avast! Privacy Policy explanation

EULAs should be written by simple people to simple people. Then again, simple people wouldn't come up with 1/3 of it.

 

In all fairness to Avast, we went down this road 2 years ago with another vendor.

The reality is you could do this with about all EULAs.

 

Didn't Shakespeare say something about "kill all the lawyers".

 

I just glanced over the highlighted parts but I really don't see anything wrong with any that is written.

Can someone point out whats the big deal with all of this, it all seems normal to me for a cloud product.

 

Ibrad,

First time out of the box for Cloud Avast and some questions about the version 7 EULA. So awaiting clarification from someone from Avast as the EULA language was imprecise and the question of the moment was how was personal information being handled.... is it anonymous, aggregated or not.

 

I think all of the things in the list would apply to avast 6 too. At least if you enable the avast community, WebRep, and spam filtering.

 

Re: avast! 7.0 released!

TheWindBringeth,

The EULA I have quoted from accurately is the EULA for version 7 that came with the installer. If you wish, I can post the entire thing here verbatim. As for version 6, that too is the same EULA that came with the program. Downloaded from FileHippo on 2/26/2012. I can post that one here also.

This from properties:

File Version 6.0.1367.0
Internal Name avast.setup
Product Name AVAST Software Security
Product Version 6.0.1367.0

 

Re: avast! 7.0 released!

Hey nord1,

I would very much like to see what you are talking about, and appreciate your offer. Thank you! Since I may not know what they look like and how large they are, I'll leave the method up to you. Here, PM, pastebin, whatever you think is best. I'd just like to be sure I know what I'm looking at. Would these be EULA's displayed to you by the installer, are they the files that were installed by the installer, or are they both? If you followed what I said earlier, I'm seeing somewhat confusing behavior and I'm wondering if what you see/get might in someway be dependent on what you already have <shrug>.

 

None enabled on my machine, but in any event, until the dust settles, I'm back to Avast 6.

 

You are just plain overparanoid. Nothing else. If you think avast! Software is such evil, why do you then use avast! 6 ? If any company has any kind of evil intents, they'll do it with all their products, not just 1 out of 7 versions... I still just can't get it why you are making such big deal out of avast! alone. Are you complicating around every single thing in life this much?

 

This is name calling, has nothing to do with the topic, and is a violation of the TOS. (Not to mention that is has nothing to do with being paranoid -- it has to do with being intelligent, and being able to actually read and comprehend what one is reading.)

1. There has been a change in v 7, plain and simple. Just because v 6 was fine does not mean that v 7 is also fine.

2. Companies go through changes all the time. Maybe avast needs or wants more money and has changed their privacy policy as a result. Who knows? But regardless of their intent, there is a difference between 6 and 7, and it's worth discussing. That's why companies publish their EULAs in the first place -- to allow end users to decide if they agree with the EULAs or not.

3. You're the one who started this thread, and now you're complaining about people posting in it? Are you serious?

Your false characterizations and over generalizations continue. This thread is only about one product, not "every single thing in life". And again...YOU are the one who started this thread. Can you only deal with people posting in it who agree with you?

 

And slandering one product without a SINGLE proof is not against TOS? C'mon, who are you kidding? When you'll get some proof that they are abusing our privacy, then please speak up all you want and i'll never object you. Until then, don't make some crazy conspiracy theories coz you're not helping anyone. Not avast! as a company and not any users who might consider avast! as an option or who already use it. Vlk explained it, i have explained it like freakin billion times and you're still grinding the same thing over and over and over.

 

Normally something not to recommend especially for a security tool that is supposed to be your first line of defense. No matter what security software you use, if you cannot keep it updated or with advance security features turned ON then better to move to something else that you can trust and that you use at full capacity.

 

Well, he apparently prefers malware that has been proven to invade privacy many times, over avast! which hasn't been ever proven to invade anyones privacy. Weird, isn't it?

 

The v 6 virus definitions continue to be updated. And the so-called improved "features" of v 7 have yet to be proven significantly effective beyond that which was being provided by v 6. So there's really no significant drop off in using v 6. (But I do agree that if/when you're not happy using a product, it makes more sense to switch to a product you are happy with.)

 

Pointing out the discrepancies between the two EULAs is hardly slander. Neither is pointing out the problems with the new release. And your "explanations" do nothing to resolve the discrepancies -- that's why the issue is being discussed in the thread that you yourself started.

 

Nord1,

FWIW, I had the opportunity to check two other machines with avast 6 free version installed (making three total). All of them have a EULA_Avast_Free.txt file in the License subfolder of the install directory. That file is identical on them all and it contains the same 8. through 8.9 list posted by RejZoR. I haven't yet had a chance to check other versions of avast 6.

Edit: All three were 6.0.1367 with latest engine/definitions

 

Normal for cloud products.

But can you opt-out of the cloud ?

It's possible with Kaspersky and Avira. Hence these issues don't necessarily apply to these products.

 

What discrepancies? Where do you see them? Discrepancy would be if avast! would indeed query user files in the cloud but that wouldn't be mentioned in EULA at all. Where at the moment, it does that as a function and is also mentioned in the EULA. And same goes for all features. In fact some are overdone and say they do more in EULA than they actually do inside the program. I'm not a lawyer but my logic would be it's better to write more on a "sheet of paper" than actually do more than you say you're doing. It's how companies protect themself from getting sued for crazy reasons. Because no one can sue you for saying more than you actually do (in this particular case). But they would if you wouldn't mention it at all. So if they say they may share the technical data with 3rd parties this can mean they might share the infection data with other antivirus companies in order to efficiently keep malware at bay (example). But that also doesn't mean that they always have to do it. They MIGHT in very specific situations. But because they MIGHT do that, they have to mention it in the EULA. Even if they never actually do it later.

 

I think he meant differences. Personally, I think this is all to do about nothing. If we needed to explore M$ and every other security software and non security software that record data, I think we would all be surprised!

Ice

 

And yet there were no issues with v 6, which is still available. So to say it's not an issue is false, as far as I'm concerned. Anyone who finds an issue with v 7's EULA can use v 6, with full updates, and without any Chrome installation or EULA issues. Or simply choose to use another product. I for one am grateful to the posters who took the time to actually read both of the EULAs and post about them. After all...this IS a security forum, isn't it?

 

Most people don't have formal training or extensive experience in the field of information security. They tend to view things only from their own personal perspective. Which is to say, if they aren't personally concerned about the issues involved they feel others shouldn't be either.

 

It has been what, 3 days and after all the convincing, explanations from me, other users and the actual avast! staff and you still keep on going about it like a small child who+'s repeating the same questions over and over again and ignoring anything others say to you.
What i think is that it has nothing to do with EULA anymore. In your very case it's something you just apparently don't like about avast! and you keep on dragging it around for whatever reason. Out of 150 million users, you seem to be the only one to know it better. Do you think out of 150 million users, there isn't a single lawyer, security expert, IT journalist, privacy expert or some other IT expert that just might question avast!'s credentials? If something fishy was going on (which it doesn't!), someone would make a public note about it in 30 years of avast!'s existence.
And if my memory serves me well, no one has ever done that. Now how's that possible? Hm hm? I don't have anything against others opinions or even things being questionable, but this is getting plain ridiculous. Do you seriously think they'd throw 30 years of trust and achievements away because they are in your opinion doing something indecent? C'mon, be realistic. They have absolutely no motive to abuse users privacy. avast! is their product which they also sell. They don't work with advertisement like Google or Facebook does and as such there is no need to harvest private user data. What they do harvest is information regarding malware and its trends. Because they don't want to stay in stone age, they want to keep up with the malware as fast as possible. Now, most of normal users seem to understand the benefits of that (not getting infected and your actual private data stolen by the malware for example). Just not you.

Do us all a favor, uninstall avast! and just forget about it. Like it never existed for you. Don't even mention it to anyone. If anyone asks an opinion about it, just play it dumb and ignore they even asked a question. Because i don't see any need to spread your misinformation around...

 

again ..... this is all to do about nothing. It will come to pass.
Ice

 

I really do not see anything here at all that's any different from not only cloud-based services, but from most security vendors period. There was mention of their law firm writing this stuff up, and it hit the nail on the head in regards as to why these EULAs are written so "scary". Lawyers will write anything and everything into these things if they think it'll protect their clients, and of course themselves.

There's nothing here to be paranoid over, and nothing here to defend to the death either. Of course it can also be said that if you don't like it, don't use the product.