A cleaner, safer web with Chrome Cleanup

[lehnerus2000]

Modern society is all about a lack of responsibility - it's easy just to blame someone else for misfortune, instead of holding oneself accountable. You see it here too - aka "Chrome sneaked on my system", "I was forced to install Windows 10" etc. etc. etc. take your pick.

"Modern society is all about a lack of responsibility", especially when it comes to corporations.

I notice you ignored the infamous "close the GWX dialogue window, which installs W10" incident.

IMO, it should be illegal for commercial software to use "Opt Out" installers.


I've noticed that some installers and dialogue windows now use dodgy wording.
For example "Upgrade" and "OK" buttons, not "Upgrade and "Do Not Upgrade".

Also the "Install Everything" button is huge, but the "Opt Out" option is a tiny link (often hidden in a wall of text and links).

Note:
Fining companies is pointless, all that does is disadvantage customers, employees and shareholders.
The Executives should be personally liable.
If they can't pay, they go to prison just like a normal person.

For example, a billion dollar fine is irrelevant to MS, but I'm sure if Satya Nadella had to pay the fine, he would think twice before authorising any scams.

The GWX campaign had the most deceptive series of attempts to trick people to download and install an unwanted program or OS just barely short of virus infections. It was buried in security updates and the popups it generated were often very misleading, the worst being the one that gave no option to opt out and, if you clicked on the X in the upper right corner of the popup, which pretty much everyone would assume would just close the popup, it would trigger the install. Even experts were often fooled by one attempt or another. MS even later admitted the GWX campaign was a huge mistake.

Of course they only admitted that after a lot of people had been tricked and started complaining.

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
Chrome was on a asus x299 drivers disk and so was Norton
Pay to be there and checked by default freaking asus :mad2:

 

[michael diemer]

IMHO, if the software in question is free, it's up to the consumer to enlighten themselves as to exactly what they're getting into. The company is under no obligation vis a vis consumers in this situation. You don't have to install the software. Remember, you're getting something for nothing. Companies aren't giving it away thinking they're doing the community a service. They're hoping to get a return on it one way or another. Enter at your own risk. Browsers are free. So, be careful. Read the fine print. When you enter the internet, YOU are responsible for what happens to you! Live and learn. (GWX is an exception. This was truly reprehensible, a blatant attempt to force Windows 10 on people without their permission).

 

[feetand nches]

I used Piriform.com and also used custom. Their was no Chrome offered but I got it anyway.

Jack

That's not good, thanks for the Heads-Up! I use Speccy on all my pc's.

 

[Layback Bear]

As most know, I'm not a click, click and pray computer user.
I do custom installs and I can read.
I don't use Chrome just because of the sneaky way it's shoved into computers. When a product is put into my computer in that fashion I will do what ever it takes to remove it. Tip toeing through the registry does take some time. How others take care of such a problem is up to them if they are on their computer.
I'm know and admit that I'm no geek know it all but I do know what I want on my computers and the proper way to get exactly what I want.
My referring to the problem with updating Speccy from the Speccy web site is just a fair warning to others. If you do update Speccy just do a quick search for Chrome if you don't want Chrome.

If and/or when I want Chrome I will download and install it in the proper fashion and not from some sneak method.

Jack

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

...I'm know and admit that I'm no geek know it all...
Jack

:roflmao: Riiiight. And you got all those medals and pips for being cute and cuddly looking instead of just being smarter that the average bear.

 

[TechnoMage2016]

I don't use Chrome just because of the sneaky way it's shoved into computers. When a product is put into my computer in that fashion I will do what ever it takes to remove it.
I know and admit that I'm no geek know it all but I do know what I want on my computers and the proper way to get exactly what I want.
My referring to the problem with updating Speccy from the Speccy web site is just a fair warning to others. If you do update Speccy just do a quick search for Chrome if you don't want Chrome.

If and/or when I want Chrome I will download and install it in the proper fashion and not from some sneak method.
Jack

10-4 Good Buddy!!! (that means that I agree 100%)
To this old tech, anything that sneaks into a computer and then tries to take over, qualifies as a "VIRUS", and should be treated as such.

I'm forever finding Chrome on my customers' PC's and they have no idea what it is, or where it came from, so of course, I use the "Revo Uninstaller" to get rid of it, and all it's leftovers.

I remember, some program that I do use, like Super Anti-Spyware, wanting to install Chrome and I'm very careful to always say "NO!". Ya jus gotta read every word of every little window that opens up, when you're installing new software, to make sure you're not installing some tag-along POC.

Cheers Mates!
TechnoMage

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

...I remember, some program that I do use, like Super Anti-Spyware, wanting to install Chrome and I'm very careful to always say "NO!". Ya jus gotta read every word of every little window that opens up, when you're installing new software, to make sure you're not installing some tag-along POC...

Sometimes, the installers for Chrome, etc. are pretty well hidden and it's possible for one to sneak by. That's why I like Unchecky and highly recommend it. It's a tiny program that just sits in the background but will uncheck any PYPs trying to sneak a program onto a computer. Every once in a while, it catches one I miss, event though I'm pretty careful, use the advanced installs, etc.

 

[SCANNERMAN777]

FireFox for me. It has passed the test of time even if it has the occasional glitch.


______________________________________________________________________________

RAID IS BACKUP WHEN IT'S A MIRRORED BACKUP OF YOUR BACKUP!

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

I ran SuperAntiSpyware yesterday and found out that the half dozen times I recently had to use Firefox (due to idiots too lazy and/or too incompetent to design their websites to work with IE11) let over 500 tracking cookies into my computer. With any browser other than IE, cookie acceptance, unless one jumps through umpteen hoops, is an all or none proposition. I'll use IE11 until I switch over to Linux, then I'll sit down and have a good cry because I'll be forced to use an inferior browser.

 

[Brds7t7]

500?? I've used Chrome for years and the most tracking cookies SAS has ever picked up was around 20 for a months usage. That's with the default cookie settings. 500 seems like a huge amount!

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

500?? I've used Chrome for years and the most tracking cookies SAS has ever picked up was around 20 for a months usage. That's with the default cookie settings. 500 seems like a huge amount!

I was talking about Firefox but its cookie handling is no better than Chrome's (and you're correct, 500 is a lot).

 

[Brds7t7]

I knew you were talking about Firefox LF, but what I meant was through all my years of using Chrome I've never had anywhere near that amount. Does Firefox handle cookies differently to Chrome somehow?

I prefer to use Chrome as I use a few Android devices and it syncs well with those. I'm tied into the Android ecosystem anyway, so I just have to go along with Google's excessive data collection, despite blocking and disabling as much as I can.

I haven't used Firefox since around 2010. I updated to a buggy version which caused me a lot of problems, so haven't used it since. I can't remember how it's set up by default, or how its cookie handling works. That just seems like an excessive amount of trackers.

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
I use palemoon which isn't any different and just scanned and no cookies
There are settings to reject 3rd party cookies possibly you should alter the behavior

 

[Brds7t7]

Hi,
I use palemoon which isn't any different and just scanned and no cookies
There are settings to reject 3rd party cookies possibly you should alter the behavior
View attachment 401392

That's one thing about newer versions of Chrome which annoys me. For some strange reason, when I choose the option to block third party cookies, I can't pay for anything online using a card. It gets to the authentication page and just times out. I've tried adding certain cookies to the allow list, but it never works. As soon as I allow third party cookies again I can purchase things.

Not sure what Google changed to cause this, but I have to accept third party cookies for it to work in the latest versions.
I get the same behaviour on Chrome for Android.

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

Firefox is pretty much the same (I tried Pale Moon a short while back—mayhap two months ago—and I was not impressed). I had it set to reject third party cookies but I just checked it and it had changed itself back to always accept them (mutter, mutter, mumble, mumble). The only reason I even have the POS on my computer is a recent IE11 update (September's) broke a handful of badly programmed websites (I'm blaming those websites, not the update, because the vast majority of the websites I visited since then had no problems from the update). I'm running SAS again to see if any new "infections" snuck in before reset the POS.

The SAS scan just finished and has 98 hits, every misbegotten one of them through equally misbegotten Firefox. Heck, I've hardly even used the POS since I last ran SAS. This a screen shot of some of them:

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
I might add I also use in private browsing so not much of anything is saved even any cookies.

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
This is what is cleared on exit which Chrome does not have and why I would never use it or at least one of the main reasons "clear on exit"

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

Hi,
This is what is cleared on exit which Chrome does not have and why I would never use it or at least one of the main reasons "clear on exit"
View attachment 401397

The problem with those settings is the desirable cookies also get deleted. It so simple IE to deal with. I have it set to ask before new cookie gets planted on my computer. I can either choose to allow it or not to allow it. I can also choose whether my choice applies thereafter or only this onetime. It's easy peasy with no hoops to jump through. Another bonus is I immediately know when a website is trying to plant cookies onto my computer.

Once upon a time, browsers like Firefox and its derivatives had that same option but have dropped it, probably because the developers got paid by the cookie planters (polite term: I would use more accurate terms but Mama told my not to use those words) to drop the option.

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
You just add the wanted cookies in the exceptions field.
You can also block with exceptions too like when sas finds one or 500 hundred