What is Dmoz's position on spyware?

I just had a horrible user experience, spending two hours removing spyware installed on my comp after clicking on a link from the directory. I searched and couldn't find a definite answer on this...Are such listings allowed good standing in DMOZ?

I'm not sure there is a definitive position per the guidelines on Spyware.

However if you read:

http://dmoz.org/add.html

In particular what it says about editorial discretion:

Please recognize that making the ODP a useful resource requires us to exercise broad editorial discretion in determining the content and structure of the directory. That discretion extends (but is not limited) to what sites to include, where in the directory sites are placed, whether and when to include more than one link to a site, when deep linking is appropriate, and the content of the title and description of the site. In addition, a site's placement in the directory is subject to change or deletion at any time at our sole discretion. You should not rely on any aspect of a site's inclusion in the directory. Please understand that an editor's exercise of discretion may not always treat all submissions equally. You may not always agree with our choices, but we hope you recognize that we do our best to make fair and reasonable decisions.

Click to expand...

As an editor, I would take a pretty dim view of a website that tried to install spyware on my machine when I reviewed the site. I suspect most other editors would feel the same way.

If you can point out the site that installed spyware on your machine in the abuse reporting thread in the following R-Z forum, it will be looked at and dealt with by an editor if found to be an issue.

http://resource-zone.com/forum/index.php?showforum=12

Kind Regards,

Andy

Thanks for the quick and helpful reply. I'll do as you say.

JP

Theres no 'hard' rule against it, I'd suspect most editors don't get into anything that tries to install spyware, so it wouldn't get reviewed, and thus not listed.

However there is no way we can monitor what has happened after a site has been listed.

In addition what one person considers spyware another may not, the tracking cookies are a case in point, some surfers block them, some don't, some don't know they exist.

ODP editors have a very high concentration of non IE browsers, and after the first bad experience, most run firewalls, ad-blockers, pop up bockers, and certainly quit on anything that is not doing what was expected (for example I'll cut the connection if there is a lot of internet activity and I'm not loading anything). This also means we may not be aware of a particular problem that affects/attacks unpatched/non-secured browsers and operating systems.

I used to delete with prejudice anything that tried to install Gator a couple of years back, haven't seen that lately.

One other problem arises where sites are hosted on 'free' servers, and the hosts run the adware/spyware without the site owners knowledge.

Generally I would not list sites that install anything that is unsolicited. Thats my personal view, not an official policy, I can't speak for others.

If you are sure of the particular site being the problem, I'd report it in the abuse reporting forum. An editor can make a decision at that point. (I have to say there's not usually much unique and useful information on sites that (knowingly) host such malicious cr*p)

:tree:

I think there's an unofficial meta-editor consensus that there might as well be a hard rule against it. It is, after all, arguably illegal in at least some of the United States.

I think one problem is that many of us are pretty paranoid and run as secure a system as we know how.

Why is that a problem? Because I for one don't even notice attempts to install malware - my system takes care of them.

Nothing can possibly go wro

jimnoble said:

Nothing can possibly go wro

Click to expand...

... until suddenly the n and the g on your keyboard disappear at an inopportune moment.

I do, exclusively, use IE6 - I've tried others and I just can't get along with them. But like many editors my Internet connection is firewalled, my workstation has a second firewall, I have 2 anti-virus checkers and they still get through, Spybot, and the Google toolbar popup blocker. Excessive? You must be joking, not enough even so. And so, like Jim, nothing alerts me to the existence of spyware on a site.

If you are going to surf the Internet it is an ugly place, the sensible surfer goes armed with all the tools to avoid harm. Now you've been caught, please take precautions! Spybot (using the Immunise option) is a good start. Set your Internet security to prompt for cookies and don't accept them unless you trust the site (some sites need them). Install ZoneAlarm (my current employer, one of the biggest IT companies globally uses the corporate version so it ain't bad for nothing). That much you can do for free. Then invest in anti-virus software if you haven't already - AVG 7.0 is free to trial for a month and if nothing else it will clean the system.

Well, we're talking mostly to webmasters in here. But this is what your visitors -- your potential customers -- have to do, in simple self-protection.

So: what do you have to do, to avoid driving away the sane visitors?

(1) Automatic downloads of gratuitous ActiveHex components (including Flash!) -- just don't.
(2) Cookies -- don't ask for them unless it's obvious to the VISITOR that there's a good reason. Tracking the visitor is by definition NOT a good reason: I wanna let you track me, I'll leave my REFERER parameter on, kapice? Tracking ads served is by definition another NOT good reason.
(3) Popups -- just don't.
(4) Popunders -- a fine way to get a galactic-wide reputation as a stupid jerk with vain delusions of being a devious malicious jerk. Otherwise useless.
(5) IE-only features: I have a firewall installed. Its main, almost its SOLE purpose in life is to keep the IE and Lookout from accessing the internet. That takes care of 99.999% of malware problems. Less than 80% of all surfing today is done with the IE, and that number is dropping like, um, like public trust in Microsoft. Don't stand underneath.

Think like a surfer with a brain (borrow one if necessary), and it'll be obvious what you need to not do. In another forum, one day the webmasters were all bemoaning the callous disrespect shown by surfers who blocked their cookies (and the Flash download that would try to restore cookies behind the surfer's back). Then ... Google announced it was tracking searches, and attitudes got adjusted faster than persecutors on the road to Damascus. How DARE those evil Google webmasters try to track surfers?

We think of you what you think of Google. Live with it.