This site hosted by Free.ProHosting.com
Google

Browser Hijackers Ruining Lives  By Michelle Delio

 

Story location: http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,63391,00.html

02:00 AM May. 11, 2004 PT

 

Browser hijackers are doing more than just changing homepages. They are also

changing some peoples' lives for the worse.

Browser hijackers are malicious programs that change browser settings, usually

altering designated default start and search pages. But some, such as CWS, also

produce pop-up ads for pornography, add dozens of bookmarks -- some for

extremely hard-core pornography websites -- to Internet Explorer's Favorites

folder, and can redirect users to porn websites when they mistype URLs.

Traces of browsed sites can remain on computers, and it's difficult to tell from

those traces whether a user willingly or mistakenly viewed a website. When those

traces connect to borderline-criminal websites, people may have a hard time

believing that their employee or significant other hasn't been spending an awful

lot of time cruising adult sites.

In response to a recent Wired News story about the CWS browser hijacker, famed

for peddling porn, several dozen readers sent e-mails in which they claimed to

have lost or almost lost jobs, relationships and their good reputations when

their computers were found to harbor traces of pornography that they insist were

placed on their computers by a browser hijacker.

In one case a man claims that a browser hijacker sent him to jail after

compromising images of children were found on his work computer by an employer,

who then reported him to law enforcement authorities.

"The police raided my house on Sept. 17, 2002," said "Jack," who came to the

United States from the former Soviet Union as a political refugee, and has

requested that his name not be published. "Nobody gave me a chance to explain. I

was told by judge and prosecutor that I will get years in prison if I go to

trial. After negotiations through my lawyer I got 180 days in an adult

correctional facility. I was imprisoned for 20 days and then released under the

Electronic Home Monitoring scheme. I now have a felony sex-criminal record, and

the court ordered me to register as a predatory sex offender for 10 years."

Jack originally believed that the images found on his computer were from a

previous owner -- he'd bought the machine on an eBay auction. But he now thinks

a browser hijacker may have been responsible.

"When I used search engines, sometimes I got a lot of porn pop-ups," Jack said.

"Sometimes I was sent to illegal porn sites. When I tried to close one, another

five would be opened without my will. They changed my start page, wrote a lot of

illegal porn links in favorites. The only way to stop this was turn the

(computer's) power off. But when I dialed up to my server again, I started with

illegal site, then got the same pop-ups. There were illegal pictures in

pop-ups."

Several of the URLs that CWS injects into Internet Explorer's favorites list

also appear in the arrest warrant and other materials from Jack's hearing. CWS

works as Jack described -- changing start pages, adding to favorites, popping up

porn. But CWS was first spotted several months after Jack's arrest, so it seems

unlikely that this particular hijacker is the cause of his problems.

Security experts who were asked to review Jack's claims said it is possible that

a browser hijacker could have been the reason porn images were found on Jack's

computer. But they also pointed out some discrepancies in the story.

Some of the images were found in unallocated file space, and would have to have

been placed there deliberately since cached images from browsing sessions

wouldn't have been stored in unallocated space.

Brian Rothery, a former IBM systems engineer who has been researching Jack's

claims, pointed out that a significant portion of the images and URLs cited in

the arrest papers are from fairly tame nudist sites, as well as adult sites that

do not contain illegal materials.

He said that however the pornography arrived on Jack's computer, "the evidence

wasn't handled properly, and his lawyer did not do his job."

Jack said he opted not to fight the charge because his lawyer told him he would

probably receive a harsher sentence if he went to trial.

"They are very eager to get conviction," Jack said. "Nobody can fight those

powers. I could hardly stay in jail two weeks. The cell is very small, the food

is very bad. They let prisoners out only every other day for 3 hours. I do not

know how people can stay in prison for years."

If the pornography was placed on Jack's machine by a browser hijacker, he's

suffered far more than most victims of malicious software. Others who blame

browser hijackers for placing porn on their computers have been luckier.

"I was almost fired after some sort of content-monitoring system that my

ex-employer used on the network found several dozen dirty photos on my laptop,"

said Matthew Cortella, a sales representative based in Illinois. "I had no idea

how that stuff got on my machine; I thought it'd been hacked.

"Eventually, thank God, IT found some program on there that they said could have

caused the problem. But for eight days I was sure I'd be fired, and I was

terrified. I have a family to support. Jobs aren't easy to come by these days."

"My wife and I separated for a time because she thought I was looking at porno,"

said Fred McFarlane, a store owner in Georgia. "We are religious people. She

just couldn't be with me after she saw the pictures that were in our computer. I

don't blame her. Even now, I know it's real hard for her to understand it was

the computer that did it, not me."

Telling people that "the computer" is downloading pornography on its own often

provokes smirks and disbelief.

"I have to say it's like insisting the dog ate your homework," said Jeff

Bertram, a systems administrator in New York City. "Are you going to admit that

you downloaded porn to your pissed-off spouse or employer? Or to a judge? Hell

no, your honor, it wasn't me. The browser did it."

Jack said he would like to appeal his conviction, but knows it will be difficult

to convince people that he didn't download the pornography found on his machine.

 

"The police found nothing in my house, you know, not even a Playboy magazine,"

he said. "Only in the computer. But most people do not understand that such a

thing is possible, that the computer could have made this happen. Plus, with

child pornography, people's reaction is only emotions and no thinking."

"I advise Internet users to be very, very careful," Jack added. "Committing a

felony is very easy; it just takes one click."