CNet's Download.com Caught Adding Malware to Nmap & Other Software

CNet.com was the only site I used to trust for any windows software downloads, apart from Microsoft itself. Now I'm really really worried to download any software from CNet.com.

Quoting:CNet.com was the only site I used to trust for any windows software downloads...

You trust MS! how could you? where have you been? Obviously you never heard the famous saying "Trust but Verify".

Many of the packages that I cannot find in the repos or on the app website, I get from Softpedia. So far, no real issues.

I trust M$,... I trust them to be completely self-serving, greedy, unethical, immoral, corrupt, ... and most of the time, ... incompetent.

I've just done some quick checking, and it appears the the "glossy" cumputer/Computing magazines are assiduously averting their eyes. I couldn't find any mention on ZDNet, PC Mag or PC World, not even using the sites' search function for terms such as "Cnet", "download.com", or "malware". (But ZDNet did have ads ("sponsored links") for Download.com).

I didn't realize they had sunk quite so low.

- - -

And this story broke over a week ago. I am seriously considering personally boycotting these publications, and an email to explain why. I might experiment with bringing it up in ZD story comments, but I doubt such comments would survive (I'm not sure my account would survive, either).

I cannot afford to lose my only real free entertainment fix....the fistfights that occur on SJVN's article comments.

Yes, If I can trust there Windows OS I better trust there softwares too! Just like on Debian Linux I trust debian repos. It is very difficult for common man like me to verify and understand if there are any malware/spyware inside softwares... for that I have to trust my anti virus to find it.... finally I'm dependent some or other softwares.

for that I have to trust my anti virus to find it....

I think that is a common mistake we all made when we used Windows. Unfortunately, most antivirus and malware software is reactive and not proactive. We did an informal experiment at the HeliOS facility a couple of months ago, testing the ability of many of the free and trialware antivirus programs to detect and stop the virus/malware program known as AV Security 2012.

None of them, to include Microsoft Security Essentials were able to stop it from being installed and only reported it after it had made itself at home and set up shop on the computer. Once it had a foothold on the machine, we discovered that it has evolved into a rootkit and was almost impossible to remove without severely endangering the registry.

I personally do not think it wise to ever trust Microsoft Windows OR the software-in-the-wild that goes with it. Besides, if you ever actually read the EULA before installing it, I don't see how anyone can justify using it. Many will say "but Linux won't run X or Y programs." Yeah, that may be true but not as much as you might think. Between Wine, Crossover Office and VirtualBox, there really isn't much excuse to "need" Windows.

Look, I understand that advertising pays the bills. What advertisers (and companies who bundle ads or adware with applications) fail to understand is that we users are sick and tired of ads!! Personally, I don't even notice ads anymore. My brain has learned to simply filter them out completely. Moreover, as a Linux/FOSS user, I no longer use proprietary software and feel no need whatsoever to deal with the strings attached to so called freeware or other such bloatware infested cr@p. Advertisers take note: your target audience is reaching its breaking point.

I want to thank henke54 for drawing this to our attention.

I still sometimes help friends with their Windows computers, but otherwise pay relatively little attention to the Windows ecosystem. In fact, just last night I downloaded LibraOffice for a friend's Vista system, but fortunately I went straight to the LibraOffice site. If Download.com had been higher on the search results, I would have believed CNet's Download.com to be a safe place from which to acquire LibreOffice, or any other necessary item such as AVG, ZoneAlarm, Spybot S&D, AdAware, MalwareBytes, etc. (the kind of stuff I usually have handy on a USB drive as my "Windows Survival Kit").

And I shall forward this article to every Windows user I know -- especially those who don't rely on my help.

I'm already getting replies from people (Windows users) that I've forwarded this story to.

So far, almost every response so far, has also asked what I would recommend as an alternative source.

Yes, I know there's three of them listed in the article. The only one of the three I've ever used, at all, is Softpedia (but hardly ever).

I've generally relied on Download-dot-com (no longer an option, now) and MajorGeeks, if I couldn't get it from the source (and several sources have actually passed at least the "free" downloads to one of those two or to Softpedia, anyways.

So I've been suggesting MajorGeeks (majorgeeks.com) because that one has always worked out well for me. Especially when I've been wanting to download multiple apps, or hoping to find a "complete .exe" installer, rather than one of those "stub" downloading installers (which often won't co-operate with me DL-ing them to my Linux box -- and I'm sorry, but I want a functioning, reliable firewall set up and running before I plug a fresh Windows box back into the internet.

But I don't do a lot of Windows downloads -- Does anybody want to make recommendations of their own?

sorry I almost never download stuff for windows.

Every few months a friend or relative wants some help, and I may consequently update my "Windows Survival Kit" USB stick.

And I will admit, that since Vista/Win7 came out, there's been less need for keeping that USP stick up-to-date.

I get everything I need for Windoze (albeit it's not much) here.

http://win.softpedia.com/