Zango Inc., formerly known as 180solutions, has been trying for
some time to erase its public image as a
shameless adware pusher.
The most recent example came earlier this month, when Zango
agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission (FTC) charges that it
used unfair and deceptive methods to download adware and obstruct
consumers from removing it. The settlement bars future downloads of
Zango's adware without consumers' consent, requires the company to
let consumers remove the adware, and requires it to relinquish $3
million in ill-gotten gains.
But Ben Edelman, a well-known researcher on a mission to expose
spyware and adware, has posted a detailed analysis in his
blog of how Zango is failing to live up to the
FTC settlement.
"We commend the proposed settlement's core terms," Edelman and
fellow researcher Eric Howes wrote. "But despite these strong
provisions, bad practices continue at Zango -- practices that, in
our judgment, put Zango in violation of the key terms and
requirements of the FTC settlement."
First, the researchers noted the specifics of the FTC
settlement, in which Zango is:
- Prohibited from using "any legacy program to display any
advertisement to, or otherwise communicate with, a consumer's
computer."
- Prohibited from (directly or via third parties) "exploiting" a
security vulnerability ... to download or install onto any computer
any software code, program, or content."
- Prohibited from installing software onto users' computers
without "express consent." Obtaining "express consent" requires
"clearly and prominently disclos[ing] the material terms of such
software program or application prior to the display of, and
separate from, any final end user license agreement."
- Required to "provide a reasonable and effective means for
consumers to uninstall the software or application," through a
computers' Add/Remove utility.
- Required to "clearly and prominently" label each advertisement
it displays.
Despite Zango's claim that it has met those demands, Edelmen and
Howes said they continue to find ongoing installations of Zango's
software "that fall far short of the proposed settlement's burdens,
requirements, and standards."
For example, they wrote, Zango:
- Often announces "material terms" only in its end user license
agreement, not in the more prominent locations required by the
proposed settlement.
- Often omits "material terms" from its prominent installation
disclosures -- failing to prominently disclose facts likely to
affect consumers' decisions to install Zango's software.
- Presents disclosures in a manner and format such that these
disclosures fail to gain the required "express consent" of users
because the disclosures are not "clearly and prominently"
displayed.
- Presents disclosures only after the installation and execution
of Zango's software on the users' computers has already occurred,
contrary to the terms of the proposed settlement.
- Has software that continues to become installed with no
disclosure whatsoever.
- Allows older versions of Zango's software -- versions with
installation, uninstallation, and/or disclosure inconsistent with
the proposed settlement -- to keep being installed and to
communicate with Zango servers.
- Has installs that are still known to be promoted and performed
in or through a variety of miscellaneous practices that can only be
characterized as deceptive.
- Distributes advertisements that lack the labeling required by
the proposed settlement.
"These improper practices remain remarkably easy to find, and we
have numerous additional recent examples on file," the researchers
wrote. "Moreover, these problems are sufficiently serious that they
cast doubt on the efficacy and viability of the FTC's proposed
settlement as well as Zango's ability to meet the requirements of
the settlement."
The blog entry continues with a series of very specific examples
of the violations.
Zango defended its compliance efforts in its own
blog.
"Several researchers released information this week pertaining
to our settlement agreement announced earlier this month with the
FTC," Zango said. "We are committed to meeting and exceeding our
obligations, take concerns relating to the FTC consent order very
seriously and welcome any and all input about our business
practices and the protection of consumers."
The statement doesn't directly address the specific violations
Edelmen and Howes outlined, however.
A look around the blogosphere shows little surprise that Zango
may be shirking its responsibilities.
The
Security Garden blog called on the FTC to
look at Zango's practices, not words, and "come down hard on
them and other creators of advertising software."
The Techdirt blog called the researchers' findings
a laundry list of what you'd expect from a company like Zango.
"It's bad news for Internet users and a major slap in the face
to the FTC, which sees its agreements flouted so blatantly as it
struggles to come up with a workable model of regulating online
activity," Techdirt said.