- Mar 15, 2011
- 13,070
Well I'm not surprise if that incident may happen way back before; but the privacy policy should meet the declare jurisdiction since people gain trust from the services.
I think you got it wrong.
MalwareTips is not a Malwarebytes forum.
What do you mean?
Malwarebytes Anti-Malware is a product owned by Malwarebytes, it isn't the only product out there which will attempt to protect the user from unsafe websites. However, WOT (Web Of Trust) is a service to help guide the user on if the website being viewed/about to be viewed is safe or not based on the user reviews/reputation. In fact, you could use both WOT and Malwarebytes Anti-Malware (paid - with the real-time web blocking) at the same time without any conflicts (although after this incident I would steer clear from WOT personally, but I just said this as an example).
If I misunderstood what you meant please let me know and re-explain
No need to be embarrassed.Well that explains a great deal! I feel like such a doofus.
Here I thought Malwarebytes had just the BEST forum ever.
I'll just dematerialize now....
Thanks to those who answered me.
It's disabled by default in the latest beta.I briefly used WOT long time ago, but never really trusted the WOT to be accurate and protectful. I wonder if Adguard will change its use of WOT to some other service or completely remove it.
We take our obligations to our users very seriously. It always has been, and remains, our intention to inform our users, clearly and accurately, as to what data we collect from them and how it is used. We never intend to collect or share data which can be used to identify our users, and we have developed extensive data cleansing techniques to ensure our users remain anonymous.
After a review of some of the information recently reported and a thorough investigation of facts and circumstances, we now believe that our data cleaning techniques may not have been sufficient to fully anonymize the browsing data WoT users shared with us. While we deployed great effort to remove any data that could be used to identify individual users, it appears that in some cases such identification remained possible, albeit for what may be a very small number of WoT users. Of course, if the data allows the identification of even a small number of WoT users, we consider that unacceptable, and we will be taking immediate measures to address this matter urgently as part of a full security assessment and review.
We hope to earn back the trust of the community by implementing a set of measures which will ensure that those who prefer not to share their data can easily choose to keep their data private while still participating in the WOT community.
Regarding the relaunch of WoT – we received a notice from the Mozilla store that they were removing our add-on from the store pending answers to certain questions. We decided to remove WoT from the other platforms at our own initiative so that we could have the time to study the feedback we have been receiving and to make appropriate changes.
We are now preparing to relaunch an updated version of WoT which will include the appropriate measures to regain the trust of our users.
Hahaha, funny sentence, I laughed... They really think most people will believe the part I underlined ?This is the latest message released by WOT to TheRegister.co.uk
We now believe that our data cleaning techniques may not have been sufficient to fully anonymize the browsing data WoT users shared with us. While we deployed great effort to remove any data that could be used to identify individual users, it appears that in some cases such identification remained possible, albeit for what may be a very small number of WoT users. Of course, if the data allows the identification of even a small number of WoT users, we consider that unacceptable, and we will be taking immediate measures to address this matter urgently as part of a full security assessment and review.
So it will be back on Chrome/Firefox when they change their underlying code.