Diladele Web Safety - AdBlocker

Diladele Web Safety​

Official Website - http://www.diladele.com/index.html

Softpedia Screenshots of Diladele Web Safety - http://www.softpedia.com/progScreenshots/Diladele-Web-Safety-Screenshot-227677.html

Contact Information
Rafael Akchurin
Diladele B.V.
Amstelveen, Amsterdam
Netherlands
Voice: +31653464424
E-mail: support@diladele.com

Download Size info:

• 4.0MB (32-bit)
• 4.5MB (64-bit)

Installer File Type:
*.msi

VirusTotal Results: 0 Infections found, out of 46 engines used

 

Link of screenshot shows 30 day trial. But descriptions make it sound like donationware.

Anybody tried this? Not so adventurous lately.

 

It looks as the full freeware

http://sichent.wordpress.com/

 

I might give it a go on my test bed machine.

If I do, I'll post my thoughts on the product

 

I might bite too. I'm always slightly suspicious of things I've never heard of, but new companies/people have to start somewhere. IE being supported is a nice bit of news, seeing as how ABP has slowed down or stopped in its efforts to be IE-compatible. The documentation is rather sparse, so I'll assume it works on a deeper level than ABP (perhaps maybe like AdMuncher?).

 

WOT has no rating on it yet.
Appears to be from a russian domain also.

It has a MSE look and feel about it.
Might be worth a spin.

 

Privacy policy is worth a look first.It collects information like email address and demographic info for marketing purposes.

 

Thanks. I'll pass.

 

Hell even well known vendors use your email and such for marketing (Do you trust Avast? Norton?). There is such a thing as "10 minute Mail" as well.

 

You seem to fully contradict your earlier post.(post 5).
You state you are suspicious of unknown things.?
Do you know the personnel of avast and norton on a personal level .?

And yet you are perfectly happy to allow them to have your data etc.
You automatically trust a "trademark" or "brandname" and assume it is trustworthy without knowing anything about the background or people involved.

Oddly i have witnessed several products on this very forum crucified because of the linguistics used in a EULA which is no different from any other.

 

I think he was referring to "unknown" things to the market as a whole.

Norton (Symantec), Avast, etc have too much to lose if they go to "the other side" (think about their share holders, clients, etc).

Besides, their practices are regularly scrutinized by governments as well as by the more tech savvy proportions of the community - including their commercial rivals, but also professional test labs, etc.

These are more important than trusting "personal contact" (which can be unreliable as well).

 

Precisely. Although I don't immediately place my trust in an unknown company, I've been around long enough to know what is standard practice as far as an EULA and what is a bit on the shady side. There's literally no major company out there that doesn't at the very least use your email address for other things than just storing them on a server and forgetting about it. The privacy policy of this company is par for the course as far as marketing goes. Whether that's good or bad is another debate.