Time to boycott JAVA?

[Petef56]

With all the recent concern about JAVA security issues, and the endless updates that include useless software of other vendors, it might be time to begin a JAVA BOYCOTT.

As PC techs, perhaps we should begin a campaign of permanently removing JAVA from all our customer's computers and advising them to quit using any service or app that requires JAVA, making it known that, as consumers, we no longer support anything that requires JAVA.

JAVA deserves go extinct due to it's endless security flaws, it's need for constant updates, and for having the audacity to piggyback other vendor's crappy useless software onto the update process.

If we can successfully eliminate JAVA it would send a strong message to the entire software developer community that we demand security and we won't tolerate unethical or deceptive marketing practices.


It all starts here... LIKE this if you agree.
.

[rjfvillarosa]

I am very interested to see other peoples opinions on this.
ForceFlow. what are your thoughts on this?

[Petef56]

Originally Posted by rjfvillarosa I am very interested to see other peoples opinions on this. ForceFlow. what are your thoughts on this?

rjfvillarosa, I have a lot of respect for your opinion. In fact, it was your post in the other JAVA thread that inspired me to post this today.

So what's your opinion?

---pete---

[EzyStvy]

Pete - did you write this thread with a browser You developed on an OS you developed

Does anyone know anyone that has been directly affected by the security issues

Does anyone think the developers created the flaws on purpose

I'm in my fifteenth year of doing tech support for software companies. Hardly a month goes by that we don't find a bug that's been around for a while. Sometimes its amazing some of the things we find... Can't help but wonder why our clients don't notice them... Even simple type-o's on reports that have been viewed thousands of times go unreported...

As a tech community, it'd make more sense to me if we installed the latest patched version of JAVA to test it and reported any flaws we found

[jdeb]

Boycott it? I wouldn't. There's quite a few places on the web where it's employed, rather seamlessly most times. A lot of my customers that have it disabled are finding out they use it more than they realize. Additionally, Java is a program language that supports multiple platforms and saves a great deal of time in the programming process. At the end of the day, one door may close and another will be opened. I just remind customers on the importance of keeping it updated.

Why an outdated Java Plugin is so serious | Mozilla Security Blog

[Force Flow]

The Java browser plugin has *always* been insecure. It's foolish to think otherwise. The media simply glommed onto this all of a sudden for some reason, when in fact, this is nothing new.

Java used in too many places (especially in a a business environment) to simply drop. All you can do is make sure it's kept up-to-date and that you have adequate antivirus and anti-malware protection in place.

But, you're perfectly free to stop using on your own accord. There's obviously nothing preventing you from doing that. Most home users probably wouldn't even notice it was missing if it were disabled in the browser or uninstalled completely.

If we can successfully eliminate JAVA it would send a strong message to the entire software developer community that we demand security and we won't tolerate unethical or deceptive marketing practices.

Joining a boycott movement over this is kind of silly. If you use the same logic about unethical or deceptive practices, maybe it's time to boycott Apple. Or Microsoft. Or half a dozen other companies.

In any case, Oracle is in charge of Java, not the software development community. Oracle has always done its own thing (unfortunately), which has been leading to its decline over the past few years.

[rjfvillarosa]

Originally Posted by Petef56 So what's your opinion?

To be honest Pete my opinion is exactly what I have quoted from Force. The security flaws in Java really irritate me, but unfortunately it's one of those little devils that we can't really be without. I really wish there was an alternative, Java is starting to annoy me almost as much as Adobe software.

Originally Posted by Force Flow Java used in too many places (especially in a a business environment) to simply drop. All you can do is make sure it's kept up-to-date and that you have adequate antivirus and anti-malware protection in place.

Originally Posted by EzyStvy Does anyone know anyone that has been directly affected by the security issues

Unfortunately Steve every infected machine I have seen so far this week has had Java exploits. They came up with one fix this week that apparently is not enough, lets hope they come up with another soon.

[quartet-man]

What software did you use to see they were Java exploits?

[rjfvillarosa]

MSE and Malwarebytes both reported Java exploits that were allowing a trojan infection.

[usnavyretired]

You could say the same thing about Flash, seems like a weekly update for some security issue, HTML5 is chugging along but what can one do. I guess the only safe computer is one that's unplugged from the power grid and no battery.

[David M]

Boycotts never work and Java is never 100% secure. What a dilemma.

What would substitute for Java? I don't drink tea.

[Petef56]

Everone,
Thank you all for your comments and opinions. Everyone seems to agree that JAVA poses a security risk, but to what degree? There also seems to be conflicting opinions regarding whether most people can simply remove JAVA from their computer.

===============
Allow me to quote 2 excerpts from 2 different articles...

Security Experts: Java Should Be Disabled Unless Necessary - Dark Reading

Excerpt...
"As it happens, very few websites rely on Java for dynamic content," says Tod Beardsley, Metasploit engineering manager at Rapid7. "Java isn't relied on nearly as much as Javascript and Flash. Most people can disable their Java browser plug-in and not really notice the difference.


Java security update - Chicago Tribune

Excerpt...
Java was responsible for 50 percent of all cyber attacks last year in which hackers broke into computers by exploiting software bugs, according to Kaspersky Lab.

================

Ok everyone, so at least according to these sources above, most people don't need JAVA for browsing and disabling JAVA in the browser will reduce a person's risk of ALL CYBER ATTACKS by 50%. FIFTY PERCENT!!! That's a huge improvement.

I can't find the other article I read recently, but it basically said that JAVA is becoming obsolete for use on websites.

In summary, it seems the best overall solution is to run 2 browsers; one with JAVA disabled, and one with JAVA enabled. Then use the "JAVA disabled" browser for all but when JAVA is needed.

As for a boycott, I was just testing the waters here and I see now there is no support for that. Too bad. Too bad that most people here don't see that JAVA selling out to companies like ASK or McAfee to piggyback their software onto the JAVA updates is an unethical practice worth boycotting.

---pete---

[Petef56]

Originally Posted by usnavyretired You could say the same thing about Flash, seems like a weekly update for some security issue, HTML5 is chugging along but what can one do. I guess the only safe computer is one that's unplugged from the power grid and no battery.

That's right, Adobe is almost as bad as JAVA for ongoing security issues and piggybacking other vendors software in an unethical manner that tricks most people into installing software they don't need or want.

JAVA just happens to be the better target to go after for a boycott because most people don't need it anyway. Who's going to boycott Adobe??? Answer: NOBODY.

To anyone who thinks boycotts are a waste of time, it took me all of 2 minutes to find this site below that lists many major successful boycotts. I'm sure I could find more. It's just sad how people are unwilling to stand up for something anymore. We have the ability to cause change but most people have lost their ability to buck the system.
Successful Consumer Boycotts: Ethical Consumer

---pete---

[Petef56]

Originally Posted by Force Flow Joining a boycott movement over this is kind of silly. If you use the same logic about unethical or deceptive practices, maybe it's time to boycott Apple. Or Microsoft. Or half a dozen other companies.

I'm shocked!!! This kind of statement coming from someone who presents himself as "Superman", a character representing.. truth, justice and the American way. LOL Come on Superman, you taught me better than that.

The reason you go after JAVA is that it's feasible to get people to boycott something they hardly need anyway. Who's going join a boycott against some Apple or Microsoft??? Answer: NOBODY

---pete---

[Nuclear Krusader]

Try it. Start removing it from customers' computers. Whenever they hit a site that requires it and offers the download they will just click, click, click and install it again— along with all the bundled junk.

Better if you install it and make sure the bundled garbage is never installed.

[Force Flow]

Originally Posted by Petef56 I'm shocked!!! This kind of statement coming from someone who presents himself as "Superman", a character representing.. truth, justice and the American way. LOL Come on Superman, you taught me better than that. The reason you go after JAVA is that it's feasible to get people to boycott something they hardly need anyway. Who's going join a boycott against some Apple or Microsoft??? Answer: NOBODY

Pfft, who needs those silly iPods and iPhones made from Chinese child labor. Let's start a boycott.

Remember, you don't actually pay anything for Java. You're perfectly free to use it or free not to. Using it or not using it isn't going to have much of an effect as far as Oracle is concerned, as there isn't an impact on their bottom line.

Originally Posted by Petef56 JAVA just happens to be the better target to go after for a boycott because most people don't need it anyway. Who's going to boycott Adobe??? Answer: NOBODY.

Keep in mind that flash is slowly being phased out by HTML5. The main reason flash got so popular was that it provided an easy way to play media files. Since HTML5 can fulfill that need on its own now without an extra plugin, flash isn't necessary. Flash isn't even supported on newer smart phones and tablets any more.

[glc]

piggybacking other vendors software in an unethical manner

Excuse me? NOTHING is free, someone has to pay the bills. Even highly recommended "free" utilities such as CCleaner come bundled with something. It's only unethical if you can't opt out or easily uninstall the excess baggage.

[David M]

I just deleted Java off of mine and my wife's computers. It will be interesting to see just how easy or difficult it is to live without it.

[Nuclear Krusader]

Originally Posted by glc Excuse me? NOTHING is free, someone has to pay the bills. Even highly recommended "free" utilities such as CCleaner come bundled with something. It's only unethical if you can't opt out or easily uninstall the excess baggage.

Agree 100%. It's the culture of the free that has gotten us into so many troubles. People who want everything for free have no face to be accusing companies, big or small, of greed.

[David M]

In the digital age it is easy to copy something and then for many to think that if something physical was not copied then it is not stealing. It is stealing because it is an opportunity cost to the creator of the content. Basically, that future income will never be realized because the product was stolen. It is the loss of income that a creator never sees.

It is real alright.

Economics: Opportunity Costs, Explicit Costs and Implicit costs

Opportunity cost - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Petef56]

Originally Posted by glc Excuse me? NOTHING is free, someone has to pay the bills. Even highly recommended "free" utilities such as CCleaner come bundled with something. It's only unethical if you can't opt out or easily uninstall the excess baggage.

Having an option is reasonable, but to my way of thinking, if it tricks people into installing it then it's unethical. In the real world, with most people I deal with (customers), a very high percentage of people get tricked into installing the software piggybacked with JAVA.

So there's nothing wrong with offering something as an opt-in option, but if you have to resort to trickery get the optional software installed, I consider that unethical.

I'm absolutely amazed how you are defending these actions by JAVA.
Is that how you treat people? Somehow I don't think so.

---pete---

[Jbc223456]

Last time I checked, there is specifically one whole section of the Java downloader that explicitly asks if one would like to install the "piggybacked" software. I just updated my Java, and there was even a banner at the top that explicitly said "McAfee." It's not vague, and it's not ambiguous. They don't have it hidden in their terms of use or anything of that nature to hide it from the user. And they give the option right in the middle of the page to uncheck the box to not install that software.

I honestly don't see it as being tricked. Perhaps the customers you are dealing with are just clicking the little "Next" button without actually reading what is on the installation dialogues.

[Petef56]

Originally Posted by David M I just deleted Java off of mine and my wife's computers. It will be interesting to see just how easy or difficult it is to live without it.

David, that's what I'm doing here too. I'm also removing JAVA on a couple of my customer's computers in order to study the effects. If we can eliminate JAVA it will dramatically improve the computer's security. To me security is a higher priority than having 100% of all websites operating.

I post my finding here or in a new thread.

---pete---

[Petef56]

Originally Posted by Jbc223456 I honestly don't see it as being tricked. Perhaps the customers you are dealing with are just clicking the little "Next" button without actually reading what is on the installation dialogues.

Bottom line, if the people don't want it and it winds up on their computer, they got tricked. It's probably their own fault for not reading all the information on the screen, but that's not the point. JAVA knows exactly what they are doing by forcing the person to UNCHECK the box in order to opt out.

The honest way is to have people take action to opt-in.
I can't believe I'm having to explain this. Is this what
our society has come to. No one has any sense of
fair practice and honesty anymore?

I see it time and time again, it's the elderly and the
young kids that don't know any better that get tricked
by these deceptive marketing strategies. That's who
I 'm mostly trying to protect.

---pete---

[Jbc223456]

How young is a young kid? I'm quite young, but I don't see myself getting deceived by it. And if I can recall, Java (or Oracle) has had that checkbox for other software to install for quite some time. Why is it only relevant now?

So you're saying I'm getting tricked by Microsoft every time I buy and install a new version of Windows? Because honestly, I would love it if I could just get a clean install of Windows, without having all those stupid links to internet games and games like freecell, solitaire, etc. Just give me the operating system and nothing else. But you don't see me boycotting Microsoft.

[glc]

Pete, in my opinion you are being very unreasonable. You are entitled to your opinion but in MY opinion you are making a mountain out of a molehill.

Look at it this way - nothing I've ever seen coming in with a legitimate download will HARM a person's computer, it's only an annoyance.

[Petef56]

Originally Posted by glc Pete, in my opinion you are being very unreasonable. You are entitled to your opinion but in MY opinion you are making a mountain out of a molehill. Look at it this way - nothing I've ever seen coming in with a legitimate download will HARM a person's computer, it's only an annoyance.

Where in this thread did I say any harm to a computer?
You are putting words in my mouth in an attempt to win
your point. That's how weak your argument is.

What I said is that people wind up with software on their
computers that they don't want or need. All because they
don't realize they need to UNCHECK a tiny checkbox.

Answer me this question, why doesn't JAVA simply perform
the update offering the piggybacked software by having the
person opt-in by checking the box? This would be the ethical
method to use. I can't believe I have to point this out.


---pete---

[rwest]

Pete it's not unethical. It's comes down to marketing tactics. I don't like it either, but when you look at it from the other side, it's just a business move.

How many people will say that they 'don't want' or 'want' somethng if they've never tried it?

Yes, the little box to uncheck is overlooked by many downloaders that want the originally offered software, but not the additional software. But it is not hidden from view, it is just already preselected. Why?; because the softeare company wants us to try it. And they (the software company) has a better chance of it being tried if it gets installled even if it was done by someone overlooking the little check box.

Pete, it is expected that the average user will install the additonal software accidentally; and of those that do, they will have never done so if it was not bundled in; Of that same goup a percentage of people will try the new software and keep it. It is the 'backhand' of good business.


You will understand this - only if you've been following along...
We know and they know. And they know we know-but they also know, that not 'everybody knows'.

You're just mad because you know they know and they're using the 'know' to thier advantage.


Okay, so let's be honest here....
Raise your hands, Please!
How many of us have 'ever' accidentally installed pre-selected software?
I'll go first.
Aye

[Petef56]

Originally Posted by rwest Pete it's not unethical. It's comes down to marketing tactics. I don't like it either, but when you look at it from the other side, it's just a business move. How many people will say that they 'don't want' or 'want' somethng if they've never tried it? Yes, the little box to uncheck is overlooked by many downloaders that want the originally offered software, but not the additional software. But it is not hidden from view, it is just already preselected. Why?; because the softeare company wants us to try it. And they (the software company) has a better chance of it being tried if it gets installled even if it was done by someone overlooking the little check box. Pete, it is expected that the average user will install the additonal software accidentally; and of those that do, they will have never done so if it was not bundled in; Of that same goup a percentage of people will try the new software and keep it. It is the 'backhand' of good business. You will understand this - only if you've been following along... We know and they know. And they know we know-but they also know, that not 'everybody knows'. You're just mad because you know they know and they're using the 'know' to thier advantage. Okay, so let's be honest here.... Raise your hands, Please! How many of us have 'ever' accidentally installed pre-selected software? I'll go first. Aye

Thank you!!! Finally, somone responds with some objectivity, logic and reason. I might not agree with al your points, but at least you make sense and demonstrate an understanding of points I'm making.

Honestly, I don't recall ever being tricked into installling preselected software. I'm a professional and I get paid to teach others how to avoid that kind of thing.

About "they know we know".. I say, they can fool most of the people (lemmings & sheeple) most of the time, but they can't fool me. LOL

But here's what they are really thinking..
People who will not use their intelligence are no
better than animals who do not have intelligence.
Such people are beasts of burden and steaks on
the table by choice and consent.

Hey, I'm not mad. I just see an opportunity here for the consumer to counteract some of these marketing strategies that trick many people and are constant annoyances to most others. If we act like sheep and never buck back, things will only get worse in the future. In fact, I already see it happening with some online software vendors.

For example, an online software company has 2 products for sale, one being considerably higher priced. What they do is offer each product simultaniously, but the more expensive product has colorful buttons to click versus the lower priced one which only has drab text links to click on. Most consumers get tricked into buying the more expensive product all due to the manipulative design of choices, not paying close enough attention, and being drawn to the more expensive option. This is just an extension of the opt-out marketing technique that JAVA uses with it's updates. This is the future if consumers act like sheep do nothing now to stop it.

---pete---

[glc]

Pete, I'd advise you to stop pushing me. You have complained in the past about not being respected and it's my turn to turn the tables. I'm not putting words in anyone's mouth and I'm not trying to win any points. I'm simply rebutting what I see as an unreasonable opinion and you are jumping down my throat. Shall I close this thread?