Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Fraudulent LuLa survey or not?  (Read 1724 times)
walter.sk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1322


« on: April 06, 2013, 12:49:58 PM »
ReplyReply

I got onto the LuLa forums today and got a message for a "prize" if I filled out a survey.  I have never seen this here before, so I copied the link below.  Is this fraudulent?


http://www.offerdailys.scam/index.php?source=trafficvance&keyword=/
« Last Edit: April 06, 2013, 01:30:12 PM by Chris Sanderson » Logged
Chris Sanderson
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1830



« Reply #1 on: April 06, 2013, 01:27:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Definitely Spam and untrustworty. Clearly, nothing to do with us.

If you can figure out how you got to that page, please let us know.

I am editing the link you posted
« Last Edit: April 06, 2013, 01:30:52 PM by Chris Sanderson » Logged

Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape
walter.sk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1322


« Reply #2 on: April 06, 2013, 01:36:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Definitely Spam and untrustworty. Clearly, nothing to do with us.

If you can figure out how you got to that page, please let us know.

I am editing the link you posted
Thanks, Chris.  I got several strange effects after I installed a program called CPUID after clicking on a link to it in the following LuLa thread.  It put several toolbars in my browser and I got lots of new pop-up junk.  I went into Windows Control Panel>Programs and Features, sorted my programs by descending date installed, and found what I hope was all of the problems, installed yesterday.

Here is the forum thread that contains the link I clicked on that caused the problem:


http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=77096.0;topicseen
Logged
Rocco Penny
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 483



« Reply #3 on: April 06, 2013, 02:04:37 PM »
ReplyReply

the way those downloads have unfettered access to your hard drive etc better hope that you have really robust AV
even then if you have some free AV that doesn't run unless you run a scan manually,
well why not buy legitimate or proven apps?
The freeware isn't always a dog,
but 90% probably is.
I just wouldn't chance anything beyond spybot or malwarebytes
just asking for it...
Logged
OldRoy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 404


WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 07, 2013, 04:36:55 AM »
ReplyReply

the way those downloads have unfettered access to your hard drive etc better hope that you have really robust AV
even then if you have some free AV that doesn't run unless you run a scan manually,
well why not buy legitimate or proven apps?
The freeware isn't always a dog,
but 90% probably is.
I just wouldn't chance anything beyond spybot or malwarebytes
just asking for it...
In the many serious tests I have seen NO single av software identifies every hazard every time. As for the free/paid comparison, in the last evaluation of products in both paid and free categories which I read, the free version of "Avast", the Czech av application, came out with the highest score - as it has in some previous tests. There is also a paid version which includes a firewall and additional functionality which some may wish to have. I have never seen either Norton or McAffee, the most commonly pre-installed security applications, come first in these comparisons.

I have used, installed (and removed) many different security applications over many years in combination with a free third party firewall and Avast is by far the best, particularly in the newly revised version which has an excellent interface including the capacity to automatically identify and update out of date software (Flash, Java etc) which contains vulnerabilities. It incorporates a scheduled  boot-time scan function. I have no connection with Avast except as a very satisfied, malware-free, user. The other widely used free application, AVG, in my experience, is terrible. Someone I know who maintains PCs commercially told me that the majority of malware-ridden PCs he encounters are likely to have AVG installed.

I regard the practice of supplying PCs with three-month evaluation copies of paid security software such as "Norton" (it used to be McAffee, but that seems to have dropped below the radar except in Central America...) as close to being legitimised malware since it blackmails the user into paying for something which he hasn't ordered - and doesn't usually understand. I've lost count of the number of people from whose computers I have removed hugely out-of date versions of these programs which they fondly believed were still protecting them in some way.

From what I've read and seen, a high proportion of the malware about nowadays evades security by the simple expedient of fooling people into installing apparently innocuous software which also includes unwanted and potentially dangerous components - as appears to be the case in the OP. I never use the "quick install" option for anything;"custom install" usually reveals preselected cr@pware such as unwanted browser plugins.

At least as important as the software is the users' understanding of what to avoid. This is a much bigger problem to address.

As for "Spybot", that's never been a serious security solution as far as I recall. Unless it has been totally revised it was only ever only good for removing tracking cookies etc.

Roy
Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1862


WWW
« Reply #5 on: April 07, 2013, 09:49:50 AM »
ReplyReply

At least as important as the software is the users' understanding of what to avoid. This is a much bigger problem to address.
Absolutely right.

I remember back in the early days of the internet, when dial-up was just starting to get established. On one BBS I used a lot there was a serious suggestion that no one should be allowed online unless they had passed a 'driving' test to ensure they were safe to be let loose on the net. There remains a lot of merit in that idea although it's a lost cause now.

With respect to freeware being 90% rubbish, people need to remember the amount of 'freeware' that they rely on.
Anyone actually paid money for an internet browser, PDF reader, FTP or mail client lately ?
Logged
Rocco Penny
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 483



« Reply #6 on: April 07, 2013, 09:56:59 AM »
ReplyReply

no no don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting NOT to use a security protocol.
Avast you say?
OK
I have been using spybot.
Apparently Avast has some features you like while I like Spybot.
Check it out-
1.5 years surfing the net,
I'll go anywhere,
bit torrent,
anonymous,
fbi website,
I'll go anywhere.
You know how many threats Avast caught that Spybot hasn't?

None- that's zero.
n=0

So sure maybe you know,
I know I do not.
I also know Avast for all your touting it has done nothing for my computer that spybot hasn't.
In fact, Spybot has many more features and isn't kludgy comparing the free version of each, cleans temp folders, zaps rootkits, etc
Logged
Box Brownie
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 179



WWW
« Reply #7 on: April 07, 2013, 07:18:14 PM »
ReplyReply

AFAIK CPUID is a much respected utility program....................I have used it in the past and it may well still be on this PC.

Having said that I have come across such utilities being "hi-jacked" and then offered for sale (the CPUID I used was from the developers website and was free) these can be reverse engineered and have 'stuff' added in like Malware et al.

FWIW any program I download gets scanned with Hit Man Pro, Malware Bytes, SuperAntiSpyware and lastly my AV which is ESET Smart Security ~ if it passes muster of all those scans I feel safe to trust.......................provided it has come from a developer website with good history of product & service i.e. peer review and good independent reviews.

Just my 2p's worth Smiley
Logged

A collection of mine here http://500px.com/engramphotography
OldRoy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 404


WWW
« Reply #8 on: April 09, 2013, 05:32:26 AM »
ReplyReply

no no don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting NOT to use a security protocol.
Avast you say?
OK
I have been using spybot.
Apparently Avast has some features you like while I like Spybot.
Check it out-
1.5 years surfing the net,
I'll go anywhere,
bit torrent,
anonymous,
fbi website,
I'll go anywhere.
You know how many threats Avast caught that Spybot hasn't?

None- that's zero.
n=0

So sure maybe you know,
I know I do not.
I also know Avast for all your touting it has done nothing for my computer that spybot hasn't.
In fact, Spybot has many more features and isn't kludgy comparing the free version of each, cleans temp folders, zaps rootkits, etc

Over a very long time I have rescued innumerable computers for friends and acquaintances so my conclusions are drawn from a fair sized data set. I have also read many, many comparative anti-malware tests over a period measured in decades, during which time I worked in IT- although not specifically involved with security.

These comparisons have usually included some combination of: Kaspersky, McAffee, Norton, TrendMicro, Bullguard, Panda, Eset, AVG, Avast, and quite a few others. I have never, ever, seen SpyBot included as a competitor to fully-featured applications, whether paid or otherwise. I did have it installed for some years during the time when nuisance malware (as opposed to cunning malware) was endemic. I have no idea what degree of security it currently offers but its absence from tests in professionally-oriented publications indicates something.

As an aside, some of the AV companies offer online scanners which can be run without a full installation. Kaspersky's used to be among the best (and the paid-for application was a frequent top dog in comparative tests too) however I believe they have withdrawn the facility. Running a couple of these online scans (say, TrendMicro, Eset) is a useful supplementary for anyone suspecting malware, in addition to your on-board AV software. I'd say that the Avast boot-time scan is as likely to identify malware as anything else, and probably more likely. Personally I've never had malware problems with computers running Avast but without contextual information this doesn't say much on its own. Even running a third-party firewall is only helpful if you have some idea what processes to block.

Recently I've been interested to note an epidemic of BotNet junk mail. It appears that people are still opening links that appear to emanate from their email contacts list, despite the usual absence of any subject line or specific text. I've noticed that this spam (whether it's just spam or actively malicious I wouldn't know as I don't open the links) is now originating from Mac as well as PC users.

Roy
Logged
Adam L
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 175


WWW
« Reply #9 on: April 09, 2013, 06:34:33 AM »
ReplyReply

I use Acronis software to backup my data.  It's really easy to do.

In this package they have an excellent application called 'Try' which if you invoke prior to installing new software, will put the it in a nice protected container for testing.   In the event it is malware, you can easily delete knowing it was isolated from the rest of your system.  I think they do this via partitioning but am not certain.   
Logged

"That's a lot of money to move a few pixels around"
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad