SnowyOne
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Kailua, HI
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·Clearwire Wireless
| reply to LS-Mike
Re: ASW Vendors in La-La Land
said by LS-Mike:
The use of uninstallers is not, as you say, "weak at best" as it provides a means for removing the content during the re-evaluation period should a user require this.
Admittedly I haven't followed this topic too much lately, but where did this come from?
Does it mean that when an app goes into 're-evaluation' it's dropped from the definitions & replaced with an uninstaller in the interim?
What happens to the uninstaller if it passes the re-evaluations & doesn't go back into the definitions?
Is it not possible to re-evaluate a product without removing it from the definitions? |
|
LS-Mike
@82.193.x.x | Hello SnowyOne,
No, this would not be the case for every re-evaluation as this is an on-going process and the review does not mean that any given detection will or should be removed. |
|
SnowyOne
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Kailua, HI | Assuming your speaking from a position of authority, what's the criteria for removal from the definitions prior to re-evalution as opposed to to removal only after a successful reevaluation (from the spyware vendors point of view)? |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast
| reply to LS-Mike
Your re-evaluation should also include the older versions of the malware in question, and detection should not be removed until ALL variants of said malware is "cleaned up". These older versions/variants are still out there. Removing detection because the newest version is claimed to be cleaned up is bad.
I think this is the basis for most of the complaints stated. Lack of diclosure is a whole other issue.
But, what do I know? I'll tell you... nothing! Because that is what has been explained to all concerned. USUALLY, when a question is posed to a reputable company about their product, an answer is recieved within a couple of days max. NOT weeks later, and not some BS about a Remover that is worthless.
Answer this, Why did it take WEEKS to replace detection? What was the REAL reason it was removed in the first place? In English, please.
Perhaps REGISTER here and start an explanatory thread detailing what really happened and why. It may help the PR disaster that is now in place.
No worries here though, not my coin that is lost.
Take care!
David |
|
jmorlan
Hmm... That's funny.
Premium
join:2001-02-05
Pacifica, CA
 ·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to LS-Mike
Hi Mike,
Any chance of revising past release notes to comply with current/past disclosure policy?
Some of us remain curious which other programs were removed from the defs without disclosure.
Thanks.
--
NewsPlex Discussion Group |
|
fatdcuk
Premium
join:2005-02-20
England
2 edits |  reply to LS-Mike
Re: Lavasoft in La-La Land
ok mike,
as people are fond of comparisons to validate their point.
"if I/anyone go into a shop and buy's a product and subsequently at a later date become aware all is not well with it.i/we reserve the right to go back to customer desk at the manafacturers place of buisiness and demand an explaination.if i/we have questions about the product we have a right to answers surely.i for one if i am not getting the answers to the questions i have raised,will keep repeating the questions and become annoyed at being ignored.you the reap what you sow"
more public questions for LS that concern us all.
Q1. was WhenU reinstated to detections because of a new TAC rating or due to the adverse PR caused by dropping it in the 1ST place?
btw thankyou for restoring it!
OT
Q2. why do you not(lavasoft R&D) consider the two wellknown parasites Huntbar and DAP worthy of being in your detections to protect your customers ?
bare in mind,if your reply is submit it to are submissions service,it has been on numerous occaisions and yet nothing is done about it.
Q3 (for the benefit of all)
quote:
The Support forums are just that, technical support for the software. There are other, better venues for discussing general issues.
where are these now? where were they a month ago?
if the answer is e-mail lavasoft/submition service i have done both on numerous occaisions and still to date have not received any answers.
OT again but relevent!
btw,as far as PR goes and some insight into what people from the privacy community think may i draw your attention to half the comments(not mine!) but others made in this thread down at SWW.There is a lot that could be learn't from it by all after close scrutiny.
»www.spywarewarrior.com/viewtopic···&start=0 |
|
jmorlan
Hmm... That's funny.
Premium
join:2001-02-05
Pacifica, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Sorry to say it, but LavaSoft Mike appears to have gone back to the bunker.
Too bad really. Another missed opportunity to clean up a tarnished reputation.
--
NewsPlex Discussion Group |
|
fatdcuk
Premium
join:2005-02-20
England
2 edits |  
well im going to continue asking questions for myself and others until the answers are supplied at every available possibility on all levels.if they(lavasoft) choose not to answer them in an open,streight and timely manner that speaks volumes(they've got something to hide from,the truth!) and shows direspect for all their customers.
lavasoft your not the only fish in the sea now,your not even the tastiest fish in the sea anymore.time for you to face the facts and change before its too late!
JMHO |
|
