Comments on: “Cookies are not spyware”

By: Ed Bott

Ed Bott — Sat, 10 Feb 2007 17:41:59 +0000

Bpresti, look in the column on the right for the e-mail updates box.

By: Bpresti

Bpresti — Sat, 10 Feb 2007 17:20:10 +0000

How does one sign up to get on a mailing list for
Ed Bott’s Windows expertise?

By: Ed Bott’s Windows Expertise » Blog Archive » This is why we need independent sources

Tue, 06 Sep 2005 18:51:07 +0000

[...] Update: Webroot hasn’t gotten back to me yet, but Paul Roberts of eWeek was kind enough to send me a copy of the report. It’s 74 pages long, but I went to the Enterprise SpyAudit section to break down that frightening 80% number. And sure enough, on page 36 is this gem: “…cookies tend to make up the largest number of infections per enterprise machine.” Cookies! As I’ve written before, cookies are not spyware. In my opinion, Webroot is totally wrong to claim, that a computer containing one or more tracking cookies is “infected with spyware.” [...]

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000

You have a vested interest in this argument and it colors your opinion. This is a tracking cookie and I think it is right for AdAware and Spybot S&D to point that out.

I realize that this is a free newsletter and that your time is not free and you have a right to earn income when and where you can. However, I have a right to delete this junk from my computer.

By: Ed Bott

Ed Bott — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000

Well, where to begin?

First of all, I don’t have a vested interest in anything. I don’t use tracking cookies, and I don’t have a newsletter. So it’s hard to tell what you’re talking about. I was quoting a post from Jason Dunn. Perhaps he’s the one you mean to yell at?

His point, and mine, is that tracking cookies are not spyware. You may have a legitimate reason to keep them off your system, and that is your right. But for anti-spyware programs to identify them as spyware, on the same screen with programs that hijack computers, is pure BS.

Btw, it’s much easier to have a dialog with someone if they leave a name and some way to contact them.

By: Ken

Ken — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000

Ed:

I found this comment about cookies to be very helpful. Also, congratulations on your new book, which I have already read about halfway through.

This is slightly off topic, but I would love to get your thoughts on so-called “performance software” generally, such as utility suites (e.g. Systemworks, SystemSuite, System Mechanic, and the like), defraggers (such as Diskeeper and PerfectDisk), memory managers (e.g. Memokit, Cacheman), etc. — especially on Windows XP SP2. Ditto for “Internet Security” suites” and third party firewalls. My opinion on all of this is that with the possible exception of defraggers and a good stand-alone anti-virus program, less is more and native Windows XP (especially after SP2) is more than good enough for most users (even better for experienced users who know what not to download from the Internet). Do you agree? TIA

By: agaffin

agaffin — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000

I bet the spyware alerts stem from the dark days when DoubleClick bought Abacus and announced plans for a system to track users across the Web. That having been said, we probably get several e-mails a month from people convinced that we are attempting to do all sorts of evil things to their computers because their Ad-Aware or whatever reports our cookies (in our case from, yes, DoubleClick) as things demanding immediate, urgent removal.