JDownloader Community - Appwork GmbH
 

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 26.12.2012, 02:11
rrogntudjű rrogntudjű is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 364
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by raztoki View Post
...Btw it's adware not malware, I changed the thread topic to reflect that.
An adware removed only by anti-malware programs!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Topken View Post
Since I run JDownloader 2 via zip method I do not get all the crapware.
Since a long time via zip method JD2 had never proposed to install toolbars but now it's not the case, so just wait the bug...

Last edited by rrogntudjű; 26.12.2012 at 02:24.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 26.12.2012, 02:50
raztoki's Avatar
raztoki raztoki is offline
English Supporter
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 16,228
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rrogntudjű View Post
An adware removed only by anti-malware programs!
no these programs remove more than that. ie malwarebtyes removes some virus, some malware, some adware, some cookies.. pro version scans html for known zero day exploits. Effectively it's just about a full blown antivirus software, without been called that.
__________________
raztoki @ jDownloader reporter/developer
http://svn.jdownloader.org/users/170

Don't fight the system, use it to your advantage. :]
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 26.12.2012, 03:02
rrogntudjű rrogntudjű is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 364
Default Jdownloader installer contains Malware

Quote:
Originally Posted by raztoki View Post
no these programs remove more than that. ie malwarebtyes removes some virus, some malware, some adware, some cookies.. pro version scans html for known zero day exploits. Effectively it's just about a full blown antivirus software, without been called that.
An adware against the consent of people who use silent install is a malware, a toolbar who install hundred of registry keys and persistent cookies, not deletable, is a malware. A browsers' hijacker like this who spy our surf habitude you call that how, you think it's not serious??? A program who install regularly this kind of malware can be considered as complice, it can be subject to malware complaints. If you continue like that no need to wait long time to see JD in their databases and probably worse. Betray users just for pocket money...
Spoiler:




PS: I prefer do not talk about redirection to crapulous removal tools developed by the same authors of these toolbars... and please do not try the bug with me, it was already the same with Sweetim, with Conduit, ect...

Just for info, what you call a simple adware: "SweetIM (or SweetPacks it's the same) installs a toolbar to the Internet Explorer and Firefox and adds its function to several instant messengers to offer free smileys. During the installation process SweetIM sets the start page of the browser to the website of SweetIM and creates a registry key that even does not get removed when the user wants to uninstall the product. With this registry key SweetIM is able to track the computer and it can ascertain if SweetIM has been installed before. Additionally SweetIM tracks different personal information like the IP-Address and "demographic information". Furthermore SweetIM secures the right to give the personal data to a third party if the website or the product gets sold." So by helping crapware to install in a double silence this kind of registry key you allow your friends to track your own users.

And finally poor 64bit users who can't choose the 1/2 infected method:
http://board.jdownloader.org/printthread.php?t=37365

JD2 beta: what is this version and where can I get it?
Windows users can use windows install method: http://installer.jdownloader.org/JDownloader2Setup.exe or the jar updater method: http://bit.ly/HF8DI8 All other use the zip/jar method.
For 64bit windows use this install: http://installer.jdownloader.org/JDo...Setup64Bit.exe
For Mac users use this install: http://installer.jdownloader.org/JDo...2Setup_Mac.dmg

Last edited by raztoki; 30.08.2015 at 04:39.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 28.12.2012, 04:46
Yeko
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Today I reinstall the program (because this was working weird for reason that i explain in other thread). I install the "WebInstaller" and when it show me the option for install a toolbar, I unmark. After the installer ask me if I was agree with the terms of contract and i put no (i knew of this trick for install "craprogram") I am safe or no?

And yes, an adware can has script that download malware.

I hope that text can be understandable :3
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 28.12.2012, 16:37
raztoki's Avatar
raztoki raztoki is offline
English Supporter
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 16,228
Default

I'm not a part of any adware inclusion within the JDownloader installer. That's entirely in Appwork control/domain, as they are the owners of JDownloader and its IP. We the supporter base (external of Appwork), have nothing todo with it's inclusion.

I have never argued for adware within the installer, if you search the forums, I was neutral to negative on this topic. But once again it really has nothing todo with me, as I don't have any controlling interest in this program or company behind this program. My involvement stops at supporting this open source program within this forum, and programming when I can.

But the option to op in / out issues, has been reported to Appwork on numerous occasions (if you read other threads about this same issue). Other than reporting the issue to them, I can not do any more. Nor will I take the flack resulting in it been installed somewhat contentiously, either it's been user error (hey it can happen if you click next without reading), a bug within the installer (possible), or intentionally (who knows?) not respecting the users selection.

The inclusion of adware within installers is usually a direct result of lack of drivable revenue streams, and the need to make a product economically viable in order to support it's core programmers (in this case Appwork) and pay it's bills (domain / server hosting and associated data costs). As this program is open source and donations to JDownloader is little to none, revenue has to come from somewhere!

In respects to malware vs adware, yes it can be classified as either (for some opinion based). Putting your opinion aside, generally adware returns revenue to a given company (Appwork). It's usually is carried out by another group like askbar (ask.com), sweetpacksim, facemoods, etc. Adware generally reasonably easy to remove from persons computer. Malware installs without your knowledge, not necessarily associated with installers of legitimate software. Who knows where the data goes, and money derived from it! It's usually very difficult to uninstall/revert from ones computer. In regards to my statement about malwarebytes, that having a result within 'malware bytes' does not imply that the findings are solely 'malware'. That was all.

I would like this issue with sweetpacksim/sweetim to be resolved once and for all, but at this stage Appwork is away on Christmas/New Years break and I'm waiting for them to return to bring this issue up yet again.


raztoki



Spoiler:
Quote:
Originally Posted by rrogntudjű View Post
An adware against the consent of people who use silent install is a malware, a toolbar who install hundred of registry keys and persistent cookies, not deletable, is a malware. A browsers' hijacker like this who spy our surf habitude you call that how, you think it's not serious??? A program who install regularly this kind of malware can be considered as complice, it can be subject to malware complaints. If you continue like that no need to wait long time to see JD in their databases and probably worse. Betray users just for pocket money...


PS: I prefer do not talk about redirection to crapulous removal tools developed by the same authors of these toolbars... and please do not try the bug with me, it was already the same with Sweetim, with Conduit, ect...

Just for info, what you call a simple adware: "SweetIM (or SweetPacks it's the same) installs a toolbar to the Internet Explorer and Firefox and adds its function to several instant messengers to offer free smileys. During the installation process SweetIM sets the start page of the browser to the website of SweetIM and creates a registry key that even does not get removed when the user wants to uninstall the product. With this registry key SweetIM is able to track the computer and it can ascertain if SweetIM has been installed before. Additionally SweetIM tracks different personal information like the IP-Address and "demographic information". Furthermore SweetIM secures the right to give the personal data to a third party if the website or the product gets sold." So by helping crapware to install in a double silence this kind of registry key you allow your friends to track your own users.

And finally poor 64bit users who can't choose the 1/2 infected method:
http://board.jdownloader.org/printthread.php?t=37365

JD2 beta: what is this version and where can I get it?
Windows users can use windows install method: http://installer.jdownloader.org/JDownloader2Setup.exe or the jar updater method: http://bit.ly/HF8DI8 All other use the zip/jar method.
For 64bit windows use this install: http://installer.jdownloader.org/JDo...Setup64Bit.exe
For Mac users use this install: http://installer.jdownloader.org/JDo...2Setup_Mac.dmg
__________________
raztoki @ jDownloader reporter/developer
http://svn.jdownloader.org/users/170

Don't fight the system, use it to your advantage. :]

Last edited by raztoki; 31.12.2012 at 11:43. Reason: spelling
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 28.12.2012, 17:21
Yeko
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
either it been user error (hey it can happen if you click next without reading)
imgur.com/hhtu6

I think that was this because if you unmark the option install but you put "agree" it will install anyways.

But i cant confirm it.

PD: I have problems putting image here.

Last edited by Yeko; 28.12.2012 at 17:23.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 31.12.2012, 01:54
soisbasura
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Forcing people to install software

Forcing people to install software they don't want is not funny at all.

Your software is just one of those shits that force to do it. No matter if you uncheck all the checkboxes the software is still installed on the system without user consent.

It is quite obvious than no matter how much you pretend not to being spreading virus. No matter if that is not a virus you are spreading software not requested by people. For that reason for me your sotfware has gone in the category of trash software that noone should use at all.

Good luck with your shit installer policy. I will try to spread the word against jdownloader as much as posible.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 31.12.2012, 02:14
soisbasura
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Confirmed your software comes with a virus, no matter how much you pretend it is not. So or you are stupid for not knowing the shit installer you are using on your software is a virus spreader or you know it and you are stupid anyway. Probably you ban and delete this message, because you don't want the truth, but who cares, the truth always soon or later will be known by everyone.

Everyone has one he deserves. I don't have any good wishes for you.

Last edited by soisbasura; 31.12.2012 at 02:17.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 31.12.2012, 03:09
app_eng
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default I can confirm it's still installing SweetIM

I love jdownloader and will continue to use it. You guys are great!!

I can confirm that during the jdownloader install, toggling OFF the Sweet install will not avoid a partial install of the Sweet product line. So please consider this issue "not solved".

I have a brand new computer - (purchased at Office Max) with Windows 8. All I've done is take the Windows updates so far, and then installed jdownloader from the jdownloader.org site (version 0.9.581).

The resulting install gave me two desktop shortcuts to Sweet (easily deleted), 3 entries on the Add/Remove Programs Control Panel (easily deleted), and about 70 registry entries (time consuming manual registry strip).

Even though the Sweet toolbar did not show up in Fire Fox nor IE, I see it has been automatically creating traffic to the SweetIM website. I'm hoping that will end now that I've cleaned the registry and rebooted.

Once again..... Love you guys. Thanks!!
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 31.12.2012, 04:41
soisbasura
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

This is a malware no matter who pretends it is not calling it adware. And I'm sure is not a bug on the installer. Everyone that has a knowledge on how things are moving nowdays in free software for windows platforms know those kind of installers are crap managed by unexcrupulous people that are spreading malware, and very very shit malware difficult to get rid of. It is not a coincidence that the crap software is installed with no consent and it results to be a crap sotfware that makes all posible to make it very difficult for you to uninstall it.

It is just malware consciounsly coded as malware and conciounsly installed without consent.

Pretending it is a bug or anything is just crap. You have sold your souls to the bad guys by alowing that shit installer on your software. Obviously for profit.

And thanking people from doing this is just mad.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 31.12.2012, 11:17
editestowy's Avatar
editestowy editestowy is offline
Polish Supporter
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: PL
Posts: 3,029
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by soisbasura View Post
Forcing people to install software they don't want is not funny at all.

Everything was said in the raztoki's post, so stop writing nonsenses like this above.
JD is FREE software and NO ONE FORCED you to install it.
If you don't understand meaning of the words "FREE" and "FORCE" ask google or wikipedia.
You also have zipped version of the installer to choose without using any installer.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 31.12.2012, 14:23
soisbasura
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by editestowy View Post
Everything was said in the raztoki's post, so stop writing nonsenses like this above.
JD is FREE software and NO ONE FORCED you to install it.
If you don't understand meaning of the words "FREE" and "FORCE" ask google or wikipedia.
You also have zipped version of the installer to choose without using any installer.
Having another alternative ways of installation (included source code) does not change the fact that this software has an installer (the one it is going to be chosen by most people and the one provided in the download page as the Windows installation package) that installs malware software without consent by cheating people making they think they can decide to not install it by disable two checkboxes. But after they continue the proccess and the install starts the malware is installed on system.

This isn't any nonsense is just reality. If you have been not affected by that crap does not mean many people have been and is the fault of jdownloader which are the ones that have spreaded malware.

And this same thing happened with a lot of free software lately that have decided to sell themselves for profit to the crap company responsible of that installer or if you are the ones that code the installer and you are the ones that decide which software to offer on that installer then even worst because you are the one that have decided for profit to offer that malware as a choice.

And the only thing that @raztoki explains is that he is not the responsible of that decision (he is only a guy that offer support on forum) and even he can't deny it is possible that the installer does this installation of malware intentionally. And obviously explains that offering software on installer is a way of getting revenue.

That way of revenue the responsibles of jdownloader have chosen by going into spreading malware is not correct, not honest way of revenue.

And even explains it is not first time that this happen. (wait for appwork vacation break finishes so they solve it again). Which is crap, if someone really matters of such a serious issue as it is spreading malware this would be solved inmediately by as first measure removing the installer from the download page of the website if that is the only thing they could do as first measure because they have not time to go into code. But it is obvious the responsibles of this software doesn't mind on spreading malware and it is not a priority for them. The priority is the profit they get by using that installer software.

So go on and good dead jdownloader.

Last edited by soisbasura; 31.12.2012 at 15:17.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 31.12.2012, 17:51
soisbasura
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by soisbasura View Post
Having another alternative ways of installation (included source code) does not change the fact that this software has an installer (the one it is going to be chosen by most people and the one provided in the download page as the Windows installation package)
And I want to clarify about this that even if there is an alternative instalation process the windows installer -the one spreading malware- is on download page and marked as RECOMMENDED.

Last edited by soisbasura; 31.12.2012 at 18:05.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 31.12.2012, 18:58
raztoki's Avatar
raztoki raztoki is offline
English Supporter
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 16,228
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by soisbasura View Post
And the only thing that @raztoki explains is that he is not the responsible of that decision (he is only a guy that offer support on forum) and even he can't deny it is possible that the installer does this installation of malware intentionally.
As with most things, it can be interpreted multiple ways, but that was never my intention. I neither denied or accepted that it was intentional. I stated what I thought could be all the possible combinations, that's all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by soisbasura View Post
That way of revenue the responsibles of jdownloader have chosen by going into spreading malware is not correct, not honest way of revenue.
This statement leads on from the previous paragraph. It isn't true, as your previous paragraph is incorrect. Your trying to imply just because Appwork wants derived income from this project and that their is an issue with user consent in reguards to the adware component within installer previously, that it is/was totally intentional. What rubbish.

Quote:
Originally Posted by soisbasura View Post
And even explains it is not first time that this happen. (wait for appwork vacation break finishes so they solve it again). Which is crap, if someone really matters of such a serious issue as it is spreading malware this would be solved inmediately by as first measure removing the installer from the download page of the website if that is the only thing they could do as first measure because they have not time to go into code. But it is obvious the responsibles of this software doesn't mind on spreading malware and it is not a priority for them. The priority is the profit they get by using that installer software.
As I understand Appwork doesn't control the adware installer page or their components of the installation files to any significant extent. That's all provided by said party, and would be stipulated within the contract with the adware party. I'd assume they would have input on it's design, opt in/op out default settings etc. I dare say Appwork does have the ability to get the issue resolved, or to decide to discontinue with this adware provider. disclaimer... I could be totally wrong, I have no real idea on the contract or it's terms. I'm only putting that together from what I've been told indirectly. And as stated already no controlling/vested interest in regards to the installers adware components.

Quote:
Originally Posted by soisbasura View Post
And I want to clarify about this that even if there is an alternative instalation process the windows installer -the one spreading malware- is on download page and marked as RECOMMENDED.
That's because installers do the extra stuff for example: creates file associations, desktop and start menu shortcuts, JDownloader loader binaries for your system 32/64bit (they find java installations and start JD with the correct start parameters.), all specific to that installer variant.

installing via the update jar wont do any of that. You will need to create the shortcuts, file associations, link formats like dlc:// containerformathere://, create a bat or some shortcut that will start JD with the correct arguments.

Installers are provided to make life easier for everyone concerned.

------

You will need to wait for Appwork to get back from holidays before and respond to this thread. Please don't jump to any hasty conclusion. Please keep in mind Appwork is a small company and only consists of two programmers, which are away over the Christmas/New Year break. Not sure what you'd expect to happen when no one else has the ability to look into this further.
__________________
raztoki @ jDownloader reporter/developer
http://svn.jdownloader.org/users/170

Don't fight the system, use it to your advantage. :]

Last edited by raztoki; 31.12.2012 at 19:01.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 31.12.2012, 20:09
soisbasura
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

First I must say my intention was only put into notice whats happening. Expressing my point of view about the issue. I didn't started my post as a bug report though now I can see that it was merged to a bug report.

@raztoki I really think I never misunderstood your words. I'm not saying that you were afirming that was intentional, I said you were not denying being intentional was a posibility. You just say you don't know.

At least it is clarified the core team has made the arrangement (that is what I mean in other posts when I said sell, though obviously is not a sell, I only didn't knew how to express it) with that whatever company is in charge of that shit installer -as other free software has done recently, I can ensure you- knowing or not knowing that's not my problem, these people in charge of that shit installer are not honest people and they are spreading malware.

So I don't know if this has been intentional by the appwork team but the fact is that actual -and you say is not the first time it happens- jdownloader windows installer recommended on download page spreads malware.

A wrong decision by appteam, intentional, not intentional, or whatever doesn't change facts. jDownloader is spreading malware (intentional collaborator or not) and as so should be flagged by antimalware databases. And this is what I'm going to try to ask for, sorry.

There are issues for which there are no vacations, no matter if the team are only 2 members. As I said something so serious should be resolved inmediately at least by removing the installer link from the download page until the issue is resolved. (less than 5 mins solution)

@rrogntudjű explains very clear what that crap does.

And really this issue is because the malware is being installed without consent but it is awful anyway to offer malware within your software, even if it were only installed with the user consent. So for me by using that installer even if the issue about the silent install is a bug and it gets resolved, still makes jdownloader a collaborator on spreading malware.

Regards.

Last edited by soisbasura; 31.12.2012 at 20:22.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 01.01.2013, 13:26
rrogntudjű rrogntudjű is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 364
Default

Edit by Think3r: The following is unapproved.
JDownloader will attempt to install Malware without your permission OR your knowledge. Do not fall into the same trap that I did.


Unapproved? The truth does not need to be approved, it is a fact that has been proven by users all over the net since several month. What you should not approve that's the fact while hundreds of users are infected by a "bug" owners are having a good time on holiday. When someone says kindly "I just wanted to inform you that JDownloader is installing SweetPacks even if we uncheck it during the installation.": http://board.jdownloader.org/showthread.php?t=44830 he gets no response, no explanation, no apology, nothing. But maybe nothing is better than "JD is FREE software and NO ONE FORCED you to install it."...
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 01.01.2013, 13:40
soisbasura
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Sooner or later more and more people will open their eyes to the truth.

There isn't any software that is imprescindible. The world free software community has always been able enough to code alternatives to anything. And more than probable a lot of collaborators to this project are going to be pissed off about this issue. I would be.

The same as I am pissed off when I recommend a software that I would ever thought it will be turned into a malware spreader to a person and that person gets infected. And I try it myself because I can't believe it just to confirm it is no more than the truth.

This pretension of trying to talk down this serious issue by calling it adware and not malware to try to say to people: "Hey guys is not so bad", is just nonsense. But at the end people are clever enough to know the truth.

Last edited by soisbasura; 01.01.2013 at 13:52.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 01.01.2013, 23:33
tunayx's Avatar
tunayx tunayx is offline
JD Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Xp Sp3 wth Java 7 No Firewall / Turkey
Posts: 603
Default

JD installs toolbar? I can't believe it. I just removed Jd as well. Man even Microsoft products come with useless and annoying components. If you haven't knew how to deal with malwares so far then I'm sure your computer has full of them and one more won't hurt. If you have intelligence how to zap commercials in TV then you can handle this common issue, adapt or suicide (by removing Jd)
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 02.01.2013, 11:33
rrogntudjű rrogntudjű is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 364
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tunayx View Post
JD installs toolbar? I can't believe it. I just removed Jd as well. Man even Microsoft products come with useless and annoying components. If you haven't knew how to deal with malwares so far then I'm sure your computer has full of them and one more won't hurt. If you have intelligence how to zap commercials in TV then you can handle this common issue, adapt or suicide (by removing Jd)
The real question is not JD & JD2 installs toolbars, the question is JD installs toolbars without the consentement of users by using 'bugs'!
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 02.01.2013, 12:29
rrogntudjű rrogntudjű is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 364
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rrogntudjű View Post
[COLOR="Red"]When someone says kindly "I just wanted to inform you that JDownloader is installing SweetPacks even if we uncheck it during the installation.": http://board.jdownloader.org/showthread.php?t=44830 he gets no response, no explanation, no apology, nothing. But maybe nothing is better than "JD is FREE software and NO ONE FORCED you to install it."...
Just a clarification, this thread was not started by Alooka but by stackoverflow. Another proof tricks begin to be an habitude now.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 18:13.
Provided By AppWork GmbH | Privacy | Imprint
Parts of the Design are used from Kirsch designed by Andrew & Austin
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.