Keeper one of the apps I uninstall first thing along with many of the other apps Microsoft seems intent on providing me no matter if I want them or not. Funny how Microsoft used to tell all users to keep stuff off your PC that you don’t use. Now they simply install this stuff without even offering a opt out. I think pretty much all users can figure out how to install any of these apps if they really want them.

I always run
Get-AppxPackage | where-object {$_.publisher –notlike "*microsoft*"} | Remove-AppxPackage
on any fresh Win10 install to get rid of anything not created by MS.

I know that devs pay money to MS to promote their apps on W10 as ‘suggestions’ and that’s OK, but to install them without user permission is bad form. Unfortunately,  OEMs and at times MS, do not agree.  When this transaction takes place it may only apply to a specific build and not carry over with a refresh.  One user confirmed it was pre-installed on their W10 Signature edition – the so called no-bloat version!

I have read several comments online regarding this ‘problem’ and it has been confirmed by users that Keeper is included in the latest W10 ISO they downloaded from the MS Site.  I guess it all depends on the tools you use to do a clean install whether it is there or not.

The few times I’ve found myself doing a clean install of windows 10 (rather than just removing it and installing any other OS) I’ve gotten a lot of pre-installed “down arrow tiles” that say some app is coming, but they never turned into anything (even after I eventually connect to the internet for the first time) and I eventually unpinned them, which left no trace.

Is this normal and/or what everyone else is seeing?

…but isn’t suing the national sport of the U.S.A?

The First Amendment protects citizens from punishment by the government for espousing views against the government, in speech, written, or published. There are other protections, but I think this is the relevant portion. It offers no protection from accusations of slander or libel by another citizen or private entity under US law. These charges must be adjudicated on their merit. It is generally held that a true statement cannot be a libelous statement, no matter how much harm results.

A reverse condition arises if the initial charge is proven false, then the accused can file as plaintiff as a damaged party for having their reputation sullied.

As I read Woody’s post, I was wondering if Tavis Ormandy could be related to Eugene Ormandy, the longtime conductor of the Philadelphia Orchestra.

And then when I navigated to this thread, Amazon’s “Shop Related Products” ad to the right is offering me four collections of music performed by… Eugene Ormandy and the Philadelphia Orchestra. <grin>

anonymous wrote:

It offers no protection from accusations of slander or libel by another citizen or private entity under US law. These charges must be adjudicated on their merit. It is generally held that a true statement cannot be a libelous statement, no matter how much harm results. A reverse condition arises if the initial charge is proven false, then the accused can file as plaintiff as a damaged party for having their reputation sullied.

Notice that Keeper is not suing Ormandy; they’re suing Ars Technica, Conde Nast & Godkin. Assuming they have deeper pockets than Ormandy in case of a win… However, if Ormandy can prove his assertion that the bug has been there for 16 months, he should join the others as defendants if possible.

On December 15, 2017, the ARS Technica website made false and misleading statements about the Keeper software application suggesting that it had a 16-month old bug that allowed sites to steal user passwords. The article contained numerous false and misleading statements. Ars Technica has revised the article twice, but to date has failed to remove the false statements.

Keeper now asserts claims for defamation, violation of the Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act, 815 ILCS 510/2, and commercial disparagement under Illinois law.

I hope ARS has kept good notes as they’ve discovered (and reported) these things.

Suing Ars Technica or any of its staff over their reporting is the very definition of a frivolous lawsuit. Every other tech outlet which has repeated Ormandy’s claim would be open to the same suit, including this site.

In many US States, there is a definition of SLAPP, which is a frivolous lawsuit filed to silence public criticism. This lawsuit may fit the criteria, and opens Keeper to countersuits. In any event, the lack of a retraction from Ars Technica supports the idea that Keeper will not prevail, and Conde Nast has no fear of this suit. But Windows users should have great fear of installing any potentially buggy app when the vendor is so lawsuit-happy.

Meanwhile, I have found some nicely priced Intel based Chromebooks which should handle a Linux install with Crouton very nicely. Goodbye, Microsoft.

On defamation, disparagement, deceptive business practices, and frivolous lawsuits, it may be interesting to note these will be discussed in terms of Illinois law as it reads in Chicago. Not New York. Historical views of Chicago’s approach to reading law may be interesting. Keeper is playing home court [sic] advantage here.

I read this article and enjoyed it. If the Keeper program like Candy Crush is one of several SuggestedApps listed under the following current user registry key then Microsoft is lying when claiming no knowledge of how it gets installed on a computer. Some Microsoft employee had to perform an action to put that in the build.

HKEY_CURRENT_USER\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\ContentDeliveryManager\SuggestedApps

I deleted all of the values listed when setting up a system and that quelled any further attempted nearly silent installations. Don’t set up an internet connection until you have set new connections as metered connections and have taken a peek at that registry key for every user account!

The Keeper App being out of date and insecure reminds me of the versions of Firefox, Flash Player Plugin and just about everything else which Ubuntu installs from their own Repositories. Maybe the change in Ubuntu 18.04 to a new repository will get these apps more up to date, but the mere fact that an app is an old version can happen in anyone’s app store. Users who can install apps from outside official Stores and Repositories have long been encouraged to do so, where possible from the original vendors’ web pages. This advice applies to all OSes which have Walled Gardens of their own versions of apps.