OpenDNS Blogger takes on Google and Dell

May 23, 2007 4:41 AM

Google turning to the dark side? From the article: In short, Google and Dell have teamed up to install some software on Dell computers that borders on being spyware. I say spyware because it’s hard to figure out what it is and is even harder to remove. It also breaks all kinds of OpenDNS functionality. At the end, I’ll tell you what we’re doing about it.
posted by psmealey (104 comments total)

"This program has no clear name and is very hard to uninstall."

Eh? Google gives you clear instructions:
This program can be uninstalled from the Control Panel "Add/Remove Programs" in Windows XP or "Control Panel > Program > Programs and Features" in Windows Vista. Look for the application named "Browser Address Error Redirector".

What kind of spyware gives you clear, one-step instructions for removal?

Apparently this name "barely makes sense to techies and it makes no sense to normal people."

It's a program that picks up Address Errors in your Browser and Redirects you. Calling it the Browser Address Error Redirector is not entirely unreasonable.
posted by Aloysius Bear at 4:54 AM on May 23, 2007 [3 favorites]

Yeah, I can see how that would be a problem, if I were unable to follow obvious uninstall instructions.
posted by East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94 at 4:56 AM on May 23, 2007

Google turning to the dark side?

What's the opposite of a grave? Google has been reported to have turned to the dark side so often that they must be spinning in whatever it is.
posted by DU at 4:57 AM on May 23, 2007

Come off it, snarkers, don't you think that making a new google page for Dell types which is 100% ads above the fold is a bad thing, irrespective of the redirect software's uninstallability?

I mean, sure, Grandma should just uninstall Windows anyway, but in the real world..
posted by imperium at 4:59 AM on May 23, 2007 [1 favorite]

Lamborghini.
posted by East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94 at 4:59 AM on May 23, 2007

From the comments:

Google’s new slogan - “Don’t be Evil. Be very Evil.”

Yahooooooooo!
posted by three blind mice at 5:00 AM on May 23, 2007

Come off it, snarkers, don't you think that making a new google page for Dell types which is 100% ads above the fold is a bad thing, irrespective of the redirect software's uninstallability?

I mean, sure, Grandma should just uninstall Windows anyway, but in the real world..

By the same token, if I explained the "privacy implications" to my Grandmother she'd throw something at me and tell me to stop wasting her time.

Unless you're stealing their identity, most casual users I know wouldn't care that Dell is generating ad revenue from their typos. While I do see it as a legitimate issue, I think it's mostly just axe grinding on OpenDNS' part.
posted by saraswati at 5:06 AM on May 23, 2007

When Apple goes evil as well, we are so screwed.
posted by chrismear at 5:06 AM on May 23, 2007 [1 favorite]

Spinning in their swivel chairs?
posted by Elmore at 5:07 AM on May 23, 2007 [2 favorites]

Come off it, snarkers, don't you think that making a new google page for Dell types which is 100% ads above the fold is a bad thing, irrespective of the redirect software's uninstallability?

It only appears when you make a typo, which is pretty standard search behavior. It says that you made a typo, at the top. Then it clearly says Sponsored Links. Then, if you're not using SuperVGA(TM), it has non-sponsored links, otherwise you have to scroll down. Then it says how to uninstall it.

Basically, if people want cheap Dells, which they do, they have to allow Dell to make money in this inoffensive way. Otherwise they should spend more and buy from a better firm. I don't think this is a big deal.
posted by East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94 at 5:11 AM on May 23, 2007

The problem, East Manitoba, is that they're retroactively doing that too. Presumably the computers were profitable when they were originally sold; trying to extract more money out of by giving them suboptimal search results after the sale is pretty damn slimy.

I think it's slimy BEFORE the sale; you're impairing the user experience to make money. That's certainly scumware, if not spyware.
posted by Malor at 5:14 AM on May 23, 2007

sigh. I should preview. "trying to extract more money out of old customers"....
posted by Malor at 5:15 AM on May 23, 2007

The smell test for software:

Is this program for the customer's benefit?

In this case, the answer is clearly 'no'.
posted by Malor at 5:17 AM on May 23, 2007 [5 favorites]

Or, if it makes their PC cheaper, "probably yes".

The retroactive thing is not good, I agree.
posted by East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94 at 5:20 AM on May 23, 2007

When Apple goes evil as well, we are so screwed.

Message found in a bottle, dated 1982.
posted by DU at 5:27 AM on May 23, 2007

You can’t even see the search results in the picture (800×600 resolution)

I'm somewhat on the fence as to how evil this is (if it really is evil, it is at worst "small e" evil), but OpenDNS is being a bit slimy themselves by demonstrating the results in a resolution that not even Dell customers would use these days (yeah, yeah, Grandad's old P2 still uses 800 x 600, but be realistic here, we are talking mostly about modern machines). A screen shot at higher resolution would not "prove" their point quite as well, I suspect.
posted by dg at 5:35 AM on May 23, 2007

The OpenDNS people have "solved" this problem by redirecting all www.google.com traffic through their own proxy. I think that is more than a little bit iffy.

It is bad enough that OpenDNS is redirecting every unregistered domain to provide ads (previous outrage when VeriSign did it) -- now they're going to start filtering real ones too?
posted by you at 5:37 AM on May 23, 2007

Jesus. I don't want any companies messing with my http requests. If I made a typo just give me the goddamn 500 error! I'm a pretty smart guy, I can probably fix a typo in the time it takes to click the "did you mean foo.com?" link, especially when you consider the added load time for all the ads.

All these DNS tricks also break any sort of RESTful programming, which is hugely annoying when I try to debug stuff. Google, Charter, OpenDNS, whatever - they are all guilty o this crap.
posted by rsanheim at 5:55 AM on May 23, 2007 [2 favorites]

Spinning in their swivel chairs?

With arms and legs tucked, or extended?

On its face, this doesn't look good even though the software is completely and easily get-riddable; however, any evilness is purely tangential as I'm sure Google was just fulfilling a request from Dell.

Yeah, they could have declined and then blogged about how Dell attempted to draw them to the dark side -- emerging the scrappy do-gooder victor we all know they are (…). Then that story would have shot to the top of digg, reddit, and del.icio.us simultaneously -- forever (or for 3 days, whichever is longer in this post web 2.0 world) cementing into our minds that Google is our beneficent overlord.
posted by pmbuko at 5:55 AM on May 23, 2007

Google 'turned to the dark side' the moment they became an advertising company. That was a long time ago.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:58 AM on May 23, 2007 [2 favorites]

I think Dell is the bad guy here, Google is just providing search results and ads. Dell is the one that installed the software.
posted by empath at 5:58 AM on May 23, 2007

Quoting Malor:
The smell test for software:

Is this program for the customer's benefit?

In this case, the answer is clearly 'no'.


Say wha?

User wants to go to FancyWebsite.

User accidentally types in FncayWebsite.

User gets a page saying "We didn't find FncayWebsite. Did you mean FancyWebsite?"

and then throws a few banners below it.

The customer gets proactive assistance in trying to get to their destination, not just an error message. How is this not in the customer's benefit?

I'm not thrilled with it and I'm not horrified by it, but I don't see how this fails to assist my grandmother in trying to browse the web.
posted by cavalier at 6:12 AM on May 23, 2007

When Apple goes evil as well, we are so screwed.

Goes? Are you kidding? Killing the mac clones with no warning? The first major computer maker to put DRM (FairPlay) on their machines? I'm suprised apple even has this reputation, they don't do anything to foster it (unlike google with their 'don't be evil' mantra).

Really though, it was inevitable that this would happen when google went public.
posted by delmoi at 6:20 AM on May 23, 2007

I think is the bad guy here, Smith & Wesson is just providing a product. is the one that made it dangerous.

No judgement, just wanted to point out that for the most part each part of the value-chain plays a knowing role.
posted by michswiss at 6:22 AM on May 23, 2007

The customer gets proactive assistance in trying to get to their destination, not just an error message. How is this not in the customer's benefit?

Well, it certanly would if her or one of her friends started a blog on FncayWebsite.com. Yes, all the typosquatters out there are pretty annoying, but this service really does detract from the 'neutrality' of the network, and in effect google/dell is becomming the biggest typosquatter of them all.
posted by delmoi at 6:23 AM on May 23, 2007

Can we stop making snarky remarks about Grandma and Grandpa? Who do you think invented all this computer/Internet stuff anyway?
posted by Kirth Gerson at 6:24 AM on May 23, 2007 [3 favorites]

Hmm, let's try that again...

I think [bullet manufacturer] is the bad guy here, Smith & Wesson is just providing a product. [bullet manufacturer] is the one that made it dangerous.

No judgement, just wanted to point out that for the most part each part of the value-chain plays a knowing role.
posted by michswiss at 6:24 AM on May 23, 2007

Is this anywhere near as evil as Google (along with their brethren at Yahoo, Cisco and Microsoft) bowing at the feet of Chinese censors and essentially crippling their own product in the service of totalitarianism? Me no think so.

Yes I watched Frontline last night.
posted by spicynuts at 6:24 AM on May 23, 2007

There are people on that page going "OMG I CANNOT FIND THIS PROGRAM IT IS SO EVIL".

Apparently, it does not occur to them, at all, that perhaps, just perhaps, they are using machines that came out before this deal, and therefore they, uh, don't have it.

Sweet Tesla's moustache, that's the kind of behavior that makes me want to walk up to some of what Simon The BOFH calls the 'furry-toothed types' and smack them until candy comes out. They document the removal process, giving you not just the current name, but a previous version of it... and it just does not occur to them that it might not be present.

Feed them to the fucking Sharkticons, man.
posted by mephron at 6:25 AM on May 23, 2007 [2 favorites]

When Apple goes evil as well, we are so screwed.

They've partnered with AT&T, for them to remain pure after that would be nearly impossible [AT&Tist].
posted by drezdn at 6:25 AM on May 23, 2007

michswiss, you forgot to involve Hitler, cats, and butter-eaters.
posted by mendel at 6:31 AM on May 23, 2007

I never thought Tesla's mustache would be sweet. Savory, possibly. Definitely not sweet.
posted by spicynuts at 6:31 AM on May 23, 2007

The implementation is terrible, and a program like this would be removed from any of my computers immediately... and yes, the user would be better off without it....

But the writeup is still extremely melodramatic and overblown. Refering to it as somethign the user "Can't" remove, when the user is given very clear and simple instructions on how to remove it. Sure, add/remove programs is a pain, but if you're a windows user, it's the way things are done, and you don't yell at Google/Dell for doing it as simply as possible without coming up with an entirely new (to windows) uninstalling paradigm.

I'm far more annoyed at the melodrama and the intentionally misleading description ("barely makes sense to techies"; 800x600? please, etc.) than I am by the software itself.

(seriously though, the software is useless and annoying.)
posted by John Kenneth Fisher at 6:36 AM on May 23, 2007

psmealy, what were you thinking? You know better than to criticize Google (or Apple) around here. It breaks the rules. Fawning posts of all new product releases though are perfectly acceptable.
posted by caddis at 6:45 AM on May 23, 2007

mendel, I promise to try harder next time. In any case, the vast majority of computers come out of the box as targeted advertising devices. That Google and Dell decided to team up to turn that into 40 pieces of silver shouldn't be a surprise.



(Is that better?)
posted by michswiss at 6:48 AM on May 23, 2007

I can't believe nobody's posted this yet.

And also, Microsoft is Dead.
posted by lysdexic at 6:49 AM on May 23, 2007

Well, it certanly would if her or one of her friends started a blog on FncayWebsite.com.

But...but... in that case, FncayWebsite would resolve! So no search engine message.
posted by cavalier at 6:54 AM on May 23, 2007

If you replaced the word Google with Microsoft in the post, I couldn't imagine seeing a single comment in this thread in defense of this.
posted by Pastabagel at 7:11 AM on May 23, 2007

In other news, Google's goal, according to its founders, is "to enable Google users to be able to ask the question such as ‘What shall I do tomorrow?’ and ‘What job shall I take?’".
posted by Pastabagel at 7:14 AM on May 23, 2007

Metafilter: We would like to take this opportunity to profess our unconditional and undying love for Google.
posted by caddis at 7:18 AM on May 23, 2007

If you replaced the word Google with Microsoft in the post, I couldn't imagine seeing a single comment in this thread in defense of this.

That's what it comes down to. This is a terrible precedent and it's a slimy way to throw even more ads at the user. What's extra-slimy about it is that they could have built this directly into their toolbar but they chose to attack it directly at the win tcp layer to make sure they grab this information even if the person is using a free browser.
posted by nixerman at 7:19 AM on May 23, 2007

Yeah, well...public company now and all. Do no evil unless it increases the share price.
posted by spicynuts at 7:31 AM on May 23, 2007

It's a program that picks up Address Errors in your Browser and Redirects you. Calling it the Browser Address Error Redirector is not entirely unreasonable.

How many programs hide who installed it or where it's from? There's certainly room to call it the "Dell blah blah" or the "Google blah blah"

Also... Why not just make it apart of the toolbar, that's no more difficult, and that would at least make sense.
posted by davidu at 7:35 AM on May 23, 2007

Cavalier wrote:
User wants to go to FancyWebsite.
User accidentally types in FncayWebsite.
User gets a page saying "We didn't find FncayWebsite. Did you mean FancyWebsite?"
and then throws a few banners below it.

The problem is that Google/Dell aren't doing that. They don't even offer a suggestion.

Compare these two links:
http://www.google.com/hws/dell/afe?hl=en&s=http://linux.xom
http://guide.opendns.com/?url=linux.xom

(note: Nobody would ever hit linux.xom with OpenDNS, we automagically correct it to linux.com)

Anyways, this is less about our page vs. their page. It's about sneakingly installing software on computers, separate from toolbars, and making it a bit techie sounding so your average joe and jane might not feel comfortable removing it.
posted by davidu at 7:38 AM on May 23, 2007 [1 favorite]

OpenDNS is hardly a disinterested observer, so it is about your page vs. their page. You don't like their business practices, but they're also your competition.
posted by mendel at 7:43 AM on May 23, 2007 [2 favorites]

Here is a question for all you "it's easy to remove" people. Can you, after seeing one of those pages, easily figure out how to disable it? I was able to figure it out pretty easily after clicking on the 'what's this' link, but how long has that link been there?
posted by delmoi at 7:49 AM on May 23, 2007

@mendel

True enough. We posted it on opendns.com, not my personal blog where I don't mention I run OpenDNS. I think most people understand, especially when I show a screenshot of our page in comparison, that we have at least some interest in this.

We're also confident that we're giving users a better experience so it's easy for us to pull this punch. There's no denying that. That doesn't make it any more lame for Google and Dell to be doing this. It's because we're in this space that exposed us to what they are doing.

And it's not just Dell...
http://www.google.com/hws/sony/afe?hl=en&s=http://linux.xom
http://www.google.com/hws/gateway/afe?hl=en&s=http://linux.xom
http://www.google.com/hws/emachines/afe?hl=en&s=http://linux.xom

Gross. Google.com would NEVER make their search results look like that. Users would walk away in a second.
posted by davidu at 7:54 AM on May 23, 2007 [1 favorite]

The problem is that Google/Dell aren't doing that. They don't even offer a suggestion.

Uh. Did you click that link?


Web Search Results powered bypowered by Google
The Linux Home Page at Linux Online
Comprehensive information and resources about the Linux Operating System.
http://www.linux.org/ - - Cached

Linux.com: The Enterprise Linux Resource
A Linux portal and directory.
http://www.linux.com/ - 44k - Cached


Top results?
posted by cavalier at 8:32 AM on May 23, 2007

psmealy, what were you thinking?</I.

Is this what it's come to? Merely linking to an article that might be of interest to the community now constitutes endorsement of said article?
posted by psmealey at 8:33 AM on May 23, 2007

Methinks he was being snarky..
posted by cavalier at 8:37 AM on May 23, 2007

Yeah, you're right. I was being groggy, as exemplified by the elegant way I closed my itals tag above. Reminder: never post while on vacation.
posted by psmealey at 8:39 AM on May 23, 2007

I posted a comment on their 'blog', and it was pulled. Here it is below:

I think OpenDNS has more on their agenda here than helping regular Internet users. If Google/Dell is breaking their service, they are most likely losing revenue.

Just thought I'd share because it doesn't seem like they want people reading their blog to come across opinions that might seem detrimental to OpenDNS.
posted by mattking17 at 8:57 AM on May 23, 2007

Nevermind, seems they put it back up with a rebuttal.
posted by mattking17 at 8:58 AM on May 23, 2007

'OpenDNS' is lame hype-driven crapware with marginal benefits and obvious detriments. They outright lie about some things 'our servers have faster responses than your ISPs'. They're just pissed off that someone else got to some suckers first.

Fuck all of these DNS-poisoning shitheads.
posted by blasdelf at 9:10 AM on May 23, 2007 [1 favorite]

openDNS sucks big throbbing spamcock.
posted by quonsar at 9:14 AM on May 23, 2007

I tell you, the Google backlash is beginning! We're about to start ripping to shreds a company we formerly loved to bits. Make a note of this day in your diary, and you can add it as a footnote to that history of the Internet you'll one-day write.

It's a tech industry tradition. Microsoft went through it, as did IBM some years before. Apple went through it and came out the other side.

Does anybody know of a cool company to replace Google? I like to jump on band-waggons before they've really built up speed.
posted by humblepigeon at 9:14 AM on May 23, 2007

'OpenDNS' is lame hype-driven crapware with marginal benefits and obvious detriments.


Actually, it's faster than my ISP's no-good DNS. The speed difference was very pronounced when I switched.
posted by humblepigeon at 9:15 AM on May 23, 2007

davidu: You have been caught massively overreacting to a little piece of –not particularly insidious– advertising spamware.

Take a step away from the keyboard and try and not be so emotionally attached to your product when you come back.
posted by public at 9:25 AM on May 23, 2007

it's a deliberate selfish breaking of the internet in the name of profit to intercept / substitute / generate anything but a standard error message in response to an error. openDNS might be fast, but it still sucks a big fat corpocock.
posted by quonsar at 9:27 AM on May 23, 2007

Google's software principles are relevant here.
posted by Nelson at 9:29 AM on May 23, 2007

This "ev0l malwarez" is trivial to uninstall. I could have written this article too, if I packed my bong full of hyperbole, buzz-words, a few assorted technical terms and a whole lot of FUD ... and then did the brown acid.

There's enough legitimately dangerous malware out there; an easily removed application tied to a publically accessible -- and North American -- company is not the end of the world. AOL has fucked with dial-up settings for ages now; it just means it's badly-written software, not "evil".

People need to stop personifying companies / software. All it does is come across as fear-mongering and sensationalistic horseshit. Stuff like this is the digital age's version of fire and brimstone evangelicals, painting the world in black and white as it suits...

FACT: you can remove the Browse Error Address Redirector. hell, if you fucking run the Reset on IE7 it's disabled, or use Internet Options > Manage Addons. It's just a BHO (browser helper object); if you wanna feel like a l33t h4X0r then bust out HiJackthis... Not that it is neccessary.

FACT: that app lowers the cost of the PC it is installed on.

BULLSHIT: this article.
posted by Dark Messiah at 9:34 AM on May 23, 2007

If it's implemented like an IE Toolbar as you say, then it doesn't actually poison DNS at all (as 'OpenDNS' does), and only does anything to fucking Internet Explorer.
posted by blasdelf at 9:52 AM on May 23, 2007

I'll join the chorus of people who don't trust OpenDNS or davidu.
posted by gen at 10:01 AM on May 23, 2007 [1 favorite]

Google has slowly done more and more worrying things lately. The site: keyword no longer works usefully on a website that I visit frequently that I used to use it for all the time. And the fervor with which Google products try to change your search page is unseemly at the very least. (There's always a checkbox in the installer but it always defaults to checked and when one is installing one wants to just Next> past everything quickly.)

While this is not as bad as the OpenDNS guy makes out, it is not really good either. And the entire practice of bundling software onto computers has turned from trying to be legitimately helpful to users to being an exceptionally obnoxious revenue source for computer manufacturers. My Compaq laptop came with a half-dozen programs I've never used, things like "muvee Producer," and a few things that don't pretend to be anything other than trial versions.

The problem's gotten so bad that people are writing utilities (Pcdecrapifier) specifically to remove stuff that often gets preloaded. Interestingly, Google Toolbar and Google Desktop are among the things it detects.
posted by JHarris at 10:13 AM on May 23, 2007

FACT: that app lowers the cost of the PC it is installed on.

How so?
posted by delmoi at 10:16 AM on May 23, 2007

The DNS technical community discussed OpenDNS at its start, and several issues with this service were pointed out:

It tries to fix known typos for you, in exchange for redirecting you through a website that subjects you to targeted advertising. Things like this make me cringe, but perhaps some folks might find it useful. In any case, this means that they are not participating in presenting a uniform view of the namespace - one of the design criteria of the DNS. This applies to the feature that intercepts requests for known phishing sites also.

I think it's possible to opt out of the typo/phishing services, but I'm sure they are counting on the vast majority of folks not changing the default.

The web isn't the only application in the world. Although unfortunately many people seem to think so. Optimizing a name resolver service for a specific application is not a good idea.

The typo correction feature will also break a specialized class of applications that needs to know about the non-existence of domain names.

It violates the DNS protocol on some types of responses. This is unlikely to affect typical users, but may be problematic for some.

It's an open recursive nameserver, which means it can most likely be used to launch certain kinds of DoS attacks. The designer of OpenDNS claims to have a variey of countermeasures in place to defend against these attacks. But we don't know really know what they are or whether they actually work.

The "much faster" claims have already been refuted. I'm sure it might be faster in some cases. But the speed of the service depends on where you are and what type of connectivity you have to their nearest DNS server. And on how large your own ISP's nameserver cache is.

I'm omitting a few other more esoteric issues...

Opt-out anti-phishing measures are built into Firefox and IE, and new measures are to be added to Safari 3 (Leopard). Seems like a feature desirable to users that DNS never needed to provide from the start.

How so?

Presumably, Google shares some percentage of advertising revenues with Dell in exchange for being part of a default installation.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:19 AM on May 23, 2007

Flagged as nothing more than a shill for OpenDNS, which as Blazecock Pileon has pointed out isn't all that it's cracked up to be.

The 'net was all over Verisign when they pulled a similar stunt called "Sitefinder."
posted by drstein at 10:22 AM on May 23, 2007

I was prepared to be very angry at this, but I just don't see anything to get worked up about. I mean, I don't know from OpenDNS, but I'm not sure that having a program that redirects typoed and non-existent domain names to ads and search results is upsetting. It's not like linux.com is getting redirected in anyway. That's kinda what I thought was happening, and that'd be bad news, certainly.

I also find it disingenuous to claim that "[...] it’s hard to figure out what it is and is even harder to remove.", then spend a brief amount of time neatly summing up what it is and how to remove it. I also disagree that Google's explanation is an "ambiguous statement". Two bullet points with explicit reasons: typos or keyword searches. Where's the ambiguity in that?

In short, I say to you and to the OpenDNS blogger, No Digg, Gentlemen. No Digg At All.
posted by boo_radley at 10:22 AM on May 23, 2007

This is only one of many problem pieces of software that come loaded on Dell PCs now. It usually takes a good two hours to actually clean one up to usable condition. Here's my usual process:

When Google Toolbar first starts, click the button or link to Disagree to the terms of service. This automatically causes the toolbar and desktop software to be uninstalled.

Then, remove URL Assistant and Search Assistant from Add/Remove.

Additionally, remove all trial software. If you get a PC for a business, and specifically ask your representative to have as much trialware removed at the factory, you still have a couple of trial software items to uninstall. If you get a home PC, god help you.

Disable the Themes service.

Set up a new temporary admin user. Log in as that user and turn off Desktop Cleanup wizard, disable Hide Taskbar Icons, set the Performance options in My Computer to more reasonable things (turn everything off except Show Window Contents While Dragging, Show Translucent Selection Rectangle, and Show Drop Shadow on Desktop Icons).

Then, logoff and log back in as another admin. Enable Show Hidden Folders/Files, copy the Default User profile to a backup location, then copy the temporary admin user profile on top of the Default User profile. Make available to the \Everyone user group.

That merely gets the machine into a usable state. After that, I install any other software that actually makes the thing useful.
posted by odinsdream at 10:48 AM on May 23, 2007 [3 favorites]

Free computer virus finds willing victims
posted by taosbat at 10:53 AM on May 23, 2007

In other news: "Microsoft .. is developing software that could accurately guess your name, age, gender and potentially even your location, by analysing telltale patterns in your web browsing history."
posted by caddis at 10:55 AM on May 23, 2007

meh.

opennic.
posted by dorian at 11:24 AM on May 23, 2007

If you replaced the word Google with Microsoft in the post, I couldn't imagine seeing a single comment in this thread in defense of this.

It would, however, be old news, as I recall IE6 being overly eager to redirect any and all errors to an MSN search page...

I'm somewhat on the fence as to how evil this is (if it really is evil, it is at worst "small e" evil), but OpenDNS is being a bit slimy themselves by demonstrating the results in a resolution that not even Dell customers would use these days (yeah, yeah, Grandad's old P2 still uses 800 x 600, but be realistic here, we are talking mostly about modern machines). A screen shot at higher resolution would not "prove" their point quite as well, I suspect.

The paid "search results" still take up 3/4 of the screen at my laptop's native resolution of 1280x800. Yeah, you could easily scroll and all, but the damn thing looks like an SEO linkfarm.
posted by arto at 12:06 PM on May 23, 2007

Why, why, why do people insist on always sorting out 'good guy' and 'bad guy' in these sorts of things? What Google and Dell are doing here is slimy. OpenDNS is also kinda questionable, but that's not important.

People seem to be insisting that what Google is doing is okay because it's the OpenDNS guys that pointed it out.

It doesn't MATTER who pointed it out, it's still bad.

I swear, if Osama bin Laden said it was bad to arrest people without warrants, hold them without trial, and execute them for not being Christian, some folks here would immediately start arguing that we should be doing those things right away.
posted by Malor at 12:58 PM on May 23, 2007

FACT: that app lowers the cost of the PC it is installed on.

How so?

Presumably, Google shares some percentage of advertising revenues with Dell in exchange for being part of a default installation.

As far as I know, pre-loaded apps are on a pay-per-install basis. That can range from $1 - 30+ according to some of the figures I have heard from employees of major computer manufacturers.
posted by Dark Messiah at 12:59 PM on May 23, 2007

Life without Google
posted by caddis at 2:22 PM on May 23, 2007

It's hard to figure out the blind love people have for certain corporations. (Shakes head)

I think this is slimy (and would also never use openDNS). I don't use Google to search for "her first ass to mouth" because I don't feel like explaining that to a judge in our brave new regime--Google has shown itself to be very willing to blow any government or government agency as long as they can keep pulling in huge profits (buying private jets filled with beanie babies or whatever it is they do with their piles of cash).

I use Google but have no illusions about the "do no evil" bullshit.
posted by maxwelton at 2:40 PM on May 23, 2007

It's hard to figure out the blind love people have for certain corporations.

It's not dissimilar from the blind hatred people have for others. It's basically cultish/tribal, my team is better than yours behavior. Clearly, Google has done some excellent things and a few shitty things, and so long as they are motivated by net income and shareholder value and not the greater good of all mankind, they will continue to do so. Same goes for Microsoft, though admittedly the balance tips significantly the other way for them.

As for OpenDNS, I didn't know much about them, and I had naïvely assumed they, based on their name (big mistake) that they were members of the open source community, and didn't have a bias other than to promote and protect open source solutions and to keep source code free and readily available. I apologize for my shoddy research, I'll know better next time; I promise.
posted by psmealey at 2:51 PM on May 23, 2007

To sum it up:
Google. Don't Be Evil. Just Naughty.
posted by wendell at 3:19 PM on May 23, 2007

So I just got a Dell, and yep, it has this redirector on it. Looking in Add/Remove Programs, I see nothing about an "address redirector" or Google AFE. So I removed the google toolbar, the SearchAssist and URL Assist apps (shoulda done that by now anyway) and I'm good to go. No more redirecting, just shitty IE 500 pages.

But then I read me the Life without google article, and I see this.

Off to de-crapify the rest of my new laptop now...
posted by disclaimer at 3:19 PM on May 23, 2007

And the Most Stupid Blog Paragraph of the Year Award goes to...

Wow. Are you kidding me? In order for a user to get rid of this brokenness the person has to remove a piece of software called “Browser Address Error Redirector?” That barely makes sense to techies and it makes no sense to normal people. Would your Mom uninstall something with a name like that? I don’t think so.

Congratulations.
posted by reklaw at 3:40 PM on May 23, 2007

OpenDNS, on the briefest of investigations, seems far far worse than this Google thing. Presumably they're jealous because Dell won't let them install their malware on a bajillion computers. Calling it "OpenDNS" is just deceptive, too - makes them sound like one of the good guys, when they just ain't.
posted by reklaw at 3:51 PM on May 23, 2007

> It usually takes a good two hours to actually clean one up to usable condition. Here's my usual process:

Hmmm. Last time I had to set up a new Dell I started with this really neeto malware remover called fdisk. Like a chom, it voiks.
posted by jfuller at 4:34 PM on May 23, 2007 [1 favorite]

jfuller writes "Hmmm. Last time I had to set up a new Dell I started with this really neeto malware remover called fdisk. Like a chom, it voiks."

Problem with that is that the restore disk, or partition, is usually a ghosted install with the crap already there. You often have to buy a retail copy of Windows if you really want to do a clean install, as you rarely get the OEM Windows disk by itself. Some OEMs don't add the crap, though, like Acer. And although Vista does appear at first glance to be more secure (in a completely annoying way), the OEM installs are still piled high with garbage.
posted by krinklyfig at 6:37 PM on May 23, 2007

Just to be clear about Open DNS, quonsar was really nice in describing them, exceedingly nice if you know quonsar's style. Still, this act of Google is just not right. I think they are startin to drool.
posted by caddis at 7:10 PM on May 23, 2007

It looks like ass, and is only marginally (at best) useful, although on my 1400x1050 laptop I can indeed see the "real" results below the sponsored links.

That said, I really don't care whether or not Dell does such things. I do have a problem with Cox "testing" the feature of breaking their DNS to never return NXDOMAIN for an A record, even though they do provide alternate servers, which one then has to manually configure should one want to avoid the so-called DNS servers.

FWIW, Lenovo's factory restore feature allows the user to pick and choose which preloaded software to install, so you don't have to take Norton AntiVirus, Picasa, the Google Toolbar, or whatever other crap you don't want. The sad thing is that it still takes an hour or two for the system to reinstall itself...

And I just have to say it:

Metafilter: fucking Internet Explorer
posted by wierdo at 7:39 PM on May 23, 2007

> It usually takes a good two hours to actually clean one up to usable condition. Here's my usual process

My XPS 710 required me to opt out of the Google Toolbar and uninstall McAfee's rookit, errr, security suite. Done. I formatted it, and created my own image backup so their built-in image restore didn't return the unwanted McAfee (yes, I hate their stuff that much; there's a reason someone had to invent McRem...)

If you're buying the non-premium brand, then expect to uninstall a few things. If that really bothers you, then drop the extra cash for the higher-end line of systems and spare yourself the effort of opening Add / Remove Programs. Everything on your Dell comes with an uninstaller.
posted by Dark Messiah at 7:39 PM on May 23, 2007

I enjoy the argument OpenDNS is making: "Google redirects people to an ad-filled page when they make a typo. Thus, they are evil. Oh, and we do that too."

Regarding the 800x600: yeah, that sounds dumb, but I just tried it out on my laptop (1024x768), and it turns out the same: thanks to the screen space taken by the Start bar at the bottom of the screen, the Firefox title bar, the Firefox "File/Edit/View..." bar, the Firefox icons (small size), the Bookmark bar, and the tab bar, the actual browser viewing space is 1006x590, which is small enough that only the Sponsored Results show up.

Then again, this apparently only works in IE, so maybe that's not an issue (dunno, haven't downloaded the new tab-supporting IE)
posted by bugbread at 7:47 PM on May 23, 2007

I think Google's plan is to provide the ultimate convenience data link. They own smoking amounts of dark fiber and have mastered every aspect of maximizing network speed and capacity in their distributed data centres.

The carrot they dangle is going to be really bitchin'. Integrated data life: your camera, phone, web, twitter, entirefuckinglife shared and operated through Google's services, and financially inexpensive.

The cost? They're going to develop one helluva psychological profile of you, and send you their most effective advertising. They're gonna close the loop.
posted by five fresh fish at 8:26 PM on May 23, 2007

Is this anywhere near as evil as Google (along with their brethren at Yahoo, Cisco and Microsoft) bowing at the feet of Chinese censors and essentially crippling their own product in the service of totalitarianism? Me no think so.

Actually Google is by far the un-evilest of these corporations in their dealings with China. All Google does is put filters on google.cn, whose servers are based in China. They only do this because it's the law in China, and they couldn't of had any servers in there if they hadn't complied. Searches through google.com made in China are the same as they are anywhere else, except they go through Chinese government filters which will block Google for a short amount of time if your search for the wrong thing. Compared to the other companies, (Cisco and Yahoo probably being the worst), who actively cooperate with government in censoring their citizens and jailing dissidents, Google come out looking quite good.

Google as a corporation is remarkably unevil. I really don't understand the whole "life without Google" thing. If you don't want them tracking your Internet use, don't install the toolbar and use ad blocking software, there is no reason not to use their search feature. Google was the only company that challenged the Justice dept. request for data in court, I'd trust them way more than Yahoo.
posted by afu at 12:47 AM on May 24, 2007 [1 favorite]

The cost? They're going to develop one helluva psychological profile of you, and send you their most effective advertising. They're gonna close the loop.
Which is no cost at all, really. If you have to see advertising (and there is no way on earth to avoid it completely), surely it's better that it is advertising that just may actually be of interest to you? I couldn't care less if advertising is targeted or completely random - it's all just noise and that which doesn't get removed by adblock gets ignored by the filter in my brain.
posted by dg at 3:29 AM on May 24, 2007

I enjoy the argument OpenDNS is making: "Google redirects people to an ad-filled page when they make a typo. Thus, they are evil. Oh, and we do that too."

... Except you opt-in to OpenDNS, whereas the Google trick is default on any new computer you buy from Dell and, unless you're computer-savvy, hard to get rid of.
posted by humblepigeon at 8:09 AM on May 24, 2007

afu : "I really don't understand the whole 'life without Google' thing. If you don't want them tracking your Internet use, don't install the toolbar and use ad blocking software, there is no reason not to use their search feature."

Yeah, I'm not really clear on it either: are we talking tracking via gmail account? Cookies? IP address? If it's the gmail/other account, don't make an account. If it's cookies, just reject cookies from google. If it's IP address, then, admittedly, it's harder to avoid without jumping through hoops like using proxies/etc., but on the other hand, unless you have a fixed IP address (unlikely), they're not so much getting highly detailed information about you, but highly detailed information about a being who is an amalgam of the people who work in your department, or live in your neighborhood. "Somebody on this street likes chocolate, hates chocolate, is a pedophile, and hates pedophiles."
posted by bugbread at 3:39 PM on May 24, 2007

My DSL's IP address is "dynamic" in so far as it might change if I power-down the modem long enough for the previous number to be reassigned to someone else... who, I suppose, must be doing much the same as I.

In other words, 'close enough to static to know it was me.'

I have absolutely no doubt Google is IP tracking me, especially as I've blacklisted their domain wrt cookies.
posted by five fresh fish at 8:05 PM on May 24, 2007

Ok, that makes sense. I guess my mind is still in the old days of dialup when it comes to IP reassignment, when in reality I've got a permanently connected fiber to the home, and thus a semi-permanent IP address. Must update mind.
posted by bugbread at 10:02 PM on May 24, 2007

fff:

I really really doubt Google does IP tracking for anything but general geolocation. User tracking is what they have the cookie (and now accounts) for. They're not going to bother implementing stuff to track the %00.001 that block cookies and don't have accounts.

I know that Goolge will be the last megacorp to give up my info to the feds. For this I trust them.
posted by blasdelf at 11:07 PM on May 24, 2007

For this I trust them...

If I be born & living & righteous in the USA...
posted by taosbat at 11:13 PM on May 24, 2007

I really really doubt Google does IP tracking for anything but general geolocation. User tracking is what they have the cookie (and now accounts) for.

I suspect that Google will track by any means possible, including IP. This is because Google is a data monster--it wants to eat all your data, store it, and use it. Google's business is data storage and analyzation. That's what they do. Even if they don't know how to use the data right now, they'll still store it to use it in future. Why wouldn't they?

I know that Goolge will be the last megacorp to give up my info to the feds

Google will roll over if the law demands it, and the US laws covering this matter are being eroded in the name of terrorism and paranoia. America is a sick country right now.
posted by humblepigeon at 1:40 AM on May 25, 2007

humblepigeon writes "Google's business is data storage and analyzation. That's what they do. Even if they don't know how to use the data right now, they'll still store it to use it in future. Why wouldn't they?"

I don't know if they do or don't use IP addy info, but I doubt it, because, as you say, their business is data storage and analysis, but we're talking about a non-trivial amount of information. I'd guess 99% or more of folks using Google don't block their cookies. Logging IP addresses for all requests would be a pretty darn big increase in the amount of log data they're storing, all for a minuscule amount of extra info. Not impossible, but very improbable.
posted by bugbread at 3:16 AM on May 25, 2007

I know that Goolge will be the last megacorp to give up my info to the feds. For this I trust them.

that's funny
posted by caddis at 4:54 AM on May 25, 2007

we're talking about a non-trivial amount of information.

They're Google! They have a lot of money, and resources, and clever people. Like I said, it's Google's business to store data. They won't walk away from the task because it's difficult or expensive, or impractical. Or even impossible.

I would think that Google stores all the personal information about you and me that it possibly can, without actually breaking the law, that is.

You have to pray that the American government doesn't create a law that lets them get at this data. I would say that's extremely likely over the next few years (all it will take is another terrorist atrocity on US soil). Add in intelligent searching routines, and privacy becomes little more than an anachronistic word.
posted by humblepigeon at 5:39 AM on May 25, 2007

I've yawped about this before, most recently here. Backup to my throwaway comment above, for what it's worth.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:57 AM on May 25, 2007

I would think that Google stores all the personal information about you and me that it possibly can, without actually breaking the law, that is.

What law? I doubt there are many that apply to what they do. The legal system hasn't caught up with the technology.
posted by five fresh fish at 8:20 AM on May 25, 2007

humblepigeon writes "They won't walk away from the task because it's difficult or expensive, or impractical. Or even impossible. "

No, but they may walk away from a task if it's unprofitable. I can't see them recouping the additional expense with the additional targeting information obtained from storing all the IP addresses. Advertisers won't care (or even know) about the extremely marginally higher amount of additional demographic information obtained via IP logging. And people who intentionally block google cookies are the kinds of people who also use adblock to block ads, including the sponsored ads on Google results pages (thank you, Adblock Plus: Element Hiding Helper extension). So they'd be spending money to get demographic information for a group of people who are probably the least likely of all internet users to purchase anything from an ad, or even click on an ad, or even see an ad, and whether they exist or not is something that wouldn't affect advertising revenue.

Again, I'm not saying Google isn't doing it. But Google has shown a tendency to either: 1) Make profitable decisions, or 2) Make unprofitable decisions which they believe will in the future become profitable. IP logging doesn't match either, so I'd be surprised if they did it. I wouldn't eat my hat or anything, but I'd be a little surprised.

five fresh fish writes "What law? I doubt there are many that apply to what they do."

Well, for example, they probably don't install keyloggers in tools like the Google toolbar to automatically catch password entry on non-Google pages and send them to the Google server, or grab your credit card number when you type it in at Amazon, or the like.
posted by bugbread at 5:59 PM on May 25, 2007