I like Limewire. 'Use it all the time. There's a number of tech. forums I frequent where a thread occasionally pops up along the lines of...'Can anyone recommend a good p2p prog.' I've always recommended Limewire, for various reasons, one being that Limewire is free of malware. On one of these forums today, one guy has posted the following link which seems to imply that I might have been wrong. Can someone who represents Limewire on this forum put this one to sleep. Categoric statement would be appreciated as to whether Limewire contains any form of spyware, adware, malware, scumware... you get my drift. Thanks in anticipation. I want to be able to continue to support Limewire but to remain credible the assurances are necessary.

__________________
IF HUNGER BE THE LOVE OF FOOD, EAT ON!

....


Date: 2001 LW version: 1.7


....

__________________
Liens d'intérêt /Links of interest:
Gnutellaforums en français /The House's rules you have to respect / First search the forum, then create a thread / Free software alternatives! - Logiciels alternatifs gratuits!/

dogbreath

If you read the comments carefully, that your link pointed to, you would realise that they were well out of date and therefore totally irrelevant.

You can continue to support LW (Pro) with a clear conscience.



UK Bob

Thanks for your replies. Firstly this is not a conscience issue. I simply want to be sure that when I recommend Limewire and make a statement to the effect 'this product doesn't contain bundled malware' that my statement is correct. I don't understand why the date of the document is relevent. If you are saying that Limewire used to contain malware and now does not... then fine. The fact that the document was circa 2001 does not unfortunately convince the sceptic that all is now well. Why should it? I for one am a Limewire fanatic. If it did come with malware I'd purge it. On most tech. forums, the very nature of p2p file sharing makes it a sensitive topic. It's very discussion on some sites is frowned upon. However, I believe in free speech and I don't judge p2p products either morally or legally. It is for each user to do that for him/her self. As things stand, if a p2p question is posted on a forum of which I am a member, I will do my best to answer it and where possible to promote Limewire. If a thread isn't drawn to a satisfactory conclusion, I always refer the thread starter to this forum. So, for the time being I will assume that you are confirming that Limewire is 'clean'. May I thank you once again for taking the time to post to this thread.

__________________
IF HUNGER BE THE LOVE OF FOOD, EAT ON!

I think you may find this post informative and interesting. Spyware with Limewire? bundled with spyware&pagenumber=1

__________________
The Forum Search is easy to use
Upper right of this page between f.a.q. and home

WindowsXP MCE sp2
P4 3.0 Ghz HT
4 Gb DDR2 @ 533 Mhz

I've just been looking at this site. It contains the following quote..."Unfortunately programs like Go!Zilla and LimeWire, iMesh, Kazza along with most file-sharing apps, also install several adware applications to finance their development including TopText and Gator, Cydoor, and BonziBuddy.

It is important to note that although the Gnutella network makes claims that their network is completely anonymous, this is not true for the third party adware that they get financial support from. Many work in conjunction with a number of spyware ad servers programs such as: eZula's TopText, Gator, SaveNow, VX2 - Transponder, FlashTrack, WebHancer, Onflow, Radiate/Aureate, Conducent/Timesink, Bonzi Buddy, Cydoor and Web3000, just to name a few. These ad on programs do a lot more that serve up pop-up ads. Many of these programs monitor and transmit information regarding your keystroke activities, search engine queries, and data you input into on-line form fields. This information can at times include personal and private information about you."

The page checks out as currently updated. I really don't want to raise the issue again. The link provided by fabian in his prior post seemed unequivocal in stating Limewire's freedom from bundled software.

However, this being so, should not one of the Limewire hierarchy be tapping on this site's shoulder asking what the berluddy hell is going on.

Seems like a good opportunity to further dispell the myth.

__________________
IF HUNGER BE THE LOVE OF FOOD, EAT ON!

I too have read articles and reviews that say limewire contains spyware "like all other p2p apps" but i pretty much dont believe it. I have the "big 3" spyware scanners on my comp (AdAware,Spybot,Spysweeper) that i run on a frequent basis and i have NEVER received a positive result concerning limewire. To my knowledge the only spyware scanner to give LW a positive result is MIcrosoft's ....and it is/was considered to be a false positive as the definition file was still under construction for the beta. If you downloaded LW from a rogue site then who knows? and reading user reviews on download sites is pointless since you dont know who wrote the review and competitors will write bogus reviews to make you afraid to download it. Im sure the RIAA etc. also go on these sites to discourage people from using p2p programs by writing bogus user reviews

ImSteve, thanks for your post.

I agree entirely with what you write. It does seem obvious to me though that if these 'myths' are erroneous, then it must be good for the promotion of Limewire for someone in authority to 'take the bull by the horns'.

__________________
IF HUNGER BE THE LOVE OF FOOD, EAT ON!

dogbreath

It seems to me that you are worried that LW may contain added hidden dangers (software) that can infect a user's PC during installation.

You have found some reports that older versions of LW contained adware, spyware and whatever else and, there seem to be some suggestion, LW could be carrying on that same tradition despite their public announcements that LW contains no adware or spyware.

All I can do to dispel your worries is relate my own experience with LW:

I have been using LW Pro since May/June last year (V4.0.5) to now using V4.8.1, in addition I have always used Ad-Aware (from V6.0 B181 to SE Personal) and Spybot (from V1.2 to 1.3), both loaded with the latest adware/spyware definitions. And I have now added MS Anti-Spyware to this arsenal.

I have never ever found any adware or spyware on my PC after a new installation of LW Pro (13 installations in all), as for viruses, I regularly run Norton Antivirus 2003 (soon to be upgraded to 2005) and that has always come up clean.

Now I will readily admit that using P2P software brings the dangers of internet that much closer to the PC user and, like the article says, you can be hacked, easier to infect with viruses, Trojans and worms. Plus you have to run the gauntlet of downloading mislabeled files containing anything from dialers to various kinds of pornography.

However, if you apply a little common sense and protective software (anti Ad/Spyware/virus, firewall, browser protection, etc) and keep your OS up to date then you will have very little to worry about.

All in all, I believe you are worrying about nothing because LW does not contain any adware, spyware or whatever and most sensible users will have their protective software in place guarding their PCs from unwanted intrusions.

Finally, even if you do not believe me or the folks at LW, that from LW V4.0 there have been no hidden software bundled in, then get yourself a couple of anti-spyware apps and run them. That will tell you if there is anything on your PC that should not be there.





UK Bob

ukbobboy01.

You couldn't be further from the truth. My experience of Limewire is as yours. Absolutely no malware, viruses have entered my p.c. (tmk) due to p2p filesharing. I too treat p.c. security very seriously. I have Avast, SpywareGuard and MS Antispyware running in real time. I have SpywareBlaster installed and scan regularly with updated versions of CW Shredder, a-squared, Ad-Aware, Spybot S&D, AVG (scan only) and Stinger. I employ an active Hosts File, PeerGuardian and Prevx. I use Zone Alarm firewall and I 'clean' regularly with CCleaner and MRU Blaster.

Simply put, I use Limewire with confidence and without worry.

This is not the issue raised here.

I visit many tech. forums and a frequent thread posted relates to p2p malware/virus dangers. Although I feel totally comfortable promoting Limewire, it would be useful to be able to dispel the apparent myth that Limewire comes bundled with undesirable software.

I spotted an article today while browsing which seemed to contradict this supposition. It seemed sensible to bring this to the attention of the Limewire developers. Surely such lies need to be addressed. If the allegations can be proven to be incorrect, then the site should be invited to prove their case or retract the comments.

This type of action, I believe, would do much to promote Limewire and put it where it deserves to be, up there with the very best and safest file sharing apps.

__________________
IF HUNGER BE THE LOVE OF FOOD, EAT ON!

Here's a link to an independent recent study that proves LW contains no malware.
http://www.benedelman.org/spyware/p2p/

Slashdot, slyck and p2pnet covered the news, so many had a chance to question the results, and LimeWire came out clean.

However, others have taken LW's open source code and repackaged it--and who knows what they have done to the code.

So--trust downloads from LimeWire's official links.

dogbreath

I see that we are singing from the same hymn book and are on the same page, but have different points on how LW folk should handle the baseless accusations that you have found.

LW folks have over the past year, to my knowledge, constantly repeated that LW (since V4.0) does not carry any ad or spyware. I don't believe that LW people should engage in a debate with journalist, internet or otherwise, who are too lazy to check their facts.

Like film critics who plagiaries each others film reviews, these people have not seen LW they have just dug up an old review and, adding some spin, just copied it. In other words, how can you have a meaningful debate with someone or organisation that is prepared to release a false story as fact.

Any responsible technical reviewer would submit their reviews to the company concerned giving them enough time to reply to the negative points in that review. That way the reader is presented with both sides of any disagreement. But to republish old news as current is, basically, tabloid journalism and, as you no doubt know, tabloids are not interested in truth or facts, things which get in the way of a good story.

I guess that the LW folks would reply if they were given the choice but the writers of these dubious reviews you have read would not want that because it would spoil the story they were telling.





UK Bob

Don't doubt it stief. But if a product of yours had just been seriously misrepresented, would you not feel the need to redress the balance?

__________________
IF HUNGER BE THE LOVE OF FOOD, EAT ON!

You've got it. Take care, dogbreath.

__________________
IF HUNGER BE THE LOVE OF FOOD, EAT ON!

Agreed--and no doubt many of the LW team have been irritated with the misrepresentation. IIRC, this was one of the reasons a reputable Harvard researcher like Benedelman http://www.benedelman.org/bio/ was encouraged to publish his findings.