, you understand and agree that the Software may, without any further prior notice to you, automatically perform the following: display advertisements of advertisers who pay a fee to iSearch and/or it's partners, in the form of pop-up ads, pop-under ads, interstitials ads and various other ad formats, display links to and advertisements of related websites based on the information you view and the websites you visit; store non-personally identifiable statistics of the websites you have visited; redirect certain URLs including your browser default 404-error page to or through the Software; provide advertisements, links or information in response to search terms you use at third-party websites; provide search functionality or capabilities; automatically update the Software and install added features or functionality or additional software, including search clients and toolbars, conveniently without your input or interaction; install desktop icons and installation files; install software from iSearch affiliates; and install Third Party Software.

In addition, you further understand and agree, by installing the Software, that iSearch and/or the Software may, without any further prior notice to you, remove, disable or render inoperative other adware programs resident on your computer, which, in turn, may disable or render inoperative, other software resident on your computer, including software bundled with such adware, or have other adverse impacts on your computer.


iSearch and/or it's partners may collect certain types of non-personally identifiable information about individuals who install the Software. This information may include your Internet protocol (IP) address, your domain, your operating system, your browser version, type and language and your Internet Service Provider.


iSearch and/or it's partners may use invisible tracking or counting devices known as "web bugs" to register that a particular web page has been viewed and/or "cookies" or alphanumeric identifiers that iSearch and/or it's partners transfer to your computer's hard drive through your web browser to enable iSearch and/or it's partners systems to recognize your web browser.

iSearch and/or it's partners may also collect and may use certain other types of non-personally identifiable information, including: certain of the web pages that you view, the amount of time that you spend on certain websites, your responses to ads served by iSearch and/or it's partners, certain software installed to your computer and software characteristics and preferences, non-personally identifiable information on web pages and forms, software usage characteristics and preferences, and your ZIP code. iSearch and/or it's partners may associate this information with a randomly-generated anonymous identifier for your computer and may use this information to enable the functionality of the Software, to periodically update the Software, to deliver and display ads served by iSearch and/or it's partners of advertisers who pay a fee to iSearch and/or it's partners, provide you with or redirect you to content or websites of such advertisers or other parties and offer you the opportunity to download software from third party vendors.

Yeah. It's not spyware. Right. :angry:

#3 spy1


    SWI Junkie

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 484 posts

Posted 22 February 2005 - 12:36 PM

Due to the fact that Lavasoft doesn't have the balls to stay in the fight, I have removed AdAware from my sig - nor will I recommend it to anyone anymore.

Furthermore, should ComputerCops - or SBS&D - need funds with which to defend themselves from these kinds of "legal" attacks, I will cheerfully send them whatever I can every time I can.

I have no idea whatever whether Lavasoft was threatened with legal action or not - they won't solidly confirm or deny it (they've always had a problem with keeping their customers fully informed about anything - I guess they either don't care what our opinions/questions would be - nor whether we'd be willing to help them or not - I'm more upset by this fact than I am about the exclusion of WhenU, actually. They simply don't value their own customers!).

It's quite discouraging to realize that Lavasoft doesn't even have the brains to realize that all they have to do is make simple terminology changes, detections-wise, to make themselves totally immune from any present or future threat of lawsuits.

I urge everyone who really has the will to help us draw a line in the sand about this to contribute both to ComputerCops and to SBS&D immediately.

Money talks - and we all know what walks. All the bitching, hand-wringing and crying in the world isn't going to change the outcome of this current trend by the spyware-makers - all that will stop it is individuals like you and me, sending cold, hard cash to the people we want to stand up for us. Pete
A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government."
--George Washington

#4 ErikAlbert


    Typical User

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 787 posts

Posted 22 February 2005 - 01:29 PM

I couldn't find any trace of Ad-Aware anymore on my computer. Too late spy1 :D
Simplicity is always brilliant.

#5 Tuxedo Jack

Tuxedo Jack

    Creator of TuxPE, a Cat5-o'-9-Tails, Etherkillers, and more

  • Expert
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,758 posts

Posted 22 February 2005 - 04:20 PM

Their EULA is incorrectly worded.

IP addresses _are_ personally identifiable if:

* Your ISP keeps logs (VERY possible)
* You run a server off your machine (DYNDNS; I'm no exception to that, as I run an anime FTP server)
Signature file is under revision. This will be back shortly.

#6 LDTate


    Forum Deity

  • Retired Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 534 posts

Posted 22 February 2005 - 04:22 PM

Sure won't stop me from suggesting removal to posters in HJT logs.
Like I always post:

I suggest


#7 mrrockford



  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 13 posts

Posted 22 February 2005 - 05:08 PM


More to read:



any other links found can be sent to me per PM

#8 ErikAlbert


    Typical User

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 787 posts

Posted 23 February 2005 - 08:33 AM

I think there must be alot of links by now about this matter :) :
If you use the right seach words on google, you will find more of them.

I wonder how many people really get rid of Ad-Aware.
This incident will be forgotten in no time and everybody will use Ad-Aware again without complaining as usual.
You won't find an easy replacement for Ad-Aware as freeware.

Edited by ErikAlbert, 23 February 2005 - 08:42 AM.

Simplicity is always brilliant.

#9 mrrockford



  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 13 posts

Posted 23 February 2005 - 08:51 AM

CCSPs reply to the C&D:

Recently we received a letter from a law firm titled "Incorrect Classification of iDownload's Product as Spyware & Related disparagement of iDownload". We retained counsel to evaluate our options and last night sent our reply which will be quoted in full below.

There has been a public outcry over such a "cease and desist" letter as it has come to be known in the online communities. However, it appears that CastleCops is not the only recipient of such a letter. Suzi at SpywareWarrior Blog also received one.

At DSLReports.com, there is a thread, now 3 pages in length, titled Silencing the Critics: ISearch/IDownload. A news article was published there yesterday as well, Marketers Try to Silence Spyware Critic.

Wayne Porter of ReveNews wrote about Deceptive Is as Deceptive Does, where he posted no less than 18 links to articles describing what he calls “savage behavior”.

Wilders Security Forum has a thread going as well, and one user (Key-U) posts the details of his installation of iSearch.com’s toolbar.

And now onto the full text of our response...

Re: Settlement- Not Admissible for Any Purpose Pursuant to CA Evidence Code § 1152
              Our File No. CY757-515

Dear Mr. Hopkins:

I write you on behalf of my client ComputerCops, LLC regarding  the letter you sent on
February 10, 2005 in which you alleged that the castlecops.com website has disseminated
information improperly disparaging the iDownload/iSearch brand. I have spoken with officers of the
company about the allegations made in your letter and they have stated clearly that they have not
made or published any statement which can be said to disparage the iDownload/iSearch brand.  My
client has asked me to contact you in the hope that this matter can be resolved outside the courtroom
through a dialogue between ComputerCops and iDownload/iSearch.

Contrary to the assertion made in your February 10 letter that, “spyware has a well known
meaning within the public conscience that has a specific meaning,” spyware is actually capable of
many definitions.  In fact, there is no universal definition of spyware, nor is there a well known
meaning within the public conscience. Nevertheless, it appears that software disseminated by
iDownload/iSearch would likely be regulated as illegal in California under California Business And
Professions Code Sections 22947-22947.6 otherwise known as the Consumer Protection Against
Computer Spyware Act.

A cursory search of the Internet reveals that the iDownload/iSearch brand has quite a
controversial image to be sure:


In addition, Symantec, Lavasoft, Computer Associates, Spyware Warrior, Spyware Blaster,
and Doxdesk, to name a few, report that the iSearch toolbar, published by iDownload is spyware
(see links below). This information is publicly available and was obtained in a manner of minutes
using the iDownload “brand” as a search term.

It is clear that the issue of whether or not iDownload distributes spyware is a controversial
one which is a matter of public interest and any discussion or publication of web page links referring
to this controversy cannot be damaging to the iDownload brand.

In short, ComputerCops categorically disagrees with your letter, but remains willing to listen to
iDownload’s side of the story and offers further to allow iDownload a public forum on the
castlecops.com web site in which to respond to the questions raised in many circles about iDownload
distributing spyware. 

This is ComputerCops final good faith attempt to resolve an uncomfortable matter in an
amicable manner. Should iDownload fail to respond to this letter before March 15, 2005,
ComputerCops, LLC will take any and all legal measures necessary to protect its rights. 

                                                                  Very truly yours,

                                                                  BENJAMIN Z. RICE

                                                      Internet Resources on ISearch

Type: Spyware
Behavior: Spyware.ISearch is an Internet Explorer Browser Helper Object and functions as a
toolbar. It is a search hijacker and also tracks user activity on a remote server at isearch.com.

One or more files are detected as Spyware.Isearch.

The ISearch toolbar can be manually installed through ActiveX installers, or it comes bundled
with other software.



#  Adds other software
#  Shows ads
#  Changes browser
Danger Level: 6"




Isearch is listed as "Rogue/Suspect Anti-Spyware Products" at Eric Howes list:

      "SpywareAvenger        spywareavenger.com
      idownload.com  no trial version locatable; company is known adware
      distributor (1); "strict no-refund policy"; advertises through adware (1);
      "negative option" coupled w/ outrageous pricing  [A: 9-22-04 / U:

      Title: Remove / Uninstall iSearch toolbar?

      "Although  many would disagree, the iSearch web site claims that their
      toolbar is not Spyware because it "in no way tracks you or the web sites
      that you visit." (Source: iSearch.com FAQ).  Instead, iSearch intrudes on
      your browsing sessions by invoking ad-related activity and reportedly
      blocks access to  certain web sites.”

Link to article with all active links: http://castlecops.co...thread-1-0.html

#10 trinity71


    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 192 posts

Posted 23 February 2005 - 09:54 AM

Suzi at Spyware Warrior has received a similar letter from them.

Here's the link to her blog:


Member of UNITE
Support SpywareInfo Forum - click the button