Jump to content


Photo

Limewire


  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#1 mrmecanx

mrmecanx

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 13 posts

Posted 30 November 2005 - 11:30 PM

Inquiry about safety of P2P software called Limewire. Any Spyware sent with it? They claim it is free. How do they pay their bills?

#2 Avohir

Avohir

    Computer Exorcist

  • Trusted Advisor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,098 posts

Posted 01 December 2005 - 12:40 AM

http://www.spywarein...m/articles/p2p/
To err is human, to really foul up requires a computer
Donate to keep the site alive

Posted Image

#3 mrmecanx

mrmecanx

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 13 posts

Posted 01 December 2005 - 11:34 PM

Thankyou kind sir.

#4 nl255

nl255

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 54 posts

Posted 18 December 2005 - 08:29 AM

Get Frostwire instead, no DRM and no spyware either. Of course, always make sure you download it from the official website.

#5 dschmidty

dschmidty

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 03 January 2006 - 08:45 PM

THANKS there that just solved my issue, I am running v. 4.9.37.... seems to include something, ive had a feeling it did! my firewalls have got it blocked currently, which they just suddenly blocked it automatically! I have tried the options to tell it no connection, and the option to not display in taskbar, but it starts up and displays there! I currently have it shut down, only after a friend who is a computer tech, that i believe he runs the 4.9.28 version, and likes it! anyways he was looking at the task manager, and said shut down limewire, so i knew things werent right!

What is like bitorant (sp) like?

#6 chrisricefan87

chrisricefan87

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 04 January 2006 - 01:02 PM

Yes, thank you for that list!

Bittorrent is a wonderful system! I use it regularly. Try doing a search on Bittorrent to do some research. P2p and BT each have ups and downs, so I use both. I would give it a shot!

God Bless,
Nick

#7 Drew99GT

Drew99GT

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 09 January 2006 - 06:19 PM

Does the latest version of Limewire contain spyware? They are adamant about there not being any bundled scumware with it.

#8 Sockdude

Sockdude

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 15 posts

Posted 09 January 2006 - 06:59 PM

Does the latest version of Limewire contain spyware? They are adamant about there not being any bundled scumware with it.


Nah, ever since version 4.9.37 it's been malware-free.

#9 ieatnoobs

ieatnoobs

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 16 posts

Posted 10 January 2006 - 06:39 PM

I have the newest version and I have Ad-Aware SE Personal, Spybot S&D, MS Antispyware, Alwil Avast! Antivirus, and Ewido security suite and none of them detected anythng with this program, also I have posted a log here and I'm clean.

#10 El reteiPos

El reteiPos

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 18 posts

Posted 22 January 2006 - 05:05 AM

Get Frostwire instead, no DRM and no spyware either. Of course, always make sure you download it from the official website.

FrostWire is SLOW here and it uses up more than 50MB RAM...

Edited by El reteiPos, 22 January 2006 - 05:29 AM.


#11 spywareinfectedfool

spywareinfectedfool

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 13 posts

Posted 26 January 2006 - 10:36 PM

people have said that newest version of limewire is clean, and on the list it says newest version is infected. which is it because i have newest version and i am drastically trying to get all spyware i can off my computer.

Edited by spywareinfectedfool, 26 January 2006 - 10:37 PM.


#12 El reteiPos

El reteiPos

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 18 posts

Posted 27 January 2006 - 10:50 AM

That depends on the date the article you read was written on, so try to find out which one is the newest article. Of course you should believe the most recent article.

#13 Travito

Travito

    Look2Me can kiss my butt :P

  • New Member
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 16 February 2006 - 09:59 PM

the article's last update was in 2005.

I recently looked at the Limewire website, they have "offically" joined the no bundled programs movement it seems. I believe there's a section on it in their FAQ

#14 El reteiPos

El reteiPos

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 18 posts

Posted 17 February 2006 - 01:33 PM

I tested Limewire a month ago, but I like BearShare Lite more.

#15 firegurl

firegurl

    Member

  • New Member
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 17 February 2006 - 07:58 PM

is limewire pro really clean? The page that says its not infected is from 2005 so I don't know. Does anyone in here use limewire pro or have used it, so does it have viruses or spyware?

Edited by firegurl, 17 February 2006 - 11:25 PM.


#16 BrianBond

BrianBond

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 06 March 2006 - 04:22 AM

is limewire pro really clean? The page that says its not infected is from 2005 so I don't know. Does anyone in here use limewire pro or have used it, so does it have viruses or spyware?


I use Limewire Pro 4.10.5 and have done scans using Windows Defender, Spybot and Adaware and nothing was found. There doesn't seem to be anything in my hijackthis log that might indicate that it's bundled with anything so I would guess that it's now spyware free.

#17 trishbaby

trishbaby

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 43 posts

Posted 06 March 2006 - 03:19 PM

I am by no means a computer pro but.....
I have used limewire over the years and have not had many troubles except...

1. at times people have miss named items and you get something that you were not looking for
2. a detected corrupt file but then just make sure that you have limewire auto stop any that they find
3. always look at how many people are downloading that file the higher the better chances you will get it
4. avoid downloading anything that looks like it has a code infront of or behind the title choose only clearly identified titles.
5. in the help file choose to read the FAQ and you will be surprized at the many tips that will help you understand the dos and donts and aswell as the settings that you can tweek top get the best proformance!

Cheers

I have not tried bearshare and have had no need to switch therefore I cannot comment on it.

#18 Blink

Blink

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 165 posts

Posted 07 March 2006 - 05:42 AM

Limewire is an infected product. As some members have posted the p2p article on infected and clean p2p software i am sure your aware of the clean and infected products.

If you need any support on a p2p program, make a new topic and ask one of us. We will be more then happy to help you out.

BlinK
IPB Image

#19 doc whats up

doc whats up

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 13 March 2006 - 12:14 AM

lime wire is the best , ive used that for long time

#20 Blink

Blink

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 165 posts

Posted 13 March 2006 - 01:24 AM

I admit it is a good program, but its a disease spreading harmfull bacteria through the veins of your computer.

That must i say, most noobs dont know about.

Edited by Blink, 13 March 2006 - 01:25 AM.

IPB Image

#21 SaltyMark

SaltyMark

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 12 posts

Posted 13 March 2006 - 05:12 PM

Limewire is an infected product. As some members have posted the p2p article on infected and clean p2p software i am sure your aware of the clean and infected products.

If you need any support on a p2p program, make a new topic and ask one of us. We will be more then happy to help you out.

BlinK


Hi Blink
So you are saying that the pro version has spyware?
regards Mark

#22 Swandog46

Swandog46

    Forum Deity

  • Retired Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,190 posts

Posted 13 March 2006 - 05:39 PM

As far as I know current versions of Limewire are clean, although previous versions were not. Please see:
http://www.spywarein...m/articles/p2p/

But I am curious. I have a test machine. Give me a few minutes and I will test it myself and put this issue to rest. :)

#23 Swandog46

Swandog46

    Forum Deity

  • Retired Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,190 posts

Posted 13 March 2006 - 05:53 PM

As far as I can see in my (admittedly) limited use --- the program is clean. LimeWire installed itself to the locations in the filesystem and registry that I would expect a legitimate program to, and the uninstaller removed it completely. I saw no evidence of infection during or after the installation. And Softpedia, whose recommendations are usually fairly accurate, concurs:
http://www.softpedia...Clean-7088.html
http://www.softpedia...iew-14518.shtml

so I think the conclusion is that current LimeWire Basic is clean (I assume Pro is too, but I did not test that).

#24 Blink

Blink

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 165 posts

Posted 13 March 2006 - 07:49 PM

Hmm. i was just going on the article. Sorry if i gave false information.

Regards,
Blink
IPB Image

#25 lovethepirk

lovethepirk

    Gotta Love the Grind!

  • Retired Staff - Helper
  • PipPipPip
  • 242 posts

Posted 13 March 2006 - 08:53 PM

Here is the problem with Limewire regardless of the fact that the newest version does not have spyware anymore...

It is very easy to use without anyone to sift out the millions of viruses and trojans among its users.

I would rather have a novice computer user install a spyware infected p2p that is safe from viruses and trojans than one that is spyware free but is a breeding ground for viruses, trojans, worms, etc.

Bottom line is it is almost worse that it is spyware free because more novices or moderate computer users will use it and the amount of viruses increase now that it is labeled 'spyware free'.

Peace,

LTP

#26 Swandog46

Swandog46

    Forum Deity

  • Retired Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,190 posts

Posted 13 March 2006 - 08:56 PM

Well, it is certainly true that P2P is inherently dangerous because so much of the files *served* through P2P networks are infected with viruses or other malware. This is a danger independent of whether the P2P client itself is infected.

But lovethepirk, I don't think that any P2P client (adware-bundling or not) does any better of a job than another of filtering out infected files from transmission. Do you have a reason for claiming this that I don't know about? If not, why choose an infected P2P client under *any* circumstances? It isn't any better --- only worse....

Bottom line is it is almost worse that it is spyware free because more novices or moderate computer users will use it and the amount of viruses increase now that it is labeled 'spyware free'.

I agree with this, but only to the extent that it suppresses the knowledge that many files transferred OVER the P2P network are infected even if the client is not.

#27 Blink

Blink

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 165 posts

Posted 13 March 2006 - 10:17 PM

I use KCeasy, How is that in your honest opinion? And what do you use?
IPB Image

#28 hornet777

hornet777

    Forum Deity

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 14 March 2006 - 12:58 AM

I hadn't heard of KCeasy. I'll check it out.

I had an extended flame war on the LimeWire forum some time back, saying that technically, LW is indeed spyware insofar as it "phones home" for the purpose of an updated version check, which it does without the user's knowledge and that it cannot be turned off via its interface. It was only in this limited context that I made the assertion, but I might as well have screamed "satan" in a christian chruch; I was called every name in the book, and ripped a new orifice to boot.

I didn't say LW was a "bad" app; I was using it at the time, knowing full well that it was doing this, and the limited extent to its "clandestine" communication. All I said was that "technically" it conformed to a definition of spyware. So much for that; it was never resolved.

Since then, some of the LW developers, citing philosophical differences, have come up with their own client called FrostWire that excludes a lot of the negative "features" of LW, and even put in some valuable filtering and other refinements that LW does not have. To my knowledge, it does not "phone home" at all (but I could be wrong about this).

In either case, there is one simple expedient that can be used to avoid a lot of the nastiness found on p2p networks: include filters that exclude executable code from search results. P2p isn't inherently dangerous, as long as one uses it intelligently, and with a good does of common sense. What can be used can be misused just as well; hammers are great for nails, but not brain surgery.

Lastly, there is another open-source p2p alternative that works better (IMO) than either FW or LW: its called Phex, and again is free, free of spyware, and is much more robust and configurable than either of the -Wires.
After all is invested in correctness, then how does it stand with truth?

#29 Blink

Blink

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 165 posts

Posted 14 March 2006 - 01:12 AM

KCeasy is good, but im not aware of behind the downloading part. Also, can downloading some files have hidden malicious ware?
IPB Image

#30 lovethepirk

lovethepirk

    Gotta Love the Grind!

  • Retired Staff - Helper
  • PipPipPip
  • 242 posts

Posted 14 March 2006 - 12:40 PM

I don't think that any P2P client (adware-bundling or not) does any better of a job than another of filtering out infected files from transmission. Do you have a reason for claiming this that I don't know about?


There are several p2p's that are clean from trouble. When I say that I do not mean 100% free, even Kaspersky couldn't catch every single baddie out there...BUT there are several p2p's out there that I would be shocked if you caught a bad file even if you tried all day long. If you are caught with a bad file you will get banned, if you are caught with incomplete files you can get banned, if your files are not organized you can get banned, etc....

The only problem with these type sites is they are much tougher to use and learn and the moderate user and below would not have the patience for it. Most p2p are used for downloading copyrighted information anyway so I do not like to name names, but there are extremely safe p2p's out there.

LTP

#31 hornet777

hornet777

    Forum Deity

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 14 March 2006 - 04:35 PM

To answer your question, Blink: yes.

Recently I transferred an mp3, which conformed to the standard, and scanned clean. When loaded in my WAV editor however, it caused ZA alerts saying ____ was trying to establish a connection. The code wasn't identified, but was obviously embedded within the ostensibly audio data file. Sonce I have a dialup only and I was not connected, "it" wasn't doing any harm on that count, but who knows what else there was to it?

Instantly, and after rebooting, I began scanning my system for changes and evidence of malware, and found none; that code was evidently only memory resident, and not manifest as an actual file (other than being embedded in the mp3, which had been erased).

Thing is that even the best of scanners, and even with overlapping only will catch 20-40% of the malwares that are in the wild, optimistically. I will never know what exactly that was, since I destroyed the evidence, but it did tell me that such things can indeed be done. In this vein, Windows Media Files are particularly prone to carry "fleas".

So despite what I said above, there are exceptions: no matter how intelligently one uses p2p software, there will be a few instances when the bad guys will get in; nothing is ever absolute, nor is anythign risk-free. That's life.

I can say that in the past year, there have only been two instances of such happenings, and in each I was able to meet the challenge successfully. I am not in a position to offer advice or recommendations to others, and would not even if I were. This said, it is helpful to know from others' experience just what can happen.

On the other side, there are those who configure nothing and end up sharing their whold C: drive (dumb). This is but one example; I'm sure with little effort, one can see the importance of having everything configured correctly before using *any* software, and this includes above all, Windows itself.

Edited by hornet777, 14 March 2006 - 04:39 PM.

After all is invested in correctness, then how does it stand with truth?

#32 El reteiPos

El reteiPos

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 18 posts

Posted 15 March 2006 - 03:59 AM

lime wire is the best , ive used that for long time

Did you try BearShare Lite? It's also spyware-free and is much better than LimeWire.

#33 hornet777

hornet777

    Forum Deity

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 16 March 2006 - 12:13 AM

Regarding KCEasy, it seems ot be based upon Internet Explorer, and as such will inherit your settings thusly (or lack thereof).

I installed and configured it, but did not take it out on the net, even though my settings are even more locked-down than recommended, since there are subtleties involved with anything that sits astride IE that I didn't feel like spending a lot of time trying to figure out. I can cite two browsers that hook into IE in various ways (Maxthon: more secure; NetWorker, et al: less) -- not to mention Yahoo Messenger. Otherwise, I rather liked it.

One big advantage the java apps have in their favor is that they run in a sandbox that is protected to some extent; the downside is that they are slow, bloated, and (with the exception of Phex) are resource hogs.

Edited by hornet777, 16 March 2006 - 12:15 AM.

After all is invested in correctness, then how does it stand with truth?

#34 Crandom

Crandom

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 24 March 2006 - 11:04 AM

Do not download any programs that fit these criteria:-

-(zip) 851.7kb
-(exe) 228.0kb
-(zip) 69.4kb
-(zip or exe) 0.0kb
-(zip) 628.7kb

they are the most commonly distributed spyware files. Music and Video files cannot be viruses.

General Rule: If its large (eg 5mb+) it is not a virus. If its small (eg 851.7kb) it is a virus.

#35 hornet777

hornet777

    Forum Deity

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 24 March 2006 - 05:07 PM

There are actually a bunch that are like that, the ones you cite, with "standard" filesizes... but that does not preclude the possibility that other ones are not infected in some other way as well. Dangerous as plain data files can be, its really best practice to not transfer binary files AT ALL, and this includes archives (for what may be lurking within).

Bottom line is that naive people on filesharing networks are targets for the unscrupulous, and one's only defence is being smart enough to avoid the temptation to xfer files that are known to carry baddies.
After all is invested in correctness, then how does it stand with truth?

#36 Ronin7

Ronin7

    "The PC Sage"

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 13 posts

Posted 21 April 2006 - 11:59 AM

All I can say objectively is that 4 out of 5 of the worst-infected PCs I work on have LimeWire on them. Perhaps it isn't malware, but it seems to allow malware to be installed-- even bypassing updated firewalls and anti-malware protection. I suspect this is because of the powerful "cloaking" features that LimeWire uses to hide folders.

Also, it is a given fact that certain viruses look for P2P networks and use them to spread.

A user with updated security has no reason to think that P2P can be dangerous, because the P2P folks don't want them to know. Basically, if you have LimeWire (or many other P2P programs) on your system, you have no security.

#37 El reteiPos

El reteiPos

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 18 posts

Posted 21 April 2006 - 12:16 PM

Conclusion:

LimeWire is OK, but the network may contain malware (which is not put on that network by LimeWire, at least I think so) and other kinds of stuff that you don't want on your computer.

#38 hornet777

hornet777

    Forum Deity

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 21 April 2006 - 04:36 PM

FWIW, the newest version of Phex includes powerful inclusion/exclusion filters, and as always is free and clean.

Ronin, LW only allows what the user permits; the issue is configuration. The "cloaking features" you mention are non-existent: perhaps a poor choice of words on your part? Even with updated "security" there is a risk: nothing is ever risk-free, period. The fact is that with these softwares, one is sharing a portion of one's HD with others; only the protocol is different (e.g., Gnutella network, as opposed to NetBIOS). For those interested in discovering for themselves the differences in protocols, particularly related to the security issues involved, there is no shortage of legitimate documentation to consult; one need not rely solely on your or anyone else's opinion. P2P folks aren't the only ones who lack clarity or obfuscate.
After all is invested in correctness, then how does it stand with truth?

#39 Ronin7

Ronin7

    "The PC Sage"

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 13 posts

Posted 21 April 2006 - 06:26 PM

FWIW, the newest version of Phex includes powerful inclusion/exclusion filters, and as always is free and clean.

Ronin, LW only allows what the user permits; the issue is configuration. The "cloaking features" you mention are non-existent: perhaps a poor choice of words on your part? Even with updated "security" there is a risk: nothing is ever risk-free, period. The fact is that with these softwares, one is sharing a portion of one's HD with others; only the protocol is different (e.g., Gnutella network, as opposed to NetBIOS). For those interested in discovering for themselves the differences in protocols, particularly related to the security issues involved, there is no shortage of legitimate documentation to consult; one need not rely solely on your or anyone else's opinion. P2P folks aren't the only ones who lack clarity or obfuscate.


You sound like a very devoted fan of LimeWire -- almost emotional --- or perhaps invested....?$?

I agree that LimeWire probably only allows what the user wants, but I still see more malware on PCs with LimeWire than any other. It's true that many other applications don't explain their power well enough for the user, LimeWire simply has a different result than they do. I suppose adware companies could make the same argument that if people are dumb enough to let their computers get infected by their malicious software, it's their own fault. (Come to think of it, they already do.)

Reading LimeWire's own desciptions of their features, it is very obvious that one of its big attractions for teenagers (who I find use it the most) is the ability of the user to access whatever content he/she wishes, while completely hiding their content and browsing activities from anyone else who uses the system. This also fits with the patterns of infection I see.

"Cloaking" is perhaps not the best word, but the program does provide users with ways of creating hidden content folders that are very difficult to even detect, much less open for examination. That's in LimeWire's own documentation. I suspect that these folders may be hidden using methods that more-or-less impair or "blind" many anti-malware and firewall applications. Like Sony's infamous rootkit, LimeWire may be benign in intent, but perhaps by inadvertant design, paves the way for some types of infection and system hijacking. When I have time (HA) I'm going to load LimeWire on a test PC and check out my theories.

#40 hornet777

hornet777

    Forum Deity

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 22 April 2006 - 04:34 AM

Nah, I'm no devotee of LW at all, in fact I stopped using it about 9 months ago, and switched to Frost Wire, but since the new Phex release, I am considerig ditching the 'Wires' altogether.

Like you apparently, I am a tech in private practice; the preponderance of infected machines do indeed have P2P software on them, but blaming this for the infection is like blaming the matchhead for burned fingers. Next to copnfiguration issues, by far and away are the social factors: believing that that file with the .exe extension absolutely has the most titillating content the user has ever seen, &c.

As for this 'cloaking' business you keep mentioning, unless something has drastically changed, LW and FW both only "see" folders that are actually there, and do not *hide* anything. Please re-read the comments above about file-sharing generally: the differences between (say) the Gnutella network and NetBIOS, among others. There is nothing magic going on.
After all is invested in correctness, then how does it stand with truth?

#41 nl255

nl255

    Member

  • Full Member
  • Pip
  • 54 posts

Posted 22 April 2006 - 03:12 PM

Regarding KCEasy, it seems ot be based upon Internet Explorer, and as such will inherit your settings thusly (or lack thereof).

I installed and configured it, but did not take it out on the net, even though my settings are even more locked-down than recommended, since there are subtleties involved with anything that sits astride IE that I didn't feel like spending a lot of time trying to figure out. I can cite two browsers that hook into IE in various ways (Maxthon: more secure; NetWorker, et al: less) -- not to mention Yahoo Messenger. Otherwise, I rather liked it.

One big advantage the java apps have in their favor is that they run in a sandbox that is protected to some extent; the downside is that they are slow, bloated, and (with the exception of Phex) are resource hogs.


Have you tried installing the Mozilla ActiveX Control and using iepatcher (same page) to make KCEasy use Gecko (Firefox) instead of Trident (MSIE)? Be sure not to install the other thing that lets ActiveX work in Firefox, you want the one that implements Firefox as an ActiveX control.

#42 hornet777

hornet777

    Forum Deity

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 22 April 2006 - 08:27 PM

Thanks for the tip.
After all is invested in correctness, then how does it stand with truth?




Member of UNITE
Support SpywareInfo Forum - click the button