potentially dangerous file in AutoGK instalation pack

[metropolis2004]

Although everything has been said before, I'd like express my opinion because I haven't read a single word of excuse from you.

LenOx: I appreciate your work. I use AutoGK since I always got oversized files when using GK and AutoGK made everything right.

But by bundling Spyware with your software WITHOUT stating that clearly destroys all your integrity. I think I will go back to GK and try to find the mistake I make. I am really disappointed.

You want to make money? OK? Do it, but be man enough to admit it in the installer instead of cheating all the people that trusted you.

[Taurus]

Originally posted by len0x
It is a DAE installer, not a trojan...
If you let the antivirus program do it's job, AutoGK 1.85 beta continues installing without interuption (and of course without DAE).
I will try to make an installation with Virus scanner turned off, just to see what's happening :D ;)
Strange, the scanner did'nt recognized DAE in former 1.84 install.
So either the virus definition got updated or the DAE installer got twisted.

Cheers

Taurus

[shevegen]

There is an easy solution for you users - use Windows on machines not connected to the Internet, and everything is fine. And use another OS while being connected to the WWW.
;)


Personally though, I think throwing in adware is a very very bad option to attempt solving a problem.

[fewtch]

It's clearly announced now, so personally I have no objections anymore. If it reaches a point where AutoGK won't function without the spyware, then maybe it's time to say something again (like e.g. you get Paypal donation from me when hell freezes over :devil: ).

[DeadMetal]

Originally posted by Taurus

Strange, the scanner did'nt recognized DAE in former 1.84 install.
So either the virus definition got updated or the DAE installer got twisted.

Yeah, here also. Using Avast! Antivirus.

[Guest]

I understand that AutoGK uses GPL'ed software from other developers. If len0x is now making money off AutoGK, this may change the equation for those developers whose work is included.

len0x needs to write to all these people, explain the situation, and offer them the opportunity to withdraw their permission for use of their work.

If there is any of my work included, I would prefer that it not be included in a package that distributes adware/spyware, and from which the author derives income, thereby violating the spirit of the GPL licensing.

[Guest]

I've thought a bit more and investigated about this.

It is *not* a GPL issue unless it places undue obstacles to getting the source code of the bundled GPL components. Assuming that is not the case, the only justifable reaction is a polite disapproval of the concept of adware/spyware. So that's it as far as I am concerned.

I politely disapprove. :p

[Carraway]

A couple things:

First of all, I hadn't planned on mentioning this, but now that DG has (rightfully) brought up the GPL issue and packaging free programs with a commercial work, it's probably relavent. I was going through the BeSweet readme and noticed this:

Distribution
The program is a freeware and not commercial in any mean.

Technically the software is still free but it's definitely commercial now (in the same sense that, for example, American television is referred to as "commercial television" despite the fact that it's costs nothing to watch it and is funded by advertising dollars). So, yeah, my question is this: is that gonna cause problems?

Second! I said this a few days ago:

Originally posted by Carraway (that's me!)
So after hours of web browsing, I can only assume that RESPONSETARGET has a whole history of U=97883's web browsing. I don't know what they do with this information -- whether they are honorable and genuinely only use it for targeted ads and then promptly purge it, or if they harvest the info and sell it, etc etc. But they're an adware company so they're not at the peak of business ethics to begin with, so I suspect it's something closer to the latter.

This should probably be of interest to everyone. The answer to my question -- whether they only use my web history to provide ads or if they harvest it and sell it to other companies -- the answer is sadly the latter.

From their privacy policy:

ResponseTarget may collect any or all of the following types of information: (a) traffic or clickstream data, (b) cookies, (c) Internet Protocol ("IP") addresses, or (d) contact information and other personally identifying information...

[...]

(a) Traffic or Clickstream Data.

ResponseTarget may share information it collects with certain selected third parties, but only in aggregated, anonymous form. For example, we may tell an advertiser that a certain number of people visited a certain area of a Web site, or searched Web sites for the term "mortgage loan."

[...]

(b) Cookies.

Cookies let us know about repeat visitors and if we are delivering quality products and services. ResponseTarget may also use cookies to identify which sites our repeat visitors are coming from, so that we can place more of our online advertising on these sites, and can, where necessary, pay our affiliates and other business partners.

[and so on]

They are giving the info to third parties and using cookies to follow the sites that we go to. And they also collect IP addresses, so I can only assume that if they wanted to, they could easily supply the entire web history of any particular IP address. So, yes, they're deliberately doing more than simply "advertising". I give them credit for being upfront about it (moreso than len0x was/is), but they nonetheless seem like a pretty typical adware/spyware company. I encourage everyone to read their privacy policy (http://www.responsetarget.com/privacy/) because it's very informative.

Oh, one last thing -- DAE started being bundled in version 1.82b, not 1.84b as was previously thought. I don't know if anyone cares, but I figured I'd mention it anyway. So to anyone who has either 1.82 (as I did) or 1.83, you unknowingly have DAE and will have to uninstall it.

(Also NOTE: If you do happen to have 1.82b, uninstalling DAE will not suffice because doing so -- I kid you not -- cripples AutoGK. You will need to upgrade and then uninstall DAE).

[thop]

I think it's not a very good move towards all users that did donate. I already had a slight idea where this might be going when i first saw the PAYPAL button in the main window a few months ago.

I'd rather have AGKnot going commercial, than install spyware. Not sure if that's possible with the GPL and so.

[buk]

As i noticed, BeeSweet is not longer in AutoGK pack (from 1.87 beta). Caused throught problems with BeeSweet licence?

[len0x]

No, see here: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=64266&perpage=20&pagenumber=168

[buk]

OK LenOx, everything is clear. Sorry for my previous post.

[ydobon]

Hi there.

Originally posted by Carraway
[...] Oh, one last thing -- DAE started being bundled in version 1.82b, not 1.84b as was previously thought. [...]

Actually it's also in AutoGK 1.81 beta, or at least the RESPONSETARGET license appears there too :rolleyes:


Regards,

[Carraway]

Originally posted by ydobon
Hi there.

Actually it's also in AutoGK 1.81 beta, or at least the RESPONSETARGET license appears there too :rolleyes:

Regards,

Yeah, I actually noticed this today, as a matter of fact, while I was going through old versions. I'm thinking of sending Doom9 a quick note to let him know that the adware info in his guide is incorrect (it still says 1.84).

Unrelated, to len0x:

It's been five days since DG posted in this very thread and your silence has been conspicuous. His code powers a very large part of your app. Do you care at all that Donald disapproves or are you to the point where $$MONEY$$ > respect?

[Guest]

len0x and I have been in private communication about this. As I have said in an earlier post, I politely disapprove of adware/spyware, and that is all. I have not asked him to remove any components of mine, nor do I think that would be appropriate. len0x doesn't owe any explanations to me.

[len0x]

I was writing a reply, but DG was first :)
Anyway - any issues I may have with developers I prefer to discuss privately without involving "the voice of public" aka Carraway...

[TripleA]

Should anyone care what I think about this? Probably not, as I don't even use AutoGK. I didn't even download it once. Even GK I use only for cropping and resize error calculations, so I don't really need any new features in this software and thus anything that would force me to abandon use of future updates of it is not critical to me.

I hope that's understandable.

Now, I think this move is a Very Bad Idea(tm). "You cannot do anything about it and it's not really hurting you so just lay back and enjoy it" is *not* a strong argument, in my book. The very absolute minimum is to clearly warn the user adware is being installed, IMHO: "Are you *really* sure you want to do this?" in 72pt flashing blood-red letters style, I mean.

A much better and infinitely more decent way to make money is to turn AutoGK into shareware. At least in my book.

[Trystian]

I noticed that when you uninstall DAE from the "Add or Remove Programs menu", all it does is unregisters dae.dll from the system. It doesn't appear to remove the dll or any of the changes from the registry.

SO, I wrote a small program that removes everything that dae places on your system. If you want it, it's located HERE (http://trystiansky.i8.com/). Called the DAE Removal Tool. :D
If you want to know exactly what it does, read DAERemove.txt in the ZIP.

Thanks,
-Trystian

[len0x]

if you read first page of this thread then you'll know that dae.dll is removed upon restart.

[Trystian]

Ah, I missed that part. Thank you for the clarification. But it still leaves at least one registry setting behind (HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\DAE\*). If an uninstall feature of a program can't uninstall EVERYTHING, then it isn't properly doing it's job. Of course this is just my opinion, I'm sure others would disagree.
This tool just assists with what Response Target apparently missed when uninstalling their software.

[cypher_soundz]

Wow this has really blown my mind! I don’t like brining negativity to the forum, but to be fair it was already here (in 1.81 beta apparently)! I don’t use autoGK but I do really think this is a bad move! Remember bad news travels lot faster then good news! Will people really be talking about autoGK lite? It just doesn’t sound right :), I think there would have been better ways to go about this.
With pc’s slowing down to a stop for no other reason than malware infecting the system, the program may be able to be removed simply but it has shown that you are a supporter to these malicious and untrustworthy companies. I feel you have been tarred with the spyware brush now.
I was not trying to rant, only voice my opinion. You are free to do as you like, and the users should be grateful they had a clean useful program to use up to now, But I do feel that it will not be as successful as it could be now with this latest developments.
Regards
cyph

[Mouse]

Bah, stop all the whining. Contribute with money to len0x so he can skip the DAE.

He updates this software more times than some of you change undies ;) and the software itself is GREAT!

[Carraway]

Originally posted by Mouse
Bah, stop all the whining. Contribute with money to len0x so he can skip the DAE.

I'm all for a donation milestone for adware removal, but I'm fairly certain the adware is here to stay. Len0x has commented before on its permanence, but I'm not sure if he's ever stated it publicly.

But my impression is that unless a sweeter deal comes along (and I don't mean donations), the adware will forever be part of AutoGK.

[dibl]

Though I agree that software author could choose whatever business plan for his or her work, I wonder whether a clean shareware version would be a better business plan? I, for one, would like to pay for shareware like ultraedit, winrar ... Anyway, I guess it is a good practice to at least let users know about the "adware" issue before installation, like ad supported Opera browser.

[fewtch]

Originally posted by Carraway
But my impression is that unless a sweeter deal comes along (and I don't mean donations), the adware will forever be part of AutoGK.
So let's hope ResponseTarget goes out of business, then Len0x can take it out... :D

[TripleA]

Possible scenario:

0- ResponseTarget goes out of business.
1- ResponseTarget sells all information they have to the highest bidder. I.E. some pr0n outfit, most likely.
2- Spyware from another company is used in the next AutoGK.
3- Suddenly you're getting spammed from all over the place!

In short: find other software to use.

[Carraway]

Originally posted by TripleA
Possible scenario:

[...]

In short: find other software to use.

Or AutoGK Lite.

Not that it exists, but it seems like all popular programs that are spyware-laden eventually go in that direction, like it or not.

[cypher_soundz]

Will people really be talking about autoGK lite?
LOL yes they will be :D ;)
Regards
cyph

[Trystian]

I doubt that there will be an AutoGK Lite. I actually looked at AutoGK for the first time yesterday for it's functionality (and not the DAE spyware part), and it seems to be a great piece of software. A lot easier to use than Gordian Knot (Hence the "Auto" part of it's name). I did look around, and found no other "free" software out there that came close to the ease of use and quality of AutoGK. I'm not saying I agree that adding spyware/adware to the AutoGK installation was a good idea, but if Len0x spends most of his time developing this software, he has to make a living somehow. Preferably with paypal donations. I just wrote my DAE Removal tool (http://trystiansky.i8.com/) just to give the user the option of completely cleaning DAE from their system (Since I despise Spyware).

My suggestion, if you use AutoGK (http://www.autogk.me.uk/index.php), and use my DAE Removal tool (http://trystiansky.i8.com/), then DONATE to Len0x (https://www.paypal.com/xclick/business=len0x@autogk.me.uk&item_name=AutoGK+donation&no_note=1&tax=0&no_shipping=1) for his time for building such a great tool.

-Trystian

[buzzqw]

Very, very, very good :)

Your tool seems to fuction !

Thanks Trystian !

BHH

[ydobon]

Originally posted by buzzqw
Your tool seems to fuction !
Hey, I'm the first that doesn't agree with Len0x decision, but don't make it look so difficult.

Control Panel > Add/Remove Programs > DAE > Uninstall also works :p

[buzzqw]

Sure !

But your tools is quicker ! :D

BHH

[Trystian]

Originally posted by ydobon
Hey, I'm the first that doesn't agree with Len0x decision, but don't make it look so difficult.

Control Panel > Add/Remove Programs > DAE > Uninstall also works :p

True, but it doesn't remove everything that it added.

[fewtch]

Originally posted by TripleA
Possible scenario:

0- ResponseTarget goes out of business.
1- ResponseTarget sells all information they have to the highest bidder. I.E. some pr0n outfit, most likely.
2- Spyware from another company is used in the next AutoGK.
3- Suddenly you're getting spammed from all over the place!

In short: find other software to use.
Actually, my DVD burner + DVDShrink is looking the most attractive. Hate to waste the ability of my Philips 642 to play .avi files, but of course picture quality is much better at full DVD size. Then again, for less important DVD's I like storing 5-6 movies onto a single DVD+R, even if it takes a long time transcoding to MPEG4.

Hmm, what to do :rolleyes: :p

Edit -- I'm just joking... as long as DAE can be removed without preventing AutoGK from working, I'll keep using it. But if someone could write an app that simply performs the resize calculations and writes the AVISynth script, I could do the rest manually... honestly, AutoGK is basically a fancy resize/bitrate calculator (at least the DVD input function).

[Carraway]

Originally posted by fewtch
But if someone could write an app that simply performs the resize calculations and writes the AVISynth script, I could do the rest manually... honestly, AutoGK is basically a fancy resize/bitrate calculator (at least the DVD input function).

This brings up an interesting point. I am not a programmer, so I personally have no idea about anything, but really: exactly how advanced is the process that AutoGK uses?

I mean, it automates the D2V process using CLI, encodes the audio using CLI, encodes in VirtualDub via a settings file (I think). None of that seems too difficult. The interlacing analysis is predominately done through Decomb, and then AutoGK just uses those results to decide how/if to Telecine it, which in theory doesn't seem too terribly hard. Compressibility tests are well documented, so that can't be hard. AutoGK simply edits the registry file to implement the proper settings for Xvid or Divx.

What is the hardest part about writing an app like AutoGK? The batch system? The GUI itself? It seems (to my simple mind) a cakewalk compared to writing things like Decomb to analyze the video, or DGIndex that decodes and demuxes video (and they're free, too -- amazing! astonishing! where do they possibly find the motivation? etc).

Seriously, could someone who is even vaugely familiar with programming set me straight here? ydobon? Anybody?

[fewtch]

As far as I see it, the trick is in (A) refining calculations to get everything right, and (B) accounting for all possible variables (types of video the program could run into and such). Other than that (as someone vaguely familiar with programming :D) the rest isn't earth shattering stuff. It's got a nice, clean interface and is a good proggie for newcomers. No reason why Len0x shouldn't charge for it, but as you point out there's free stuff out there that makes AutoGK look pretty basic.

I wish DGIndex/DGDecode would get the ability to properly size video, like PC-based DVD player software does. Or someone would write a calculator that accepts .d2v files and outputs a small .avs script that resizes based on a fixed horizontal width (or something like that).

[niamh]

Other than that (as someone vaguely familiar with programming ) the rest isn't earth shattering stuff. It's got a nice, clean interface and is a good proggie for newcomers. No reason why Len0x shouldn't charge for it, but as you point out there's free stuff out there that makes AutoGK look pretty basic.

:eek:
You're certainly entitled to your opinion, so I'll tell you mine, I find your posts inaccurate, uninformed and offensive to boot. That's gratitude for you, hey.
I'm waiting for your own earth shattering app, please keep us posted.

[fewtch]

Originally posted by niamh
:eek:
You're certainly entitled to your opinion, so I'll tell you mine, I find your posts inaccurate, uninformed and offensive to boot.
If you have a personal beef with me, PM me from now on -- it's inappropriate and off-topic here.

[Taurus]

@ fewtch

Knock Knock:
It was you who is getting off topic. Just read your own posts a few lines above.
We are here to help each other, not to discriminate the work of a person or himself.
If you think you can do it on your own, do it. But for the rest, we are grateful for the work len0x is doing and he deserves all the respect and support he can get from the community.
If the Adware aspect worries you, you have to find conclusions on your own. And please don't say it's so easy to join all the tools together to make a perfect rip. If it's so, why there are thousands of people using AutoGk? Think of it before you write.
So, back to topic,please.

Cheers

Taurus

[fewtch]

I think there's a misunderstanding here. I like AutoGK, use it regularly, and told Len0x I'll donate if he makes another method (aside from Paypal) available (and fully intend to).

My post above was in reply to Carraway when he asked "Seriously, could someone who is even vaugely familiar with programming set me straight here? ydobon? Anybody?" I'm "vaguely familiar with programming" (6502 & 16-bit 80x86 assembler, a little C, a lot of Visual Basic and other BASICs) and was replying to his question with my personal opinion. The topic is AutoGK, the spyware included, and the worth of AutoGK considering that spyware is included with it.

Sorry if anyone was offended by my reply -- I have nothing whatever against Len0x and as stated above I use his program regularly.

[unskinnyboy]

It is sad to see people beating the same topic to death page after page even though the uninstall instructions for DAE is pretty clear and someone has even written a tool for it. What more do you want? Can't you just leave len0x and the tool alone atleast now? And yes, I am with niamh and Taurus. Let's see the ground-breaking all-in-one tool, if you can deliver.

P.S: I wonder how many of the dissidents actually even donated to len0x?:rolleyes:

[Sharktooth]

I think this has gone too far...
If you dont like AutoGK because of DAE then dont use AutoGK (or remove DAE with the uninstall or the tool...). No one forces you to download and use it. It's a free software and you should be happy it is still free, coz from what i heard, it's the best tool for automated encoding.
Stop whining and crying and get a life.

[Yo]

I just noticed this too. I have version 1.87b of Autogk installed. I noticed that there is a newer version, 1.91, downloaded it, and started the installation process.

I (like most people, I assume) don't usually read the license agreements on software installation, and just click "yes".) This time, however, I noticed mention of a software company I had never heard of, that one was agreeing to let that company access your computer through the Internet, etc. I clicked "No" and exited out of the installation, I didn't wish to allow spyware to be installed on my system.

I would find it unfortunate never to be able to upgrade Autogk again, but I do not wish to have spyware installed on my system.

I looked at the description of changes in version 1.91 on these boards, and on the autogk web site, and was surprised to see no mention of this change. This thread, started by a user, is the first mention I have seen of it, although it is possible I missed another thread. Why no official announcement of it?

Some freeware developers have spent years and many hours working on improving their software programs, with no financial compensation. Very generous souls, one can only be thankful for their generosity. One can also understand, however, after someone has worked hard on a program for years with no financial compensation, and they have seen their program develop and improve, that they finally wish to receive some compensation for thier work. Completely understood. In that case I would say, change the product to shareware, and charge money for it. That is straightforward and clear. But still calling it freeware, and sneaking spyware into the installation program, without publicly announcing the change, doesn't seem right to me. I don't mean to be critical,, LenOx, I know you have put a lot of time and energy into this project, which many people throughout the world have found useful, for no compensation, and I can understand how you might wish to earn money for it now. I just don't think this is the right way to do it. Be more straightforward--if you wish to earn money from the project, then charge for it. (I don't know if there might be a legal problem involved, in that your product bundles other freeware programs with it. If you are charging for a package that includes other freeware programs, I wonder if you would have to pay those other authors some of the money you earned from it. Or whether they would allow their products to be used in your bundle at all, if it is a commercial bundle.)

I don't like what's happened with a similar product in this regard, "Fair Use". One is forced to "donate" on their web site, in order to download the product. A "forced donation" is an oxymoron, no such thing. If one is required to pay, it is not a "donation". Once again I understand the developer's wish to make money from his project. He should then not call it "freeware" any more, change it to "shareware", and charge for it. (And not call the charge a "donation", but a registration fee.) That just doesn't seem honest to me. If you want to charge for software, then charge for it, but don't call it "freeware", and don't call the the fee you have to pay a "donation".

At least that's clear on their ("Fair Use") web site though, that you have to pay something to download the product. In this case with autogk, no mention of the spyware on the autogk web site. True, it's mentioned in the license agreement (which stopped me from installing it), but most people don't read those. It really seems rather deceptive to me, not the right way to deal with the question of revenue from your product.

[b0b0b0b]

Hey guys, I would have had no idea that I now had adware proxying my web browsing if I hadn't been debugging some web stuff, sniffing my own traffic. Without passing judgement on anything, I would vote for dae to be much more visible to the end user, on the order of "this is the version of the installer with dae" and "this is the version of the installer without dae".

[Sharktooth]

STOP IT! READ THE WHOLE THREAD BEFORE YOU POST!!!
Someone plz close this thread...

[Yo]

Originally posted by Yo
This time, however, I noticed mention of a software company I had never heard of, that one was agreeing to let that company access your computer through the Internet, etc. [/B]

I see where I had notated the name of that company:

"Responsetarget"

When I saw that name in the software license, that by installing I would be agreeing to let that company access my computer through the Internet, it immediately caught my eye. Doesn't sound like the usual freeware license, that's for sure.

[Yo]

Originally posted by Sharktooth
STOP IT! READ THE WHOLE THREAD BEFORE YOU POST!!!
Someone plz close this thread...

Are you opposed to free speech?

[len0x]

To prevent discussions about freedom of speech and unnecessary off-topic polemics (and because indeed everything has been said by both sides and me) this thread is closed.