Web Bugs

[peakaboo]

The six links below are from Bugnosis (http://www.bugnosis.org/examples.html). How many are you able to defend against?

What do you use to neutralize?


1) http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6818-2001Mar14.html
Contained bugs from DoubleClick.net and Mediaplex.com. These are with an article from The Washington Post about Web bugs. informative article BTW

2) http://www.cnn.com/
Contained a bug from Netscape.com

3) http://www.bountyfamily.com/
Contained a preferences.com bug (from MatchLogic)

4) http://www.us.buy.com/
Contained bugs from DoubleClick.net and AvenueA.com

5) http://www.denverpost.com/
Contained a bug from MyComputer.com

6) http://www.mycomputer.com/
Contained bugs from Superstats.com

[Tassie_Devils]

Did not see ANY bugs. Nothing came up visiting each site, no pop-ups, no windows asking to accept whatever, nothing.

Scanned after with Spybot and AdAware6, nothing.

What was I supposed to "get" or "see" ?

[JacK]

Hello,

No problems to filter with WW but some are no webbugs, just *.gif 1x1 pixel.

Rgds,

[peakaboo]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Tassie_Devils link=board=19;threadid=6909;start=0#46077 date=1044086379]

Did not see ANY bugs. Nothing came up visiting each site, no pop-ups, no windows asking to accept whatever, nothing.

Scanned after with Spybot and AdAware6, nothing.

What was I supposed to "get" or "see" ?
" }-

Tassie,

if you go back to the Washington Post link, there is a good explanation of what a web bug is and the malicious possibilities.

Also on the 1st page of this article, I counted about 5 web bugs from doubleclick.

Proxo can filter these, also web washer I heard, also spyblocker gets after these bugs and zaps also. Probably some other software avail which can zap. Others may want to list what they are using.

Each of the links had web bugs so if you did not filter or see 'em, maybe a good time to tighten up.

[JacK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: peakaboo link=board=19;threadid=6909;start=0#46206 date=1044124287]
Each of the links had web bugs so if you did not filter or see 'em, maybe a good time to tighten up.
" }-

Hello,

I can see some beacons but not on all the linked pages.

Maybe some are already filtered by string with my Hosts file.
All gif 1x1 pixel are not webbugs : for instance, this one is no webbug : http://i.cnn.net/cnn/1.gif (1x1 pixel)

This one is a webbug : http://ad.doubleclick.net/activity;src=776516;type=desig750;cat=bount270;ord=7988030337178.355? (1 x 1 pixel)

Bugnonis does not identify formally webbugs but invisible pics which might be webbugs.

Rgds,

Rgds,

[peakaboo]

-{ Quote: " quoting: JacK link=board=19;threadid=6909;start=0#46221 date=1044127877]
-{ Quote: " quoting: peakaboo link=board=19;threadid=6909;start=0#46206 date=1044124287]
Each of the links had web bugs so if you did not filter or see 'em, maybe a good time to tighten up.
" }-

Hello,

I can see some beacons but not on all the linked pages.

Maybe some are already filtered by string with my Hosts file.
All gif 1x1 pixel are not webbugs : for instance, this one is no webbug : http://i.cnn.net/cnn/1.gif (1x1 pixel)

This one is a webbug : http://ad.doubleclick.net/activity;src=776516;type=desig750;cat=bount270;ord=7988030337178.355? (1 x 1 pixel)

Bugnonis does not identify formally webbugs but invisible pics which might be webbugs.

Rgds,

Rgds,


" }-

Hi Jack,

Good point as you put it: " I can see some beacons but not on all the linked pages."

I went to the CNN page and counted 3 web bugs on the right side:

added $ at front end to make url not clickable

$http://ar.atwola.com/link/93103306/aol

$http://ar.atwola.com/link/93101912/aol

$http://ar.atwola.com/link/93103308/aol

counted many many beacons on the CNN site which did not appear to be web bugs.

Take care M8.

[peakaboo]

there is a potential malicious side of web bugs as stated in the Washington Post article, but the info below appears to show the "legitimate side or use" of web bugs. Regardless privacy and disclosure is the issue.

more info. regarding web bugs:

http://www.nthelp.com/oetest/web_bug_faq.htm <--- got the info from bellsouth.net

--- THE WEB BUG FAQ

--- 1. WHAT EXACTLY IS A WEB BUG?

A Web Bug is a graphics on a Web page or in an Email message that is
designed to monitor who is reading the Web page or Email message. Web
Bugs are often invisible because they are typically only 1-by-1 pixel in
size. They are represented as HTML IMG tags. For example, here are two
Web Bugs recently found on Quicken's home page (www.quicken.com):

<img src="http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/pixel.quicken/NEW" width=1
height=1 border=0>

<IMG WIDTH=1 HEIGHT=1 border=0
SRC="http://media.preferences.com/ping?ML_SD=IntuitTE_Intuit_1x1_RunOfSite_A
ny&db_afcr=4B31-C2FB-10E2C&event=reghome&group=register&time=1999.10.27.20.5
6.37">

The two Web Bugs were placed on the home page by Quicken to provide
"hit" information about visitors to DoubleClick and MatchLogic (AKA,
preferences.com), two Internet advertising companies.


--- 2. WHY ARE WEB BUGS INVISIBLE ON A PAGE?

To hide the fact that monitoring is taking place.


--- 3. ARE WEB BUGS ALWAYS INVISIBLE ON A PAGE?

Not necessarily. Any graphics on a Web page that is used for monitoring
purposes can be considered a Web Bug.


--- 4. ARE ALL INVISIBLE GIF IMAGES, WEB BUGS?

No. Invisible GIF files are also used for alignment purposes on Web
pages. A Web Bug will typically be loaded from a different Web server
than the rest of the page, so they are easy to distinguish from
alignment GIF files.


--- 5. WHAT OTHER NAMES ARE WEB BUGS KNOWN BY?

The Internet advertising community prefers the more sanitized term
"clear GIF". Web Bugs are also known as "1-by-1 GIFs" and "invisible
GIFs".


--- 6. WHAT INFORMATION IS SENT TO A SERVER WHEN A WEB BUG IS VIEWED?

* The IP address of the computer that fetched the Web Bug
* The URL of the page that the Web Bug is located on
* The URL of the Web Bug image
* The time the Web Bug was viewed
* The type of browser that fetched the Web Bug image
* A previously set cookie value


--- 7. WHAT ARE SOME OF THE USES OF A WEB BUG ON A WEB PAGE?

Ad networks can use Web Bugs to add information to a personal profile of
what sites a person is visiting. The personal profile is identified by
the browser cookie of an ad network. At some later time, this personal
profile which is stored in a data base server belonging to the ad
network, determines what banner ad one is shown.

Another use of Web Bugs is to provide an independent accounting of how
many people have visited a particular Web site.

Web Bugs are also used to gather statistics about Web browser usage at
different places on the Internet.


--- 8. WHERE CAN I FIND WEB BUGS BEING USED?

* Quicken
* FedEx
* Metamucil
* Oil of Olay
* StatMarket


--- 9. HOW CAN I SEE A WEB BUG ON A PAGE?

A Web Bug can be found by viewing the HTML source code of a Web page and
searching for IMG tags. A Web Bug will typically have its HEIGHT and
WIDTH parameters in the IMG tag set to 1. Also for the tag to be a bug,
the image should be loaded from a different server then the rest of the
Web page.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--- WEB BUGS IN EMAIL MESSAGES

--- 10. WHAT KINDS OF USES DOES A WEB BUG HAVE IN AN EMAIL MESSAGE?

1. A Web Bug can be used to find out if a particular Email message
has been read by someone and if so, when the message was read.
2. A Web Bug can provide the IP address of the recipient if the
recipient is attempt to remain anonymous.
3. Within an organization, A Web Bug can give an idea how often a
message is being forwarded and read.


--- 11. WHY ARE WEB BUGS USED IN "JUNK" EMAIL MESSAGES?

1. To measure how many people have viewed the same Email message in a
marketing campaign.

2. To detect if someone is viewed a junk Email message or not. People
who do not view a message are removed from the list for future mailings.

3. To synchronize a Web browser cookie to a particular Email address.
This trick allows a Web site to know the identity of people who come to
the site at a later date,


--- 12. WHAT ARE SOME OF THE EMAIL MARKETING COMPANIES WHO ARE KNOWN TO
USE WEB BUGS?

* Exactis
* Digital Impact
* Responsys


--- 13. WHAT COMPANIES HAVE USED WEB BUGS IN EMAIL MARKETING CAMPAIGNS?

* Barnes and Noble
* eToys
* Cooking.com
* Microsoft
* InfoBeat


--- 14. WHAT DO WEB BUGS IN EMAIL MESSAGES LOOK LILE?

Email Web Bugs are represented as 1-by-1 pixel IMG tags just like Web
Bugs for Web pages. However, because the sender of the message already
knows your Email address, they also include the Email address in the Web
Bug URL. The Email address can be in plain text or encrypted. For
example, here are two Web Bugs sent to me in junk Email messages:


<img width='1' height='1' src="http://www.m0.net/m/logopen02.asp?
vid=3&catid=370153037&email=SMITHS%40tiac.net" alt=" ">

<IMG SRC="http://email.bn.com/cgi-bin/flosensing?x=ABYoAEhouX">




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--- ADVANCED TOPICS

--- 15. IS THERE ANY METHOD OF REMOVING WEB BUGS FROM HTML PAGES?

Not really. The technical problem is that there is no method of
distinguishing Web Bugs from spacer GIFs which are used on Web pages for
aligment purposes. Your best defense against Web Bugs is to turn off
cookies. Instructions for turning off cookies can be found at the
Junkbusters Web site:

http://www.junkbusters.com/ht/en/cookies.html#disable

One note about cookies. Netscape Navigator and Internet Explorer will
still send out existing cookies after disabling cookies in the browser.
You must manually delete any cookie files on your hard drive to
eliminate being tracked by third-party ad networks.


--- 16. WHY DON'T WEB SITE PRIVACY POLICIES EVER MENTION WEB BUGS?

Good question. Clearly Web site privacy policies need to disclose the
use of Web Bugs as a minimum. Also the general practice of online
profiling by third-party ad networks should be talked about in privacy
policies. However, this important topic is rarely mentioned.


--- 17. ARE THE USE OF WEB BUGS LEGAL?

A complicated question that is best answered by a lawyer.


--- 18. ARE THE USE OF WEB BUGS UNETHICAL?

Clearly Web Bugs are controversial. Because they allow people to be
monitored, when they don't expect it, they certainly can be very
upsetting. For example, most people will likely be troubled to learn
that an outsider is tracking when they read Email.


--- 19. CAN NEWSGROUP MESSAGES BE BUGGED ALSO?

Yes. If someone is using Outlook Express or Netscape Messenger to read a
newsgroup, then Web Bugs will also work inside of HTML newsgroup
messages. A Web Bug can be used to log people who are reading messages
in particular newsgroup. Such bugs might be used for example by
investigators to track illegal activity such as trading in child
pornography and copyrighted MP3 music files. Web Bugs might also be used
to monitor people in extreme political groups.

[peakaboo]

web bugs and tracking links spotted @ yahoo.com

whoda thunk it! :-*

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=%5EDJI&d=t

if they don't come up on the 1st try just hit refresh a couple times...

if ya still don't see 'em... tighten up!

[Uguel 707]

Hi!

I can't get to Bugnosis site anymore. "the address cannot be found" Any idea?
I've got to update my bug analyser 'cause I get this message: "an error occured when parsing bugnosis datafile"
The address is:http://www.bugnosis.org/ (http://www.bugnosis.org/)

[spy1]

Six for six.

What wasn't handled by OutPost (using the AGNIS-OP blocklist in the "Ads " plug-in as well as the "Active Content" plug-in), SpyBlocker took care off. Pete

[Pieter_Arntz]

This is bugging ;) me: only 2 out of 6 ( decided to test the capabilities of Adshield 3.0 in this field)
Am I doing something wrong or is the rest not getting through the proxyserver?

Regards,

Pieter

[spy1]

That's quite possible, Pieter. In my case, SB is the "proxyserver" , so-to-speak - what's yours? Prox? Pete

[Pieter_Arntz]

Hi Pete,

I'm at work behind a "physical" proxyserver with NIS installed.
I'll give it a try at home. Did anyone ever notice the number of bugs at DSLR? It looks like PestPatrols website with Adshield on. ;)

Regards,

Pieter

[Pieter_Arntz]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Pieter_Arntz link=board=19;threadid=6909;start=0#54122 date=1049811834]
I'll give it a try at home.
" }-

Same result ???

Only the bugs on pages 2 and 4 in peakaboo´s list are found.

Regards,

Pieter

[Acadia]

Hmmmm, couldn't vote, I needed a fourth option. The web bugs that I could see were zapped by Adshield but on about half the sites I couldn't see any.

Take care, Acadia.

[notageek]

I seen web bugs ( a little gif I have Proxo showing when it spots a web bug) on 4 out of 6 pages. Proxo seems to be good at catching them. Maybe I should thighten up my web bug filter. anyone care to share a web bug filter for Proxo? LOL

[peakaboo]

-{ Quote: " quoting: notageek link=board=19;threadid=6909;start=15#54412 date=1050014914]
I seen web bugs ( a little gif I have Proxo showing when it spots a web bug) on 4 out of 6 pages. Proxo seems to be good at catching them. Maybe I should thighten up my web bug filter. anyone care to share a web bug filter for Proxo? LOL
" }-

Hi notageek,

Original links are old, I think 2 of the 6 no longer have web bugs...

Also bugnosis looks to have gone out of cyberbusiness, that link no longer works

Finally, link to a good web bug swatter filter, by JakBeNymble post towards bottom dated 12/20/02:

http://asp.flaaten.dk/proxo/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=39

____________________

Hi "ALL",
Here is the "Web-Bug Filter" that I'm using. It's a combination of several different Web-Bug Filters, so it't not Original. But I think that You will like the results of this Filter. I've also included an animated gif.file that You will need to UnZip into Proxo's HTML folder.

[Patterns]
Name = "Super Web Bug Swatter MHG"
Active = TRUE
URL = "$TYPE(htm)"
Bounds = "<img\0src=$AV(\1)\2>"
Limit = 300
Match = "(*height=$AV([#0:6])&(*width=$AV([#0:6]))&"
"(*src=$AV((\"|)http(s|)(%3A|:)(%2F|/)(%2F|/)(^\h)*))*)|"
"((^*src=$AV(*.(gif|jpg|jpeg|jpe|png)))*)"
Replace = "<img src="\dhtml/lilbuzs.gif" height="25" width="25">"

Here is the gif.file: here (http://asp.flaaten.dk/proxo/uploaded/JakBeNymble/2002122031651_lilbuzs.zip)
Have a Great & Wonderful Evening,
Safe-Surfin',
"Jak"


any way

[notageek]

Thanks Peakaboo. I don't know what happened to bugnosis. I tried their program a long time ago on my win98 system. But looks like they are gone or they changed web address. I'm gonning to check out this web bug swatter. Thanks again.

[JayK]

Some of the articles seem to be FUD.. For example . the Washington article

"I became downright alarmed after a Pittsburgh security start-up called Intelytics demonstrated a potentially malicious Web bug to a congressional panel and then, at my request, unleashed a version on two of my computers -- one at home and the other at my office. I picked up the bug by visiting Intelytics' Web site, and it managed to slip past the "fire wall" and anti-virus software that is supposed to protect both of my machines. During the test, the bug sent copies of two personal files back to Intelytics and left behind a hidden file on my hard driv"

Copies of personal files? That's some web-bug!!

???

Some thoughts about web-bugs

While I can see the point of web-bugs in emails (they help spammers figure out live account), this whole practice of web-bugs on webpages seems pointless.

Say I own a webpage www.mywebsite.com. When a visitor comes to my site and requests a html page, my mail server logs your visit ,ip address , date, referrer (if not blocked), etc, there is nothing you can do about it, web-bug or no.

Supposedly I'm paid by some advertising company to put a "invisible" web-bug. Basically when you load my webpage, you also load up a 1x1 gif file from the adserver, so the adserver getsa hit too, and your visit is logged since something is downloaded from the adserver, and it gets a hit in it's log files.


I'm not sure how bugnosis/adshield etc works, but I think the default proxo filters images with heights and widths less then equal to 3 pixels size.

Now, you might think it's clever to refuse to remove (or refuse to load up) 1x1 gif files, but what abt 5x5?, 10x10? Basically the "web-bug "can be any size right? It doesnt even have to be a transparent gif. It can even be a relatively informative diagram or picture right?

How is a web-bug detection script going to catch everything?

IMHO only way to be 100% protected from such web-bugs is to totally refuse to download images not from the current server (available in proxo and many browser options). That kills all web-bugs in its tracks. The original website still gets your ip, but that's unavoidable.



Is my logic flawed? Or are web-bugs more dangerous than that?

[LowWaterMark]

I agree with you JayK. I find web bugs in emails much more useful to those who place them there than those on webpages. Who ever did that first had a very clever idea to be sure. I block web bugs in emails just because I don't want some spam sender to get confirmation that I exist in case I accidentally render their message.

As for webbugs on webpages, they don't concern me much. If I choose to go to the webpage and the host of that page has content linked from other sites, well, so what. They get to log my current, highly dynamic, IP address and whatever referrer information I am allowing or faking. ::)

As to the incredibly powerful webbugs mentioned in the article, well, I've never seen that big and strong a bug in my life. (Not being from a tropical area, I rarely see big bugs at all. ;) )

[FluxGFX]

Still looking around but was looking for a program aside from proxo to stop webbugs....

any ideas ?

[Acadia]

I use AdShield. WebWasher also kills them and is free. I believe AdSubtact also kills them (not positive about that) but AS is not free. Good luck.

Acadia.

[FluxGFX]

Let's put it this way.....

Reverse engeneering..... can make wonders

For Educational Purpose only.

[JayK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: LowWaterMark link=board=19;threadid=6909;start=15#msg69073 date=1056415046]


As to the incredibly powerful webbugs mentioned in the article, well, I've never seen that big and strong a bug in my life. (Not being from a tropical area, I rarely see big bugs at all. ;) )
" }-

Such a bug if it exists wouldnt be a traditional web-bug anyway, it would be some kind of malware, sort of like driveby hijackers or trojans/viruses that exploit security flaws.

The whole story about how the web-bug could bypass his firewall and copy files off his computer could only work if the web-bug was doing somekind of browser exploit or if the user had very low security settings.

That is a serious concern, but shouldnt be lumped into the slight privacy concerns with regards to web-bugs

[JayK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: FluxGFX link=board=19;threadid=6909;start=15#msg69076 date=1056420272]
Still looking around but was looking for a program aside from proxo to stop webbugs....

any ideas ?
" }-

If you are using mozilla, (probably other browsers have something similar) , go to

Edit-->preference--->privacy--->images

Then click the box , "accept images only from orginanting server."

That should be more effective and give you close to compelte immunity since what you don't load can't hurt you, and almost all web-bugs are images that are placed by third parties.

much better then banking on software to guess which 1x1 or whatever size gif are web-bugs.

The drawbacks of the recommended method are obvious.

[solarpowered candle]

they say spyblocker is very good./ Its a pay version 19.95
or 39.95 for a life time of updates . A really nice programme . http://www.spyblocker-software.com/spyblocker/

[JayK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: solarpowered candle link=board=19;threadid=6909;start=15#msg74286 date=1058582797]
they say spyblocker is very good./ Its a pay version 19.95
or 39.95 for a life time of updates . A really nice programme . http://www.spyblocker-software.com/spyblocker/
" }-

Not worth the money IMHO. It automates what you can do manually that's all

[Paul Wilders]

JayK,

-{ Quote: "Not worth the money IMHO. It automates what you can do manually that's all" }-

In essence true. Then again: 98% from "average" pc owners having web access don't have the faintest as of how. Ergo: software like the one mentioned surely does have a purpose, don't you agree?

regards,

paul

[JayK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Paul Wilders link=board=19;threadid=6909;start=15#msg74464 date=1058654060]
JayK,

-{ Quote: "Not worth the money IMHO. It automates what you can do manually that's all" }-

In essence true. Then again: 98% from "average" pc owners having web access don't have the faintest as of how. Ergo: software like the one mentioned surely does have a purpose, don't you agree?

regards,

paul
" }-

In the essence true. But..
having read boasts that this is the most "advanced" forum on internet security on the web, naturally I would address my comments assuming people had a clue about what was going on and it is along such lines that my comment was made.

[solarpowered candle]

I dont agree with you in essense JayK . Most people who suibscribe to a forum dont become experts over nite simply because they "Sign up" just like if I join the best Health forum on the web it doesnt mean I shall never catch a cold. Same with firewalls and anti virus/trojon. Some experts can say you dont need a firewall , and they proberbly dont, but for the other (% who may attend expert forums its best they proberbly do.)

[Paul Wilders]

JayK,

-{ Quote: "In the essence true. But..
having read boasts that this is the most "advanced" forum on internet security on the web" }-

Thanks for the confidence! That said: our team never will proclaim this is the most advanced forum on internet security on the web. Our goal is a simple one: helping people out - period. In case this results in happy members/posters proclaiming our forum the most advanced, we'll take that as a compliment, no more, no less.

-{ Quote: "naturally I would address my comments assuming people had a clue about what was going on and it is along such lines that my comment was made." }-

Some have - many haven't a clue. Solarpowered candle did address this one quite to the point ;).

regards.

paul

[JayK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: solarpowered candle link=board=19;threadid=6909;start=15#msg74653 date=1058730892]
I dont agree with you in essense JayK . Most people who suibscribe to a forum dont become experts over nite simply because they "Sign up" just like if I join the best Health forum on the web it doesnt mean I shall never catch a cold. Same with firewalls and anti virus/trojon. Some experts can say you dont need a firewall , and they proberbly dont, but for the other (% who may attend expert forums its best they proberbly do.)
" }-

Well I responded the way I did because I don't think people should spend money unneccessarily. Want to spend money on a good antivirus go ahead (I have 3), firewall? Sure. But when i see something that can be easily replaced with some knowhow, I have to comment.

Besides Solarpower candle, you have over 200 posts on here, you can't be considered a newbie (unless you blew them are on silly threads like this!). Given the form your statement was phrased which sounded like a semi-question " ..."they" say spyblocker is very good." , I thought you would appreciate information.

And I did say "IMHO" and just gave my honest opinion.

I don't understand the reaction I'm getting. Or am I supposed to endorse every commerical security product recommended by wilders here?

[Paul Wilders]

JayK,

-{ Quote: "I don't understand the reaction I'm getting." }-

Given the fact many (lurkers, new and existing members) who do visit and post on this board don't necessarily do have all kinds of knowledge available, and prefer to rely on good software doing the job for them, you'll have your answer.

-{ Quote: "Or am I supposed to endorse every commerical security product recommended by wilders here?" }-

No one ever said so ;)

regards.

paul

[sakharg]

Paul and others,

I think JayK had good intentions. Many people don't have the money to buy a lot of security software, so they stick with the essential (AV, AT), and see how they can save on the rest without needing to shell out the dough.

JayK, I think it might have been even more useful, perhaps in another thread, to point out the ways in which one could manually perform the tasks that Spyblocker does. Actually, that kind of general thread about doing yourself what software currently does for you would be very useful for security newbies like me. However, many home and casual computer users are uncomfortable or don't want to resort to a hands-on approach when they could have software do it for them. But as they grow more comfortable with their systems and how they work, such information as you might be able to provide would help in their computer education. That's what this forum is about anyway, computer education, and it would be a shame if proposed solutions at Wilders operated on a basis of mutual exclusives.

That's the way I felt about Linux when I started to use it on my laptop. After years on Windows and its automated tasks with GUIs, Linux was a real eye opener and forced me to get down and dirty. I've even switched from Redhat to Gentoo!

[solarpowered candle]

regarding the setting ones browser security up themselves verses ready made software , i spoke with paul Kurland of spyblocker asking his thoughts on this ,this is his reply ,
Subject: Re: spyblocker

pkurland@spyblocker-software.com wrote:

>>Hi,
>>
>>SpyBlocker handles many things no amount of system tweaking can solve. Some of the things SpyBlocker does can be done less effectively by some good old fashioned know how. But there is no possible way to do some of the things SpyBlocker does without software.
>>
>>Without software, you can achieve some protection no doubt. Also, if one plans to tackle some things themselves without software, they should ask themself if theyalso have the know how to keep up with the latest internet threats.
>>
>>The beauty of our products is that everything is done for you.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Paul Kurland
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

For me the keeping up with the latest internet threats is one of the key issues that gives me greater peace of mind by utilising software such as Spyblocker. I do not have the time or patience to reivent the wheel. SPC

[JayK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: solarpowered candle link=board=19;threadid=6909;start=30#msg74920 date=1058841806]
regarding the setting ones browser security up themselves verses ready made software , i spoke with paul Kurland of spyblocker asking his thoughts on this ,this is his reply ,
Subject: Re: spyblocker

pkurland@spyblocker-software.com wrote:

>>Hi,
>>
>>SpyBlocker handles many things no amount of system tweaking can solve. Some of the things SpyBlocker does can be done less effectively by some good old fashioned know how. But there is no possible way to do some of the things SpyBlocker does without software.
>>
>>Without software, you can achieve some protection no doubt. Also, if one plans to tackle some things themselves without software, they should ask themself if theyalso have the know how to keep up with the latest internet threats.
>>
>>The beauty of our products is that everything is done for you.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Paul Kurland
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
" }-

No offence (but i'm sure you will take offence anyway), but i think it's quite silly to ask a developer of the software such a question, You really think he's going to come right out and admit "YES we are selling stuff, anyone could do for himself!"

Note i'm not saying that this is true in this case , BUT i notice this is a very common reaction here, to quote developers as if they are the final word.

Remember, they have a vested interest in selling their product. While the rest of us, generally don't. (assuming we are not emotionally invested in another opposing product :P See AV forums for details)

Well, I for one believe that if you just want to rely on software to protect you, you can go ahead, but without the brains or knowledge to go with it, you can be sure to be in trouble eventually.

BTW you are not "reinventing the wheel" , rather you are using Spyblocker to do things that are already built into the system. If anything spyblocker is rebuilding a wheel that has already being invented.

And i'm not advocating zero software, just that between what you can do for yourself and freeware products ,spyblocker doesnt do much more.

That's my opinion , if you already have it, dont let my opinions upset you.

[notageek]

isn't freeware program that will do the same thing Spyblocker does? If not could someone post all what spyblocker does that say a program like WebWasher or Proxo can't do?

[solarpowered candle]

Jayk I and Im sure a few others, are still awaiting your tips and tweeks for browser and system security. I think your contribution would be most welcome . It seems that you waste a bit of energy knocking postings .And your opinion of any one who posts at this forum is rock bottom http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=11602;start=0 Wouldnt the energy be better spent in writting something constructive or a decent solution , rather than more "Bla Bla Bla . I think that you may have some good contributions to make and I for one
look 4wards too them . (the constructive ones ).

[JayK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: notageek link=board=19;threadid=6909;start=30#msg75491 date=1059069315]
isn't freeware program that will do the same thing Spyblocker does? If not could someone post all what spyblocker does that say a program like WebWasher or Proxo can't do?
" }-

Well notageek a very good question. But I suppose many supporters of spyblocker don't know what products like proxomitron can do ( I wonder if they even know how spyblocker does what it claims to do), and despite your nick "Notageek" , remember you are a geek! and you reinvent the wheel everytime you use proxomitron ,hosts files or pac files :)

[notageek]

LOL I used to use Spyblocker and thought it was a rather good program. I went to Webwasher and than to proxo cuz you're able to make your own filters and stuff like that. I knew there was a learning curve on Proxo but there's lot of help out there. I think the people that use Spyblocker choice to use it cuz it's simple to use. They don't have to worry about them so called bugs that spyblocker blocks (I can't really recall what Spyblocker blocks cuz I used it when it was free, Long story there ;) ). But as far as I know, you can't block web bugs with IE. You might be able to with other Browsers but I'm not so sure on that. So if Spyblocker blocks web bugs than there's a reason to use it. :)

[JayK]

BEGIN RANT

-{ Quote: " quoting: notageek link=board=19;threadid=6909;start=30#msg75718 date=1059143010]
They don't have to worry about them so called bugs that spyblocker blocks (I can't really recall what Spyblocker blocks cuz I used it when it was free, Long story there ;) ). But as far as I know, you can't block web bugs with IE. You might be able to with other Browsers but I'm not so sure on that. So if Spyblocker blocks web bugs than there's a reason to use it. :)
" }-

Actually I don't think just using Proxomitron qualifies as a geek, I was just joking. I suppose making a original new filter, or significantly altering a filter might qualify since you would at least have to have some knowledge of html/http and regexp.

My point , appears to be lost, since this thread degenerated into my software is better then yours contest despite a careful phrasing "IMHO not worth the money".

What was my point? Simply this, do not just run out and buy or run any other security software just because you find that so and so online test says you are not secure.

ZAP,proxomitron,spyblocker,webwasher,adshield all claim to block web-bugs, but how do you know which actually works better, and which just duplicates what you could do with your browser? or something free?

By turning off all javascripts,java etc and images downloading from third party servers, can web-bugs still run? What about server-side scripts?

The traditional definiton of a web-bug is a small transparent gif, but are there other kinds of bugs?

Online tests? How do you know those are accurate?
Or is it a simple matter of checking each website with various web-bug detectors and see which finds the most . How do you know it's just not false positives?

It's quite sad I don't see people discuss this kind of issues, all i see is people saying .."I hear software X is quite good". Why is it good? How does it claim to work?

I don't claim to be an expert. But for a advanced forum like Wilder's security I don't really see any such discussions. The only ones perhaps worth reading are the AV forums. Sure it gets rowdy at times, but it's educational at times, when the AV and AT developers snipe at each other's products.

Or am i expecting too much from this forum?
I supposed the people who really know are keeping quiet, or discuss it elsewhere.


sorry for the rant.

[libbo1]

http://www.guidescope.com/home/

I have been using this app for a few weeks now. Impressive for bugs, ads, cookies. Interesting 'community' concept. Strong privacy statement. Has passed malware, Trojan etc . . . tests. Has done away with need for a standalone popupstopper. Can be edited for those that like to add their own filters, txt. mods. ;D

But I do not see many other posts about it here or elsewhere. Am I a self-appointed sacrificial lamb??!! :-[

[GoonMan]

My OutPost and SpyBlocker did what it was suppose to do. And I will not Post what I wanted to. ;D :P


Since this is a Poll about Web Bugs! ;D 8)

[jargonize]

i think a smalll popup prog i have gets some of the web bugs but not alll, its called popthis.

[JayK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: jargonize link=board=19;threadid=6909;start=30#msg90642 date=1064813379]
i think a smalll popup prog i have gets some of the web bugs but not alll, its called popthis.
" }-

Popthis! doesnt do web-bugs. Try again.

[tepi]

At the suggestion of a friend, and although I don't use IE much except for MS updates, I installed BUGNOSIS in IE about a month ago and went on a bug hunt. Within a short time I found web bugs at:

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-3173_7-5084364.html?tag=cnetfd.ldgif
http://shareware.search.com/search?cat=237&tag=ex.sa.fd.srch.sa_win&q=registry+utilties
http://reviews.cnet.com/2001-6028_7-0.html?tag=cnetfd.dir
http://www.cnet.com/?tag=ex.se_sa.ros.col.bw&destUrl=http%253A%252F%252Fwebservices%252Ecnet%252Ecom%252Fbandwidth%252F
https://broadband.msn.com/?xAPID=1685&DI=340&HL=BroadbandQL
http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/byoa&pgmarket=en-us&xAPID=1744&DI=340
http://www.adera.be/en/products/pop3_down.cfm

Some of the bugs seem to have been removed since then. My understanding is that these things can't jump into your computer, but that they do represent a sort of invasion of privacy.

Regards

[nadirah]

web BUGS!? get a bottle of insecticide and spray those bugs!

[Moore]

heres a couple of great links first posted by Minoka at the Outpost forum , should give you a good idea where the most webbugs are being used:

http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.200404/webbug_site.html
http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.200404/webbug_traffic.html

i used to block all 1x1 etc images with Outpost and i add all buggy sites to the HOSTS file and IP block the rest , Admuncher is also my favourite bug muncher , i got rid of bugnosis a long time ago , its was just too annoying after a while.

[manOFpeace]

I use b9 for email and get a few surprises sometimes when I see the results of the scan and where the email originated. I also have SpyBlocker and AdSubtract along with the other bits and pieces.

Bugnosis is available to me. It's beta V1.3 I used it a long time ago but got fed up with all the alarms. :o