Warning -utorrent and bittorrent by geesmith

  • Related topics: (no related topics)

User avatar
New laptop. Plays IL-2 Sturmovik with graphics on 'Excellent' settings so I went to a site called Ultrapack which has all kinds of add-ons for the game. In the course of reading the 'how-to' it was advised to use utorrent and a handy link was presented. The utorrent download also included a utorrent toolbar with no option to not include it so I chose not to install it...WHICH ACTUALLY INSTALLS IT ANYWAY! Then the problems begin...

My Firefox search was taken over by utorrent. I (dozily) uninstalled utorrent with add/remove programs which only removes the Swastika and leaves the whole Nazi party intact.

So having removed it and removed any add-ons from Firefox I was unhappy to find it still persisted.
Then all my search boxes were taken over by Conduit.Com which gives limited and partner based results to any search....
....such as "remove Conduit.Com" takes you to a page that has a McAfee result where they are quoted as saying that Conduit is not malware and does NOT need to be removed.. there are McAfee logos but the page is provided by Conduit.Com.
I'm using Revo Uninstaller to remove everything. I now have to install utorrent again so it can be thoroughly uninstalled by Revo.

Apparently bittorrent behaves in the same way. Maybe they're selling out as a final straw clutch before going under.

....and both are available from CNET . so another trust broken.

After Revo does the usual Microsoft uninstall it then proceeds to root out up to 170 files that are left behind (Firefox example) most of which are in the registry. Even uninstalling an innocuous app leaves 22 files behind.

Oh well, after I've cleaned it up I'll install Zorin Linux alongside Windows 7 and only use 7 for games. Uninstall from Linux leaves nothing behind. I have to say that Chrome allowed me to remove the add-ons completely and they haven't returned to Chrome. Firefox is okay at present after two deep uninstalls. IE9 doesn't even know the add-ons are there and remains unuseable (not much change there then).

NOTE TO SELF..only use torrents in Linux and you can no longer trust CNET.

Posted 29 Dec 2011, 12:47 #1 

User avatar
If you are talking the latest vers 3 or there abouts ?? from the Utorrent site and Cnet!
Then just don't tick any boxes m even the accept licences etc one !!
leave all blank and install it. installs quite cleanly .
Doesn't add anything to any browsers .. ? unless you got a link and a hacked version from another site ??

Happy New Year !! :thumbsup:

Got one for Me , Then one for her, and now a big one for me again, All BLOO! Well saves on the touch up paint

Posted 03 Jan 2012, 16:36 #2 

User avatar
Glynn, I think you've been tangoed :(

I have used uTorrent on a regular basis for years Glynn and it is purely a standalone program, not accessing the browser in any way. As a matter of interest, my version is 2.0.3

Can't speak about Bittorrent as I've never used it.

I understand that you are furious, I know I would be, but I think perhaps you might be blaming uTorrent when the concern lies with the link you got it from.

Cogito ergo sum... maybe?

Click the image to go to Nano-Meet Website

Posted 03 Jan 2012, 18:11 #3 

User avatar
Chris hit the nail on the head.
I reinstalled it just to let Revo Uninstaller search everything out and this time I didn't "accept the licence etc" and got a clean install.
I was furious....beefed up by reading the complaints on CNets forum. The toolbars that I "accepted" immediately invited their mates round to take over the browser. Within 30 minutes of installing I was indeed getting Tangoed.
I've also used utorrent for years (on and off) Paul and this is a new development. I also never had a problem before. This install, from CNet, offers the option to tick here to accept the licence AND THE TOOLBAR. I was fooled into thinking the licence tick was necessary. I thought I would simply disable the toolbar but it had already opened the back door to it's new friends and they were throwing up in the fridge and retuning the telly channels in doubly quick time. It was no joke. These guys are growing up your windows and spreading their roots in your registry with no manners whatsoever.
So following the caper caused by uTorrents new approach I installed my old friend BitLord. It turned up in its khaki overalls, refused a cuppa and just quietly got on with it.

I had to disconnect from the net to get these off my laptop.

I got this problem from the official uTorrent site which sends you to CNet for the download. (more accurately, click on "download" at the uTorrent site patches to CNets download). The problem starts with the intentional suggestion that you need to accept the licence/and the toolbar that turns up with the other oiks in tow.
It's a cynical strategy because within seconds of removing the toolbar and immediately after "uninstalling" it...it reappears. Every time this happens it texts its mates to say "we're in!"

All healed up now....but don't blindly trust those that you could trust before as they all seem to be feeling the pinch (perhaps CNet were duped as well....with greenbacks)

Posted 05 Jan 2012, 03:22 #4 

User avatar
I have the grandkids round quite often and the amount of stuff attached to even kiddies downloads is frightening.... :shock:

The lil ones just go .. next next next etc .. and the PC's stuffed with rubbish, I have to clear out !! Also goes for SWMBOS laptop .. oh and my Dad's PC everything I visit !!

I always tell em !! :roll:

AS with all things ... "Read the small print !! never accept anything at face value." .

and untick any boxes just to be safe!!

But it don't sink in!! :confused: ..well keeps me occupied !! :-D :gmc:
Got one for Me , Then one for her, and now a big one for me again, All BLOO! Well saves on the touch up paint

Posted 05 Jan 2012, 10:46 #5 

User avatar
Happy New Year to you too Chris. :)

My grandsons the same. He's very smart on the pc, does coding and runs a website/forum... but until just a couple of years ago we often had to give his pc a thorough scrub because his browser wasn't responding (it was, it just didn't have time for his requests).

Posted 05 Jan 2012, 12:29 #6