Cookie Control

[zarzenz]

What's the best way to control cookies Is it possible to keep the cookies needed for forum use and stop all others. Also is the index file needed. Any info on this subject would be welcome and advice on any free programs to sort it.

[Checkout]

CookieCooker is good - really cool - from anon.tu-dresden.de I believe. Others here will chip in with their own favourites.

[snowman]

Zar

I was just about to log out when I noticed your post...so please excuse my briefness.
I have tryed a couple of cookie managers...but recently Spy 1 introduced me to cookie muncher (freeware) an does it ever rock!!......I have since installed it on several computers.......

snowman

[spy1]

zarzenz - No, the index.dat (if that's what you're referring to) isn't needed for anything - unless it has some kind of unknown 'M$ only' function. There are various ways to delete it, one of the easiest of which is (depending on your OS) by use of a little program called Spider116, available from here: http://www.webattack.com/php/download.php?id=103233&app=spider&r=l . A 'Search' with any search-engine for 'index.dat' will get you much more information.

CookieMuncher (direct d/l link): http://software.design.tripod.com/download/cookiem.zip . HTH Pete

[controler]

Cookiemuncher link does not work direct from here for me.
Had to copy and paste into addressbar.

Why is this software offered at a tripod site?

Here is the link to authors site taken from cookiemuncher
text file.
http://www.bigwig.net/softwaredesign

[zarzenz]

Thanks guys...I've now downloaded both the cookie muncher and the spider...that web attack site looks like its got lots of good stuff so will have to check out all of the programs on there some time, but for now I will concentrate on installing these two and learning how to use them etc. I'll know where to come if I need any advice on setting them up so thanks to you all. :)

[spy1]

You're quite welcome. Bear in mind that Spider does not work with all OS's. Pete

[controler]

Webattack also hosts some of the very programs most antitrojan
software is trying to fend off such as the Keylogger spyer program listed on their home page.

[zarzenz]

Yeah...its an impressive site.

BTW my OS is WinME so hoping spider will work...anyway I'll give it a go and see what happens...cheers.

[spy1]

controler - is there a problem?

WebAttack is a software-hosting site just like a lot of others.

To wit - they host all kinds of software.

Steve Seymour has his site at tripod because it's free for him there.

I point people out to programs based on where I got them from - if anyone doesn't care for those sources, they're quite free to do a 'Search' on any browsers search bar and find it somewhere else. Pete

[controler]

No no I am sure the TDS-3 crew will be happy that you did.
Since I sent the Informer_setup.exe file to dem allready.
I feel all keyloggers should be included in TDS-3
Informer has all the mundane features all the rest of the keyloggers have.

thanks again Spy 1

controler

[zarzenz]

controler...sorry I got the wrong end of the stick there regarding the webAttack site...as I now understand what you meant after reading spy1's last post. So I guess I'll have to be careful with what I look at there.

spy1...forgot to mention...yes it was the index.dat file I was referring to, so thanks for that but I guess you will have gathered that anyway from my spider download.

Thanks again guys...still learning about all this stuff.

[snowy]

ZAR

be advised that over the years I have download numerous programs from webattack....an will continue to do so... just as Spy 1 said its a hosting site....there are tens of thousand of hosting sites.....an it would be obsurd to expect or ask for the site owners to check each and every program......an even if they did its still the responsibility of each computer user to check each program himself.....
right now I am not sure whats being implied regarding cookie muncher or Spider......or webattack for that matter.....what I can say is that I fully trust Spy 1...an have for a few years....he was instrumental big time in my learning how to use a computer as was Mickey the Man....an Paul.......these guys walked me one step at a time......an during a few of those times I wasn't in the best of moods......Spy 1 is as solid as they come...he is not going to knowingly or intentionally send someone to a bad website.
yes you., me..an everyone else needs to be careful no matter what the name of the program nor who made it....hijacked programs are common....even the authors of programs know that.....so yes always use caution and always check....only do it as regular good practice.....an not from fear.

snowy the snowman

[zarzenz]

Thanks for that snowman...well as I said I'm very new to all this so it's only by asking you guys that I'm getting there.

Nice to see you back in full swing snowman...hope you have made a full recovery...cheers now. :)

[controler]

Oh dear

I am not saying Spy 1 is not trustable at all
I was just thanking him for the link.
I also know many sites offer all forms of software ;)
Look at Download.com
actualy If i am looking for something, I go there.
Nice way to select desired software by Freeware, shareware
ect.
I am surprised alot are just looking into PGP here. it has been around for years.
I guess I would hope as you people make your travels online and come accross new files (keyloggers) you would report them to
the TDS crew.
MAybe I missunderstood here and not all Wilsers forum moderators ect support TDS?
Correct me if wrong please?
controler

[Paul Wilders]

Controler,

{QUOTE-> MAybe I missunderstood here and not all Wilsers forum moderators ect support TDS?
Correct me if wrong please?
controler <-QUOTE}

Not necessarelly. All DCS Mods surely are in favor of TDS. All other mods are free to support any anti-trojan software they want to. This isn't a DCS/TDS board at first; it's a security/privacy board. Although we do host the "Open DCS Forums" - and for good reasons in our opinion, anyone is entitled to his/her own opinion, moderators included.

regards.

paul

[snowy]

Controler

you have a way of changing topics mid-stream....why are you bringing keyloggers...TDS-3 and the moderators into a very simple topic.......are you attempting to instigate??? I already stated that I fail to see what you are impling.....an most definitely it appeared to me that you were accusing Spy 1......webattack,, cookie muncher and Spider.......
but so as to not be un-pleasent I am going to pass on posting further comments......

snowt the snowman

[Paul Wilders]

No need to get upset here, gents ;).

regards,

paul

[controler]

My last post on this thread will be this.

I am now finding out I missunderstood some of the posters here at the Wilders Forums. I thought the whole gang Used TDS
I was wrong. I admit it.
If I devieated from the original topic is was for good cause.
I brought to attention the keylogger on the site. I also
mentioned I thought any one of us would senf the sample to TDS.
Now I realize Not all Wilders Posters side with the TDS peoples.
but I did think we all perty much had the same purpose.

[spy1]

And we do all have the same purpose here, controler - to help people maintain or improve their safety, security and privacy online at every turn and in any way we can.

My apologies if I mis-understood the thrust of your posts. Pete

[Prince_Serendip]

:) Hi guys! I need to clarify something about index.dat files and Win98. From my understanding you do not need them in your Temporary Internet Files Folder. However, with Win98 and Win98se you need them to link between the programs in your OS outside of the Temporary Internet Files Folder. I learned this when I had some outside ones removed. Ouch! I was able to replace them and set it up that only the ones in the Temporary Internet Folder would be deleted. This could be important!

[controler]

Spy 1
I have the utmost respect for you and I wasn't trying to come off as mistrusting.
You have been a good friend here and trusted and had faith in me
And yes I know , I need to keep my posts to the correct threads,
dang will I ever get that right ? :-[

I also aggree about the index.dat files. they are needed
They are everywher on XP Even the desktop has the hidden
Index.Dat file

[spy1]

Thank you, controler - I appreciate that. Pete

[zarzenz]

Guys...I installed spider...wow...what an amazing little utility that is. First of all before running it I thought I'd try a little experiment, so I deleted a couple of cookies to the recycle bin...this forum cookie to remember me as logged in...and the doubleclick opt out cookie...to keep Ad-aware happy. My idea was to put them back after in the hope that they would still work (for me).

Now for the most mind blowing bit.

I deleted all other cookies...then ran spider. I did wonder what the other little app...spiderbite...was for but that became obvious later. Anyway...guys...I could not believe what I saw. These little index.dat files were in the cookies (that's the one you always see) and in the temp int files and in the history file and they still had all the details of all the sites I had ever been to. Well that just did it for me.

So I put the little spider to work...it bit...and I was clean.

Then I was able to get the little run down of what it found in the spiderbite part...thats nice.

So to complete my experiment...I restored my cookies from the bin. But it soon became obvious that they no longer worked. So it seems that for a cookie to be valid it must have been created by windows and then entered into the index file. Hmmm...very crafty.

So this is my idea.

1) Do a complete clean up with spider.
2) Install cookie muncher...my next priority.
3) Enter the sites I want to get the good cookies for so they get re-created in the index file and then allow them in the muncher.
4) Set muncher to stop all other cookies.

Now if I'm right on this...that should give me a very clean index all the time and then I will only have the cookies I need and no others can ever get recorded in that nasty little index.dat file.

Thanks guys...any comments on my above routine would be most welcome...I now feel as if I'm getting in control here.

[FanJ]

Hi Zarzenz,

You could also have a look at IEClean (for IE) (or NSClean (for Netscape)) at www.nsclean.com ; and at WindowWasher at www.webroot.com .
Very fine programs, but not free.

[spy1]

I'd also like to note that Spider doesn't work for me any longer in WinMe.

It used to, but now when I re-run it, it finds the same stuff again that it supposedly 'bit' when I ran it. I have no idea why it doesn't work anymore - perhaps one of M$'s 'security' patches slid a little something in to negate its effectiveness.

Just wanted to give everyone a headsup on that so they could find an alternative such as the ones mentioned above. Pete

[snowy]

Pete

try this....instead of checking all the boxs in spider at the same time.......check only one box....then let spider do its thing.......than go to the next box.......do same again until you covered it all.......takes more time but should do the job..\

snowman

[spy1]

Might just try that, snowman! Thanks for the suggestion. Pete

[snowy]

REPORT:

have been using cookie muncher for several days without any problems...works great...until today when two cookies slid right pass it....cookies were from <msn>....during my use of cookie muncher I've been to the same site several times without any cookies bypassing...but for some reason I can't explain cookie muncher let these two pass.....I've returned again and again to the same site an it didn't occur again.....I'll keep an eye open for this now.....an mentioning it here for others who may also want to monitor

snowman

[zarzenz]

Hi snowman,

Thats a strange thing you noticed there, maybe they are putting something in there that fools the muncher.

I tried cookie muncher and it does work but I've found it a bit tricky to set up for allowing the cookies I want. I know I have to set the cookie to read only to be ignored but in practice this has proved to be a little bit more difficult due to the fact that some of the 'good' places I want seem to produce more than one cookie...some forums look as if they have a different cookie for different boards for example.

So what I need to do is find out exactly what cookies (and multiples of the same site) I need first. To do this I've installed cookie jar that is rated on the Wilders downloads section. It looks good and may be the answer to this problem in the learning curve...then when I've got a good idea of the ones I need to allow I can either do it in the jar or let the muncher loose again.

The good thing about all this is I'm learning so much in this period which I was unaware of before.

BTW...why do some cookies have a [1] and some a [2] after them...is it related to what I was saying above about some sites having more than one, if so then it could be useful in my investigations or is it for some other reason that I've missed.

[snowy]

ZAR

heyya buddy....just a couple of brief comments then its lights out for me....first: I've a feeling those cookies sliding by was just a strange quirk....it hasn't happen again....the post was just a pre-caution...not to worry.
at the moment I am extremely exhusted so can't stay long enough to fully comment......I am sure Spy 1 will notice your post......until then better not to struggle with any problems you may be having.....

until another time..regards
snowman

[FanJ]

{QUOTE-> quoting: zarzenz link=board=20;threadid=1864;start=15#13875 date=1024469674]

BTW...why do some cookies have a [1] and some a [2] after them...is it related to what I was saying above about some sites having more than one, <-QUOTE}

Hi Zarzenz,

I hope this example gives you an explanaition for that:

I have several programs in which I have to "set-up" the cookies that I want to save; for example: CookieWall, IEClean, WindowWasher, Ontrack Internet Cleanup.

Let's now take this example:
I have saved a cookie in all those app's but I forgot to do it in WindowWasher. Then I do a wash with WindowWasher. That cookie is then deleted, cause it wasn't saved there. But it is still mentioned in for example IEClean, but in fact the cookie is deleted. The next time I go to the site where I need that cookie, I have to make it new (remember: it was deleted from my system). So now I make that cookie anew. But the previous cookie from that site was already mentioned in the list of my other app's. The new cookie gets now that [2], and again in all my app's I have to save that cookie.

I hope this makes it a little bit more clear.

[zarzenz]

Hi FanJ,

Yep...I think I get it...so lets say one was to completely delete every cookie from the system including the index.dat file. This should mean that all traces of cookies are gone.

So in that case...every site visited from then on would make a cookie and it should only have a [1] after it. If any cookies then have a [2] after it then it must be existing in some other location on the system...is that it.

[FanJ]

{QUOTE-> quoting: zarzenz link=board=20;threadid=1864;start=30#13918 date=1024501457]
Hi FanJ,

Yep...I think I get it...so lets say one was to completely delete every cookie from the system including the index.dat file. This should mean that all traces of cookies are gone.

So in that case...every site visited from then on would make a cookie and it should only have a [1] after it. If any cookies then have a [2] after it then it must be existing in some other location on the system...is that it.
<-QUOTE}

Yep, you got it !
There is only one subtle difference between a cookie existing on your system and a cookie somehow mentioned in a save-cookies-list of an application (for example WindowWasher or IEClean). The fact that a cookie is mentioned in such a list, doesn't have to mean that that cookie actually exists on your system (see my example in my previous posting).

[zarzenz]

Thanks FanJ...that clears it for me. So would the same thing apply with Cookie Jar in that case...just the mention of a cookie in the allow list (even though it had been completly wiped from the system) would still make it show up with a [2] when that site is next visited.

You have mentioned a few different programs that you use, so is there any particular one you like best. I've now tried the Cookie Muncher (which seems very powerful for completely stopping them dead) and the Cookie Jar which seems easy to put into allow/banned sections...so what are the others like in comparison or are they much the same.

[FanJ]

{QUOTE-> quoting: zarzenz link=board=20;threadid=1864;start=30#13923 date=1024503118]
Thanks FanJ...that clears it for me. So would the same thing apply with Cookie Jar in that case...just the mention of a cookie in the allow list (even though it had been completly wiped from the system) would still make it show up with a [2] when that site is next visited. <-QUOTE}

Yes, that is right.

{QUOTE->
You have mentioned a few different programs that you use, so is there any particular one you like best. I've now tried the Cookie Muncher (which seems very powerful for completely stopping them dead) and the Cookie Jar which seems easy to put into allow/banned sections...so what are the others like in comparison or are they much the same.
<-QUOTE}

Sorry, I didn't tried Cookie Muncher or Cookie Jar.
Internet Cleanup: not so important program to me.
IEClean and WindowWasher: I like these programs very much ! They are both capable to do a lot more things than only cookie-management.

IEClean: www.nsclean.com
WindowWasher: www.webroot.com

You asked which program I like the most; well for me there is no doubt: IEClean. I love this program ! It can make IE a lot more safe. For Netscape there is his brother NSClean. They are made by the same company that sells the AT BOClean.
I can only advice: go to those sites and take some time to read there !!!

[zarzenz]

FanJ...thanks for confirming all those points and your recommendations and links etc. What I'm going to do now is go to those sites and take all the info available and then try out the programs. Then when I've tried them all and compared them, I'll be able to see which works best for me.

This has been a great exercise for me and I want to thank you and all the other contributors for all the great advice here. I guess thats what this forum is all about. People with a common interest helping each other out as we tread this important area of our computing experience existance at this point in time. Evolution will never be the same again.

[FanJ]

Hi Zarzenz,

You're quite welcome!

Just a few other things:
WindowWasher and IEClean are not free.
If I remember me well for WindowWasher there is a trial time; but IEClean has no trial version. PSC (the company of IEClean) does not give trial-versions, but they have a money-back garantee.
You could also have a look at Internet Sweeper; there is a special forum-part here at the Wilders-forum for it.

[zarzenz]

Ok FanJ,

Well I've got the trial version for WindowWasher now and I like the look of it. I see it also has a index.dat clean facility so I will give that a try later and compare it with the spider.

I too, like spy1, seem to be having problems with the spider now, and I also have WinME. I find it won't do the full clean in one go...and the spiderbite says failed on all its cleaning routines...but if I first manually delete all the cookies and temp int files and history files it does seem to clean the index file ok. But it will be nice to give the index cleaner in WindowWasher a go and see if it works ok at the same time as the cookie cleaner. It says will work with WinME so may be a better option.

Ok on IEClean and Internet Sweeper...may also give them a try later, but I'll see how I get on with WindowWasher first so as not to get to confused with too many programs all trying to do the same thing etc.