Talk:Browser hijacking

Computer Security: Computing High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer Security, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computer security on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer SecurityWikipedia:WikiProject Computer SecurityTemplate:WikiProject Computer SecurityComputer Security articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Things you can help WikiProject Computer Security with:

Article alerts will be generated shortly by AAlertBot. Please allow some days for processing. More information...

Answer question about Same-origin_policy
Review importance and quality of existing articles
Identify categories related to Computer Security
Tag related articles
Identify articles for creation (see also: Article requests)
Identify articles for improvement
Create the Project Navigation Box including lists of adopted articles, requested articles, reviewed articles, etc.
Find editors who have shown interest in this subject and ask them to take a look here.

Some Hijackers are legit search engines[edit]

Like Babylon, Ask, AVG, and maybe even others. Should we mention them as "safe"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.8.24.2 (talk) 19:10, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Earthlink Is Not A Hijacker[edit]

The title explains it all. - PGSONIC 12:51, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

well technically it was hijacking in that it was redirecting the user's browser in a way it had not been asked to do. I think you want to say that it is not *malware*...

Elinruby (talk) 08:01, 29 March 2011 (UTC)elinruby[reply]

flashing images[edit]

The flashing image (blinking like crazy) is a sign of receiving malicious advertising content. Turn off computer to cure the flashing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.90.197.87 (talk) 03:31, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

appbario?[edit]

What is about appbario? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.68.224.154 (talk) 09:31, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The page https://malwaretips.com/blogs/appbario-toolbar-removal/ has information about Appbario. If you do enter information about it though, make sure not to write it like a "How to" guide. KirbyMario12345 (talk) 20:23, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Almost Windows-only[edit]

Wouldn't it be worth mentioning that other platforms are almost immune to browser hijacking, and that removing hijackers is much easier thanks to the absence of registry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AslanYavrusu (talk • contribs) 11:02, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GNU/Linux DO have Registry-like setting mechanism, e.g. dconf 220.137.19.38 (talk) 22:53, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Problem[edit]

I had set the site http://nabzsoftware.com/types-of-threats/dregol as one of the references for Dregol. It was all right when I accessed it, and it had been verified. However, Google Chrome is now reporting it as potentially dangerous. Thus, I have removed the source.68.100.116.118 (talk) 21:46, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Trovi[edit]

Trovi also uses a program called Search Protect. It changes the SE to Trovi Search. Is it the same as Conduit, or is it a different program? I think information about Trovi should be incorporated into this article. KirbyMario12345 (talk) 20:20, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Browser hijacking. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150211102047/https://support.norton.com/sp/en/us/home/current/solutions/kb20100811171926EN_EndUserProfile_en_us: to https://support.norton.com/sp/en/us/home/current/solutions/kb20100811171926EN_EndUserProfile_en_us:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:15, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal[edit]

I propose Trovi be merged into Browser hijacking as Trovi is not independently notable on its own. Audiovideodiscoo (talk) 04:17, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom (lack of independent notablity). And also WP:NOT a how-to guide (much of the current content isn't suitable to keep here or in merged target). Browser hijacking#Conduit (Search Protect)/Trovi is already a listed example. DMacks (talk) 20:08, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - I agree with the assessment of both the above editors. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:09, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft Office 365 ProPlus[edit]

This has not happened yet, and should not be here - Richevans69 (talk) 23:53, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft has announced it - I dont see why it shouldnt be referenced. MS admits the behaviour here: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/deployoffice/microsoft-search-bing You think we should wait until they actually do it? I think I'd want to know this ahead of time if I were a sysadmin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Badbadpants (talk • contribs) 20:16, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sysadmins have undoubtedly seen this on one of the many computing news sites that have run stories about it. Wikipedia isn't a newspaper. - MrOllie (talk) 20:23, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Enough of anons / socks re-adding this stuff William M. Connolley (talk) 22:07, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK I agree with wikipedia is not a newspaper & wont add this back again until it actualy happens. I will let this go for now if we can agree to add it back here if & when Microsoft rolls out this change i.e. the behavior "goes live" ? Any disagreement? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Badbadpants (talk • contribs) 23:42, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What is needed is a reliable secondary source that describes this as browser hijacking. And on that principle, I have removed all of the "example" subsections that lack any source whatsoever. (Probably most of the ones that do have a source could also be removed, since I doubt the sources verify that the software hijacks browsers, but I am not sufficiently interested to check them.) --JBL (talk) 21:04, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft announced that the Bing extension in Chrome (and later Firefox) for Office 365 Pro Plus will now be opt-in, not opt-out: https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/office-365-blog/update-to-microsoft-search-in-bing-through-office-365-proplus/bc-p/1166927#M2041 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:189:c47f:e280:cc99:37a1:7e41:a88c (talk) 17:13, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]