eburger68
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-28
4 edits | Pest Patrol: Claria Temporarily Removed
Hi All:
Pest Patrol users should be aware that all of Claria's products -- including Dashbar, Date Manager, Gator/GAIN, GotSmiley, Precision Time -- have been temporarily removed from Pest Patrol's detections. This change is announced on CA's "Vendor Appeals" page:
»www3.ca.com/securityadvisor/pest···?q=67945
As that page explains,
said by CA:
From time to time, Computer Associates receives requests from vendors whose products are detected by eTrust PestPatrol Anti-Spyware to stop detecting their products. When this happens, CA opens a Vendor Appeal.
The Vendor Appeals Process is designed to ensure the highest level of accuracy and quality in eTrust PestPatrol Anti-Spyware products. The first step of the Vendor Appeals process is to temporarily remove the product in question for the eTrust PestPatrol database, as well as the Spyware Encyclopedia, pending further evaluation. An evaluation of the product is then conducted using the eTrust PestPatrol Spyware Scorecard, a behavior-based list of criteria that defines what eTrust PestPatrol AntiSpyware products will detect, as well as the eTrust PestPatrol Anti-Spyware User Permission Requirements. A written report is provided to the vendor when the evaluation is complete. If the evaluation shows that the product continues to meet one or more of the criteria listed on the eTrust PestPatrol Spyware Scorecard, the product will be added back to the database and eTrust PestPatrol products will resume detection of it. It will also be added back to the Spyware Encyclopedia. In the event that the product does not meet any of the criteria on the eTrust PestPatrol Spyware Scorecard, the product will be permanently removed from both the eTrust PestPatrol database and the Spyware Encyclopedia. Products which have been temporarily removed from the database and the Spyware Encyclopedia will be listed on this page each week.
On March 25, CA posted a notice to that page about Claria:
said by CA:
March 25, 2005:
REMOVED: Gator/GAIN/Claria: all known products found in our database under the names Gator, GAIN, Claria or Gator/GAIN/Claria For those who wish to remove Gator/Gain/Claria while it is undergoing appeal, Manual Removal Instructions are available.
Strangely, this removal is not announced on CA's "New & Improved Pest Detections" page, which appears to be out of date ("Changes for version: 05031815"):
»research.pestpatrol.com/News/New···ions.asp
That page lists "Gator/GAIN/Claria" only as "Modified," not "Removed," nor does it mention the full range of Claria's products.
Still more oddly, that page does list "Whenu.ClockSync" as having been removed, though CA's "Spyware Information Center" home page lists "WhenU.Desktop Toolbar" as "newly discovered" -- see:
»www3.ca.com/securityadvisor/pest/
A quick check of CA's information pages for both Claria and WhenU products reveals most of them (though not all) to be blank -- devoid of the usual information contained in CA's write-ups of targeted programs -- see CA's "Pest Encyclopedia":
»research.pestpatrol.com/search/browse.aspx
or »www3.ca.com/securityadvisor/pest/browse.aspx
Finally, a test with Pest Patrol 5 and KaZaA, which installs Claria's software (among several other adware programs), does indeed confirm that Pest Patrol 5 with the latest definitions does not detect and remove Claria's software, though as the second screenshot above illustrates, it still detects a few stray Claria Registry keys as "AdDestroyer" (an unrelated product from VirtualBouncer).
CA's "Vendor Appeals" page does contain a link to "Manual Removal Instructions," but clicking on that link only takes you back to CA's Spyware Information Center, which informs users that the "most rapidly spreading spyware" currently is Grokster:
»www3.ca.com/securityadvisor/pest···id=64477
As that page notes, Grokster (like KaZaA) installs numerous adware products, including Claria's (Gator). But of course Claria has been temporarily removed from Pest Patrol's detections.
Although Pest Patrol was wise to include a notice of some sort to its users on the "Vendor Appeals" page, many users simply won't know to look there. Thus, I think CA still has a ways to go in creating policies and procedures to notify its users of routine removals of products that it must know its users will be concerned about.
Best,
Eric L. Howes |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA | GEEZ! CA sure is screwing PestPatrol up, what a waste.  |
|
NetFixer
Freedom is NOT Free
Premium
join:2004-06-24
Murfreesboro, TN
 ·Vonage
 ·Cingular Wireless
·AT&T CallVantage
 ·AT&T Southeast
| reply to eburger68
said by eburger68  :I think CA still has a ways to go in creating policies and procedures to notify its users of routine removals of products that it must know its users will be concerned about. Since CA purchased PestPatrol, the only communication I have ever received from CA regarding PestPatrol was this "upgrade" notice received yesterday. I wonder if the Claria/Gator exemption is the "significant enhancement" to which they are referring?
Dear PestPatrol Subscriber,
As a subscriber, you are eligible for a FREE upgrade to the new 2005 version of eTrust™ PestPatrol® Anti-Spyware from Computer Associates.
It is important to upgrade at your earliest convenience because support for older versions will be discontinued in the future. As well, you deserve the best spyware protection available. This new version offers significant enhancements to help protect your PC from unauthorized access, information theft and diminished system performance.
--
We can never have enough of nature.
We need to witness our own limits transgressed, and some life pasturing freely where we never wander. |
|
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-01
IA
 ·Mediacom
1 edit |  reply to eburger68
Damn it! 
Instead of fixing a shitload of FPs they are excluding a known spyware vendor.
--
Someone who finds a job they love will never work a day in their life. |
|
DaveNJ
No Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey | reply to eburger68
Why dont these companies realize they serve the consumer, not the not malware companies. I guess its time to look for an alternative, i guess lavasoft is out too. Do the malware companies pay them to make there product or do consumers. |
|
LoPhatPhuud
Premium,VIP,MVM
join:2002-01-06
Albuquerque, NM
·Comcast
·Qwest.net
| reply to eburger68
What bothers me is that if a Vendor appeals they remove the detection pending the resolution of the appeal. Why not leave it in instead?
I can see it now; all major spyware/malware manufacturer's appeal to CA and soon PestPatrol will detect nothing!
--
"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and a man."----- Mark Twain |
|
SnowyOne
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Kailua, HI
·RoadRunner Cable
·Clearwire Wireless
| said by LoPhatPhuud :What bothers me is that if a Vendor appeals they remove the detection pending the resolution of the appeal. Why not leave it in instead? I'm all for 'innocent until proven guilty', but even humans don't always get out of jail pending investigation without some form of bail (penalty as it applies to software).
I don't believe remaining in software jail is contrary to good management.
CA may have learned something from the LS debacle, but not enough of the lesson to have benefitted from it. If it's to be believed, even LS has a better policy (whatever it means) than CA's de-list them all policy.
»Re: ASW Vendors in La-La Land |
|
mers2
Premium,MVM
join:2004-03-20
USA
clubs:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
1 edit | reply to eburger68
Between the false positives and CA removing definitions pending a review this software is less then worthless as it provides the user with an extremely false sense of security. I will discourage people from trying/buying it. There are more trustworthy programs out there to recommend.
--
God put me on this Earth to accomplish a certain number of things. Right now, I am so far behind I will never die.
|
|
rogue_
I Have A Secret Window
Premium
join:2001-10-17
Lake Hiawatha, NJ
1 edit | reply to eburger68
When the almighty dollar speaks av vendors listen?
Probably not the case.
edit: typo |
|
madylarian
The curmudgeonly
Premium
join:2002-01-03
Parkville, MD
| said by rogue_ :When the almighty dollar speaks av vendors listen? When threatened with long and potentially VERY expensive lawsuits, yes, they do. This all makes Microsoft's Antispyware look better and better, if only because no vendor has enough money to threaten Microsoft.
mady
--
Honi soit qui mal y pense |
|
Reverend Ike
Premium
join:2001-08-24
Sacramento, CA
| reply to mers2
said by LoPhatPhuud :What bothers me is that if a Vendor appeals they remove the detection pending the resolution of the appeal. Why not leave it in instead? I can see it now; all major spyware/malware manufacturer's appeal to CA and soon PestPatrol will detect nothing! said by mers2 :Between the false positives and CA removing definitions pending a review this software is less then worthless as it provides the user with an extremely false sense of security. I will discourage people from trying/buying it. There are more trustworthy programs out there to recommend. I could not have said it better.
There is no justification for removing detection of previously indisputable adware or spyware during a "review" process. And for a product whose detections are rampant with false positives to decide to "exclude first" is rather laughable ...  |
|
TeMerc
join:2004-01-22
Phoenix, AZ
| reply to LoPhatPhuud
I couldn't agree more.
I can already hear them beating feet to CA R&D over at New.Net, WhenU, 180Solutions, ISearch\IDownload, NaviSearch, CashBack, WindowsAd Service, Searchmaid, HotOffers, SlimShield, EliteToolbar, StopGuard, Guardbar, ClickSpring, CasinoPalazzo, Media Motor, ISTsvc, iWon, eXact Advertising, Ibis toolbar, and any other ,Potentially Offensive System slower on the market, asking for 'evaluation' so they too, can go undetected by CA\PP.
Just when you think it can't get much worse.
--
Remember............You can NEVER be OVERPROTECTED!!»temerc.com/ |
|
Khaine
join:2003-03-03
Australia
| reply to eburger68
Atleast CA disclose this information to the public, while I would rather see the products kept in the definitions until after the outcome of the review, I welcome CA's honestly and integrity in informing the general public about why they were removed |
|
fatdcuk
Premium
join:2005-02-20
England
|  quote:
Atleast CA disclose this information to the public, while I would rather see the products kept in the definitions until after the outcome of the review, I welcome CA's honestly and integrity in informing the general public about why they were removed
im sure CA have learn't by lavasoft's debacle with WhenU that its better to be honest and open with your customer's about their product alterations.
having said that,lavasoft were shamed into bringing WhenU back into their detections by public demand/outrage.
i would suggest everyone contact CA before posting simmilar shaming articles around these community forum's in order to remind CA(as with lavasoft) who their customer's are and what they pay their $$'s for.
just an idea,it worked before;) |
|
R2
R Not
Premium,MVM
join:2000-09-18
Long Beach, CA
clubs:
1 edit | reply to madylarian
said by madylarian :said by rogue_ :When the almighty dollar speaks av vendors listen? When threatened with long and potentially VERY expensive lawsuits, yes, they do. This all makes Microsoft's Antispyware look better and better, if only because no vendor has enough money to threaten Microsoft. mady We can take this one step further.  What would you do if you were Microsoft and wanted to take over the Anti-Spyware market? Well, you have a lot of money and you can do almost anything you want. How about discrediting the competition? Especially if the competition is so eager to go along with the scam: "What? You'll pay us how much to remove your program from detection list? Where do we sign?"
Just spreading love, joy, and paranoia.  |
|
theeinstein
Premium
join:2003-07-31
Fernandina Beach, FL | Sadly all about the money...:(
or is it really the consumers are the ones who are to stupid to demand better....and of course Lazy how could I forget!! |
|
eburger68
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-28
| reply to eburger68
Hi All:
Two quick updates to this story.
First, as Karl Bode noted in his news story, CA has now corrected the link to the uninstall info:
»www3.ca.com/content/default.aspx?CID=67999
Second, CA's vendor appeals process is explained in more detail on this page:
eTrust PestPatrol Vendor Appeal Process
»www3.ca.com/Content/default.aspx?CID=67986
Best,
Eric L. Howes |
|
Nerdtalker
Working Hard, Or Hardly Working?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-02-18
Tucson, AZ
clubs: | reply to eburger68
Looks like Pest Patrol is going to go the way of AdAware...  |
|
mers2
Premium,MVM
join:2004-03-20
USA
clubs:
·AT&T U-Verse
1 edit | reply to eburger68
The fact that they willingly remove a product from detection before verifying that the product is no longer spyware is just plain wrong. Even if it is only for two weeks while they review it. If it still meets the CA spyware criteria the vendor can re-apply in 90 days and the whole process begins again. I would never trust a product with this set up in place.
--
God put me on this Earth to accomplish a certain number of things. Right now, I am so far behind I will never die.
|
|
SnowyOne
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Kailua, HI
1 edit | On the positive side, it should give them something to do.
It's not like they were spending their time weeding out the false positives in their definitions. |
|
