On Jul 16, 10:23 pm, Dustin Cook
<spamfilterineffect.see....@nowhere.com> wrote:
> cbgerry <cbge...@bluecollarpc.net> wrote innews:1184589318.719205.5580@57g2000hsv.googlegro ups.com:
>
> > You are full of it sir and this is a personal attack. There are over a
> > million Conduit.com toolbars and mine is one of them. They are all the
>
> Indeed conduit has a large amount of rebranded toolbars around. Yours is
> one of them, several others I believe are also known to BugHunter. They
> are added based on when I recieve viable samples. In your case, since you
> advertise it, I visited your site and downloaded it, Installed it via
> firefox and IE using sandboxie, so I could see exactly what changes it
> makes.
>
> > exact same thing including mine - so why did you pick mine out as the
> > only one infected ??? It doesn't make sense. Again McAfee has stated
>
> Please see above. I really don't pick and choose. The targets are
> selected based on samples I recieve and what they do.
>
> > there is absolutely no infection in "bluecollarpc" community toolbar.
>
> BugHunter doesn't look for infections, as viruses cause those.
> Spyware/adware/keyloggers are really all trojans, and BugHunter does
> detect some of them. The toolbar itself is classified by me as
> Adware/trackware. It poses a security risk for the following reasons.
>
> 1. It transfers "anonymous" usage data back to conduit.com; this data
> stream is actually encrypted, so who knows what it really sends to them.
>
> 2. The radio option as you noticed is a security risk, you don't have
> control over the sites it's tied too.
>
> 3. The other plugins don't always communicate strickly with your server
> either.
>
> 4. The company which actually produces the code inside the toolbar still
> employs questionable business practices.
>
> 5. Officially, because the toolbar actually installs itself as an
> extension, and not as a plugin, is against the mozilla foundation rules.
> Your toolbar generates income for conduit based on what users search for.
> If they click a result, conduit gets paid. They are leeching off of
> firefox users. What you click is apparently "anonymously" tracked back to
> conduit. Anonymous only serving to mean that it can't be tied to the
> specific computer your using... Atleast, I don't know of any exploits yet
> which would allow that with this program.
>
> > Now when I get personally attacked that was how I responded - earlier
> > deleted message.
>
> I didn't personally attack you, aside from calling you an idiot.
>
> > So my civil question is why did you pick my toolbar out that is
> > exactly the same exact for user name as one million plus of the same
> > exact toolbar from the same exact creator and server - Conduit.com ?
>
> Reasons for including it provided above. You were not singled out, Your
> toolbar was easy to get access too, and I did as any normal user would do
> who's curious. I downloaded it and analyzed it. When I noticed it's
> actually conduits work, rebranded, red flags went up.
>
> > In other words Conduit.com offers these free toolbars to anyone and
> > there have been over a million created. Each user that creates one can
>
> That's right. Over a million variants of the software, passed along to
> unsuspecting users who simply don't know any better.
>
> > pick out of there services any of a large handful of features to add
> > to it. There is absolutely nothing the user can add personally into
> > the toolbar such as malware in what ever - script code language
> > whatever. So if every one of these toolbars are exactly the same thing
>
> Not true, sir. Your extension installation for firefox can be
> edited/altered easily. In fact, it's javascript when installed for
> firefox, and an actual DLL when used in IE. The supporting plugins are,
> java scripts with xml configuration files. Very easy to expand upon.
>
> > except for user name and what they chose to be their features add-ins
> > - then what are you saying ? You are only getting malware positives on
>
> See above.
>
> > Your charges against me would be the same thing as a worm affecting
> > the Yahoo Groups Service - and then blame me for it as the Group Owner
> > of BlueCollarPC.Net News Group. This is absurd. Same thing, there are
>
> I haven't made any charges against you, directly. I don't recommend
> people make use of your toolbar, for the reasons I stated above. That
> doesn't mean I don't recommend you, as I am neutral (or try to be) as far
> as your informational providing is concerned. I disagree with the
> majority of your posts, but alas, that's my right to do so, and your
> right to post the material I think is nonsense.
>
> > thousands upon thousands of Yahoo Groups - free - created by thousands
> > and thousands of individuals. Again ther, there is nothing the user
> > can put into the Yahoo Groups except choice of features provided by
> > Yahoo.
>
> Agreed, with yahoo groups. Your toolbar however isn't yahoo groups, and
> certainly can be altered once installed.
>
> > Do you understand my points ? Would that help as an aplogy for the
> > rage reply ? Or do you hold onto I am guilty of some malware
>
> You don't owe me any apology. You weren't very professional in your
> previous correspondence with me, but I understand why. I really didn't
> target you, I targetted software that I don't think you should be
> inviting users to download. BugHunter doesn't automatically remove it,
> unless the users tells it to do so, so in the end, the user still has the
> final say in whether or not it lives or dies.
>
> > insertion ? I can accept your answer either way... I mean it would
> > seem you obviously tested the download I am guessing. Of course I
>
> No guessing required. I'm a programmer, testing/analyzing/writing code is
> something I do. I even surf myspace on purpose looking for new
> samples. *grin*
>
> > your findings then and I would immedaitely remove the bluecollarpc
> > free toolbar from the Internet and tell all users the same -
> > immedaitely uninstall it.
>
> Your site is about security, and I understand your desire to help users.
> You can start by removing the toolbar, and suggesting users uninstall it.
> No security site in it's right mind would be asking users to download and
> install any sort of toolbar.
>
> I'm not asking you to accept/admit any fault. As a precautionary measure,
> if nothing else, I'm asking you to remove the toolbar and suggest your
> userbase do the same. I have filled out an account on your forums,
> Hopefully you will allow it to go thru, and we can discuss this further
> if you'd like. You can also email me at the email address I left on your
> site. I know you hate google, and apparently yahoo, but those are what I
> use for email corresponce and I have for a very very long time. Please
> excuse the addresses in my case, if you don't mind.
>
> > You see you have opened a great can of worms here - and as far as some
> > real unresolved issues - that can involve having my websites shut down
> > as malicious content websites in Violations Of Terms Of Service.
>
> I have no intention of trying to have your website shutdown. Your not
> actually hosting the toolbar yourself, so you don't have to worry about
> that anyway.
>
> > Let me say that I am a simple consumer. I qualify myself as an
> > Advanced User (Windows). I am completely non-commercial. The best I
> > can offer your comments is that I downloaded the toolbar after I chose
> > its name and features and it was ready at Conduit.com for download. At
>
> I would agree with your assessment. I strongly disagree with some of your
> editorials and I'll be happy to debate them on you forum openly, with
> your permission of course. I figured you checked out the toolbar, saw
> it's potential to increase traffic and started recommending it. Somehow,
> you noticed the radio plugin has issues and have since disabled that, as
> a precautionary measure, if nothing else, while admitting no fault
> whatsoever, please remove the toolbar. If you already found one plugin
> with potential risk, why place your users at continued risk?
>
> > the time I was running Trend Micro Antispyware and Webroot Spysweeper.
> > There were absolutely no indications of malware with the toolbar
> > installed and running on both Internet Explorer and then I installed
> > the Firefox version. No indications of malware. I did scans and as
>
> As you should know, and if not, you do now, no program regardless of it's
> free/commercial status catches everything. Malware is released at an
> alarming rate by farms which basically xmit the same thing, slightly
> modified.
>
> > well there are absolutely no indications of infection as far as
> > antivirus softwares. So as far as Webroot, Trend Micro, Clam, AVG are
> > concerned oh, and McAfee Site Advisor, there is no such thing as any
> > malware infection in the bluecollarpc free toolbar.
>
> The toolbar itself allows for 3rd party things to be installed,
> potentially without user consent. The toolbar can easily be modified by a
> user or another party, and this too is a security risk issue.
>
> > For the statements you made and how they would appear qualified - I am
> > the LAST person you would notifiy about your opinion of any malware
> > infection in my toolbar - my, because I am the user-owner of it by
> > user account. Your reports would be assumed to have been made with all
>
> Actually, I always try to contact the author of a program I'm checking
> out, to see if my findings match theres or if they can explain why it
> does this or that. I did this in your case by creating an account the
> other day. You deleted it?
>
> > the big names - many were here. Have you made any infection reports ?
> > What were the results ? You mean you haven't put your money where your
>
> Those big names you like to toss around are automated scanning sites, I
> use them myself. A human doesn't at the time of your submittal examine
> it. Eventually, some av researchers will get there hands on the sample,
> but until then, it's all good according to the automated systems.
>
> You should *not* ever assume that if you get no hits for malware by
> submitting them that the file really is safe.
>
>
>
> > mouth and made infection reports ? I am sorrry but I have never heard
> > of you as far as any
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Preface: I don't think it was plain to the apparent owner of Bughunter
that the previous posts that Site Advisor calls Red Download site
warnings are certainly not the owner home domain - Dustin Cook
Bughunter. I thought that was quite clear to any reader - it is to me.
So here to avoid the confusion perhaps even caused by Dustin C
clouding the content of those posts seemingly - or perhaps even a
little "snow blind" in anger for the moment not seeing that NONE of
those Red Download sites were his Home Domain as Bughunter Owner
commonly or public well known as Bughunter at bughunter.it-
mate.co.uk ......

So here is the actual 'All Green Download" McAfee Site Advisor Report
- For Dustin Cook Bughunter - the real Owner and Real Bughunter
Product Homepages or Official Bughunter website - however you wish to
word it - or in real world, right, Dustin Cook owner of Bughunter and
the bughunter.it-mate.co.uk official domain website "where bughunter
lives on the net" - the Official real Bughunter and real Website to
obtain it from. (I call that explanation dead banged). It is obvious
to anyone reading it. Like one report is even the download
"registered" at Snapfiles.com - so that is what I mean as obvious to
anyone reading it.... like the first thing that hits me there is okay,
the owner must have registered with Snapfiles to sell, distribute, or
offer whatever version of download, whatever descriptive words are
your cup of tea accurately, but that certainly that is OBVIOUSLY not
the bughunter.it-mate.co.uk website. It is the software download at
Snapfiles.com and not at bughunter.it-mate.co.uk in other words. Each
of those RED warning download sites are along the same exact line.

You (if you are reading this) Dustin C are a very aggressive person
apparently and it is extremely hard to have a civil conversation with
you. You do say a lot of incorrect things about me and curse like a
sailor continually. This is offensive and angering. That is irritating
in the internet setting because of some major calm here. Well, right,
to each his own. I am use to the "Family Setting" protocols around at
different places. My cup of tea. But let me finalize as saying I can
appreciate your great effort to go out of your way to continually slam
me as you and I - the Prince and the pauper. Your never have seemed to
leave that out in any of our very brief communications. Orderlys don't
hang out with Doctors, fair enough - we certainly don't "hang" -
street jargon.

All I can say is you sir, Dustin C, invite chapters. Have you heard
that before ? ( I am just ranting , not expecting answers, I think you
misunderstand too much the "underclass").

Well I am thinking I can add here what I came to say - because
everything below this is information not conversation. I'll try
list...

1) Your final observation about the toolbar is "Potential Danger".
2) You are responsible to yourself for copyright violations and
unauthorized distribution of software you own. I suggest you call your
lawyer about these. I certainly am not to blame. They are. Get angry
with them. Have their websites shut down. Have your software
immediately removed from them. Call your Lawyer about that Mr. Cook.I
mean I would. The point is a security software is being offered at -
apparently according to McAfee Site Advisor - at malicious content
websites. Do you really want your product associated with that ? Have
you - or are they authorized by your permission to distribute your
Bughunter ? I mean you see the results by a simple Google Search with
Site Advisor and how outraged you are at the mere mention of that by
me. You exploded. Do it to them. They are the cause of this. I am not
the cause of the public warnings from Site Advisor that are quite
public on the internet. First couple of pages of results and there you
are bang, bang, bang 3 red ones. I mean that in the business / profit
aspect - and then just change it to freeware then... don't be so
stringent in interpretation. This is how it appears you are greatly
misunderstanding what is being said - at least on the side of common
folk. Actually I / we were offering some help, but you stormed past.
These are the reasons I suddenly blocked membership. I am not getting
paid for this. This is not something I can change. I am not going to
have my Forum turned into the Bughunter Soap Opera - roughly making
the point. (You just don't understand the away I talk). In other words
I am guessing the well known for years traditional Hackers Lounge is
"your flavor" as they say over in Linux world. I am a medium -
disseminating information if you will. Actually, threats removal with
any software is a learning curve for the public. I am just one
volunteer for average consumerism trying to bridge the gap. You
actually need to be an "Advanced User" to actually understand and do
things correctly without someone worrying over your back. I call it
'Computer Operator" at their "Station" like having a driver's license
for a Novice their first day behind the wheel. This is who stops in
over my way. And granted, this topic should be a part of the
repertoire as just another vein in the massive place called
cyberspace. So the point was with these type topics - it is quite
necessary for days and days even to resolve things. It can take a lot
of communications. That is what was referred to as the Soap Opera....
that is what this looks like to the average consumer. The average
consumer is extremely pressed for an hour maybe two at a session and
not even on a regular basis as well. Threatwares mess that up bad and
what is worst, trying to find information of how to take care of it
immediately. The majority of people are in a great hurry on the Net -
and that is my reference to long needed conversations being
sarcastically as a "What's this Soap Opera? Let me out of here".. like
I said you severely misunderstand what I say. You completely judge me
wrongly it seems continually or maybe you are just mean spirited.
Whatever... and now this is turning into a soap opera. Cahnge
Channels.

3) Let me floor this to important information I wished to say as a
bottom line here... So the whole rest of this point is that a sleeping
public may not know the other angles to all this. As far as the Red
zones - there are now in alarming numbers what are called "Disposable
Domains". The spammer yesterday may have opened a free yahoo account
and started sending UCE (spam) until Yahoo caught them and closed the
account without warning. Right back to Yahoo and they would just open
another account until shut down until they finally earned the name in
security as "Disposable accounts". This has obviously translated to
Botherders today reportedly responsible for up to 70 percent or more
of world UCE (spam). This is now a new name "Disposable Domains"
whereby at the same attitude websites are opened and shut down like
the old example of Yahoo email accounts. Point is that with pirated
software or Unauthorized Use someone's software can suddenly appear at
one of these Disposable Domains and the cyber criminals can add
malicious content to the website for drive-by installations of malware
and the worst can even rifle a pirated copy of software and relaunch
it with adware, spyware, and or other malware or all together and more
at the Disposable Domain site.... and we all know how irate that is
going to make the owner of the original software to say the very
least.

4) .... Cut to the chase point is that the Red Zone listed sites can
easily be this in the McAfee Site Advisor Reports. So that I said all
of this to point out that out if missed and that what may have been
missed ORIGINALLY is that Dustin Cook Bughunter bughunter.it-
mate.co.uk DOES NOT appear as a "red download" warning at McAfee Site
Advisor and below I have added that proof that is quite public and
available to the public with a download of Site Advisor installed in
Internet Explorer or Firefox browsers.

I think this should be plain, and definitely accepted as truth:
----------------------------------------
Site Advisor:Green Download BUGHUNTERbughunter.it-mate.co.uk ...

Site Advisor Report On: All Green Download...
http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/it-...earch&aff_id=0

-------------------------------------------
BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool
BugHunter is a DOS based malware scanner which has a frequently
updated database of signatures as well as engine updates. The program
is designed to quickly ...
bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/ - 13k - Cached - Similar pages
-------------------------------------------

SiteAdvisor: the Web, tested.
Look up a site report:
http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/it-...earch&aff_id=0

Want to add your comments? Log in or Register.

it-mate.co.uk
Green Verdict Image

We tested this site and didn't find any significant problems.

Are you the owner of this site? Leave a comment
Contact information: Country Popularity

A few users
Automated Web Safety Testing Results for it-mate.co.uk
e-mail tests for it-mate.co.uk:

We have not found any e-mail sign-up forms on this site.
Download tests for it-mate.co.uk:

Downloads we found on this site:
Download Analysis

AB Extension Pack 1.1.8 (abep-1_1_8-setup.exe)

AB Extension Pack 1.1.9 (abep-1_1_9-setup.exe)

AbcShortcuts 1.0 (abcshortcutssetup.exe)

AlphaChess (alphachess_setup.exe)

Avant Browser 11.0 Build 25 (Freeware) (absetup.exe)

87 total downloads. See more.

87 green downloads

In our tests, we found downloads on this site were free of adware,
spyware, and other unwanted programs.

Online affiliations for it-mate.co.uk:
Link Graph

Linked to green sites

When we visited this site, we found that most of its links are to
sites which are safe or have only minor safety/annoyance issues.
Annoyances from it-mate.co.uk:
Reviewer and Web site owner comments
User Review Summary for it-mate.co.uk

This site is good (1)
This site spams (0)
Adware, spyware, or viruses (0)
Excessive popups (0)
Phishing or other scams (0)
Bad shopping experience (0)
Browser exploit (0)
it-mate.co.uk Web site owner comments (0)

Are you the owner of this site? Add a comment
User Reviews (1)

page 1 of 1
Learn more about our reviewer system.
Rating: This site is good

Secure Download and Good Program
Posted at 03/25/2006-11:59:48 AM by Arctic Fox, Reviewer , View
profile [ Reputation score: 2 / 9 ]

page 1 of 1

Not a reviewer, yet? Register and leave a review of this site.
Get fully protected with McAfee Internet Security Suite.

Copyright © 2007 McAfee, Inc.

This will be the rating popup - TBD

[ps u betta hope u donn pay fer dhis: "Potential Danger" is my
apology. I am now reading everything I posted to see if I ever said
quite literally what you accuse me of. Wait for it - I will make one
last post. If I did not I will say so. Frankly your communications are
too repulsive and I wished this closed immediately. One of your last
posts Dustin - you are lying again. You are not blocked from
communicating with my Official Webmaster Address to Request Removal of
Offensive Material. Ask your lawyer about that - because He/She is
required by Law under the Federal Trade Commission to do that to
achieve what you are saying - or aren't? No, I do not answer hostility
and abuse at my personal addresses. And no I don't answer Unsolicited
Email as rule. Webmaster and Postmaster are NOT personal addresses.
You have said some very cheap things about my email addresses that was
quite unexpected and may be beyond your understanding. Like I said you
talk to your lawyer and he will tell you that you have to be VERY
SPECIFIC WORD FOR WORD WITH EXACT PARTICULARS you "claim" are
"offensive" and demand to be removed WITH EXACT CAUSE AND SUPPORT
THEREOF and can or can not be submitted to the WEBMASTER ADDRESS by
just yourself or with can be with Assistance of Counsel which
precludes Court Action if ignored. THAT IS THE LAW DUSTIN COOK. I am
not trying to be anything but polite with you. You keep raging and
raging. I don't understand to be quite honest. Like they say in the
circles - "generally just write the webmaster with your objections and
some brief easy reports to support them and the webmaster generally
always complies immediately without legal actions required but
indicated if needed. They will get the message fast if they value
their domain (most all do)". May you please comply. I honestly do not
understand what you are saying as apparently incohesive. I am now - in
these next hours looking at EVERYTHING I posted for what is offensive
and especially under the law as you keep saying. This is on your
behalf Dustin Cook Bughunter - in lieu of common appropriate action by
you. Do you understand so I am not misunderstood Mr. Cook ? You have
made no "formal request for removal" of objectionable material and I
will certainly add in apology if there is due per investigation right
now. DO YOU UNDERSTAND MR.COOK ? I AM GOING TO ACT ON YOUR BEHALF
RIGHT NOW AS ACTING AS IF YOU SENT ME A BILL OF PARTICULARS YOU WISH
REMEDIED IMMEDIATELY OR LEGAL ACTION WILL PURSUE --- SO THAT WITHOUT
SUPPORT OF SAME, LISTED, OR PRESENTED BY YOU PROPERLY PARTICULARLY
LISTING ONE BY ONE BY LAW TO ASK FIRST AND PROSECUTE SECOND (BUT YOU
SIT HERE LYING THAT YOUR ADDRESS IS BLOCKED - YOU HAVE NEVER CONTACTED
THE BLUE COLLAR PC.NET WEBMASTER ADDRESS) --- I WILL ACT AS IF YOU
PROPERLY PRESENTED AND ASSUME BILL OF PARTICULARS ARE - AND LOOK FOR
- ANY POSTINGS OR STATEMENTS THAT DEFAME "DUSTIN COOK BUGHUNTER
bughunter.it-mate.co.uk" MADE BY THE OWNER OF THE BLUE COLLAR PC .NET
DOMAIN BE REMOVED IF AND WHERE POSSIBLE IF THEY EXIST - AND
IMMEDIATELY - AS CEASE AND DESIST OR FACE LEGAL ACTION..... DO YOU
UNDERSTAND MY - I SAID MY - GENOROSITY TO YOU ? ACKNOWLEDGE THAT. THIS
IS NO GAME AS YOU SAID, OR IS IT ??? WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM ???

IF NONE ARE FOUND YOU WILL LIKELY BE ANSWERING AS WELL TO YOUR
SEMANTICS WITH "Potential Danger". AND I WELL KNOW YOU PERFECTLY
UNDERSTAND THAT.

GOOD BY MR. COOK - I WILL BE IN TOUCH WITHIN 24 HOURS OF THIS POSTING
WITH FULL RESULTS FOR YOU .... SATISFACTORY ? ASK YOUR LAWYER -
HONESTLY I DOUBT HE WOULD SAY DIFFERENT - VERY, VERY SERIOUSLY
MR.COOK.

BLUECOLLARPC.NET