How to best handle LinkBucks threats

[luntrus]

Hi forum friends,

Page opened up in my flock browser with latest version of NS, RP, ABP+: htxp://a1b08eb4.linkbucks.com/
Annoying and adware threat i.m.h.o. How to get fully rid of this with NS?

It appeared from a site that was apparently hacked, and the redirect would now go exclusively via the LinkBucks page to open up after 15 waiting secs, did not do that. I had NoScript and RequestPolicy installed in that browser, so I had a lucky escape, and I found later that ABP+ is just being circumvented by it (I had ABP+ there too with various block lists installed).
Sometimes one can get LinkBucks re-directs through a Conficker worm infection, but there avast would have alerted ne. What I did is block LinkBucks for good in NS and RP, also checked the SpywareBlaster snapshot for changes. That did not find any changes to the last time the snapshot of my Vista OS settings was made, I looked for specific malcode dll's, nothing there, nor anything out of the ordinary seen in the order processes in the Task Manager or via Process Explorer. This is closest to what I experienced - it is called the Rapidshare annoyment:
http://www.technize.com/remove-waiting- ... her-sites/
SkipScreen, a free firefox extension, comes to help here. SkipScreen is a firefox extension that bypasses the waiting time on Rapidshare and many other sites. The list of sites is given below:

zShare
Mediafire
Sendspace
Sharebee
Rapidshare
Megaupload
DepositFiles
Linkbucks
Link-protector
This add-on is controversial Re: http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/m ... efox_addon

Can anyone give instructions how to avoid this LinkBucks nastiness?

luntrus

[dhouwn]

This add-on is controversial

It's controversial whether this add-on should be hosted on the Mozilla Add-Ons page, since its functionality enables users to circumvent download waiting times on certain one-click file hosting sites, which often is against the hosting sites' EULAs.

Questions that arise:

• Should Mozilla care? After all, it's the users choice and responsibility in the end.
• The downloading user does not explicitly agree to the terms of the EULA, can it then even apply?
• Can these parts of the EULA be even considered valid?
• Isn't Mozilla hosting also other Add-Ons that make it easy to break the terms of service of certain services? What about ad blocking add-ons? What about NoScript (think of the surrogate script functionality and of the fact that there are predefined surrogate scripts)

[luntrus]

Hi dhouwn,

Should this skip functionality be added to NS then? Or would that also be controversial?
This ad-related nagging is a nuisance really to most users apart from the regular parties that get paid,
and also the malcreants that "hook into" these revenues.
"Linkbucks Frames" on websites are not malicious/suspicious per se if they do not come included in malware,
but I for one can absolutely do without the phenomenon,

luntrus

[dhouwn]

Should this skip functionality be added to NS then?

NoScript is a security add-on in the first place, such a functionality would be out of place IMHO.

Or would that also be controversial?

I fail to see what you are trying to tell. The functionality is controversial, no matter whether it's in a separate add-on or part of NS of course.

This ad-related nagging is a nuisance really to most users apart from the regular parties that get paid,
and also the malcreants that "hook into" these revenues.

Most certainly.