Resident cookies

Cookies that can not be taken away (hope "resident" is a proper word)

I have 3 cookies that seem resident. Are those normal cookies or more
advanced malware?

ImrWorldwide
Netflame
Webtrends


Morgan O.

"Morgan Ohlson" <morgan.ohlson@comhem.se> wrote in message
news:6hdprgtmn5ca$.z7icg57oge3k$.dlg@40tude.net...
>
> Cookies that can not be taken away (hope "resident" is a proper word)
>
> I have 3 cookies that seem resident. Are those normal cookies or more
> advanced malware?
>
> ImrWorldwide
> Netflame
> Webtrends

Are you afraid of .txt files? Cookies are nothing more than text files
that contain information that the domain that created them can use. If
you don't want them, delete them and then don't visit those sites
anymore that create them.

There are per-session cookies that expire (and get deleted) after the
browser session terminates. There are permanent cookies that remain
after the browser session terminates that expire at some later date but
which could be decades into the future. You can get utilities that can
whitelist those cookies that you want and forces all others to be
per-session cookies (so they disappear when you exit the browser). I
use PopUpCop which includes cookie whitelisting but there are probably
other solutions available, like various cookie managers.

Cookies aren't harmful by themselves. It is whether or not you get
easily frightened by the fanatics that are afraid of anyone knowing
anything about their browsing habits that don't like cookies. They are
afraid someone will see where they went on the Net but then, of course,
the sites to which they connect already know who they are and can track
that same info.

Go read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cookie_%28computing%29.

All these folks so worried about cookies and yet the site's logs can
track what you do and where you go. So much fanned flames on cookies
and yet they focus on browser cookies and not those save by Flash. I'm
sure pedophiles and terrorists are truly concerned about someone knowing
where they visited.

On Fri, 6 Apr 2007 08:35:42 -0500, Vanguard wrote:

> "Morgan Ohlson" <morgan.ohlson@comhem.se> wrote in message
> news:6hdprgtmn5ca$.z7icg57oge3k$.dlg@40tude.net...
>>
>> Cookies that can not be taken away (hope "resident" is a proper word)
>>
>> I have 3 cookies that seem resident. Are those normal cookies or more
>> advanced malware?
>>
>> ImrWorldwide
>> Netflame
>> Webtrends
>
> Are you afraid of .txt files?

No, but I just got a bit conserned when thiese cookies where deleted, but
didn't want to stay away. They reappeard also offline wich I found a little
strange.


> Cookies are nothing more than text files

Is there a guarante on that?

> that contain information that the domain that created them can use. If
> you don't want them, delete them and then don't visit those sites
> anymore that create them.
>
> There are per-session cookies that expire (and get deleted) after the
> browser session terminates. There are permanent cookies that remain
> after the browser session terminates that expire at some later date but
> which could be decades into the future. You can get utilities that can
> whitelist those cookies that you want and forces all others to be
> per-session cookies (so they disappear when you exit the browser). I
> use PopUpCop which includes cookie whitelisting but there are probably
> other solutions available, like various cookie managers.
>
> Cookies aren't harmful by themselves. It is whether or not you get
> easily frightened by the fanatics that are afraid of anyone knowing
> anything about their browsing habits that don't like cookies.

There is activity in this group so people must obviously be conserned about
security issues.


They are
> afraid someone will see where they went on the Net but then, of course,
> the sites to which they connect already know who they are and can track
> that same info.
>
> Go read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cookie_%28computing%29.
>
> All these folks so worried about cookies and yet the site's logs can
> track what you do and where you go. So much fanned flames on cookies
> and yet they focus on browser cookies and not those save by Flash. I'm
> sure pedophiles and terrorists are truly concerned about someone knowing
> where they visited.

Nowadays lots of malware seem non agressive, but do small things that can be
dangerous as skams etc. Can't be bad to have open eyes.


Morgan O.

"Morgan Ohlson" <morgan.ohlson@comhem.se> wrote in message
news:1s9q9dx1m6a4p.4imbw33dzny5$.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Fri, 6 Apr 2007 08:35:42 -0500, Vanguard wrote:
>
>> "Morgan Ohlson" <morgan.ohlson@comhem.se> wrote in message
>> news:6hdprgtmn5ca$.z7icg57oge3k$.dlg@40tude.net...
>>>
>>> Cookies that can not be taken away (hope "resident" is a proper
>>> word)
>>>
>>> I have 3 cookies that seem resident. Are those normal cookies or
>>> more
>>> advanced malware?
>>>
>>> ImrWorldwide
>>> Netflame
>>> Webtrends
>>
>> Are you afraid of .txt files?
>
> No, but I just got a bit conserned when thiese cookies where deleted,
> but
> didn't want to stay away. They reappeard also offline wich I found a
> little
> strange.

They would reappear if you revisit the site. Just because you don't
open a browser doesn't mean you don't have other programms connecting
via HTTP to sites.

>> Cookies are nothing more than text files
>
> Is there a guarante on that?

Just go look at a cookie file. One, it has the .txt extension. You can
use edlin, Notepad, or what floats your boat to look inside text files.
Yep, just text. Just because it is text doesn't mean YOU will
understand what the text means. It is whatever values the site wants to
use for whatever purpose each field is used for.

Is the Yellow Page book more than just pages of print? No, but what you
DO with that information is up to you. What site DOES with the
information stored in that text file is up to them. They may run
different server-side scripts depending on what they stored in the text
file depending on why you or they created it.

>> that contain information that the domain that created them can use.
>> If
>> you don't want them, delete them and then don't visit those sites
>> anymore that create them.
>>
>> There are per-session cookies that expire (and get deleted) after the
>> browser session terminates. There are permanent cookies that remain
>> after the browser session terminates that expire at some later date
>> but
>> which could be decades into the future. You can get utilities that
>> can
>> whitelist those cookies that you want and forces all others to be
>> per-session cookies (so they disappear when you exit the browser). I
>> use PopUpCop which includes cookie whitelisting but there are
>> probably
>> other solutions available, like various cookie managers.
>>
>> Cookies aren't harmful by themselves. It is whether or not you get
>> easily frightened by the fanatics that are afraid of anyone knowing
>> anything about their browsing habits that don't like cookies.
>
> There is activity in this group so people must obviously be conserned
> about
> security issues.

Yeah, by others that don't have a clue what are cookie files.
Repeatedly there will someone that peculiarly hides the fact that they
are complaining about cookies when they say some so-and-so anti-malware
product won't get rid of some unnamed malware when in fact they are
complaining that the product either doesn't give a gnat's fart about
text [cookie] files or that they are somehow revisiting those site to
regenerate those cookie files. Just because they complain doesn't mean
they know the topic of discussion. There are those that found out about
Flash's .sol cookie files and, oh my god, they got their panties in a
bind because someone else was saving cookie files (although, in this
case, the user has full control over if the cookies get retained, from
whom they are generated, etc.).

> They are
>> afraid someone will see where they went on the Net but then, of
>> course,
>> the sites to which they connect already know who they are and can
>> track
>> that same info.
>>
>> Go read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cookie_%28computing%29.
>>
>> All these folks so worried about cookies and yet the site's logs can
>> track what you do and where you go. So much fanned flames on cookies
>> and yet they focus on browser cookies and not those save by Flash.
>> I'm
>> sure pedophiles and terrorists are truly concerned about someone
>> knowing
>> where they visited.
>
> Nowadays lots of malware seem non agressive, but do small things that
> can be
> dangerous as skams etc. Can't be bad to have open eyes.

Use a product that lets you whitelist which domains are allowed to
retain cookies on your host and forces all others to be handled as
per-session cookies. Just because the browser you happen to use doesn't
do decent cookie management doesn't mean other browsers are as weak or
that there aren't 3rd party products to compensate for a deficient
browser. Firefox seems to have okay cookie management. IE does not but
there are plenty of cookie managers out there, and some are free.