Chrome installed without user's permission, how gross of Adobe to do this?

The periodic update pop up suggested me to update Adobe and while updating, adobe automatically started downloading Chrome and installed Chrome in my system. There was no option provided for me to choose not to download or install Chrome.
This is completely gross from Adobe and not expected from a company of Adobe stature. How come Adobe is allowing such gross practices?

The best way to get your point across is to have you and a few thousand of your closest friends to write a nice polite letter to the CEO at
Corporate headquarters
Adobe Systems Incorporated
345 Park Avenue
San Jose, CA 95110-2704

Similar Messages

The new version of firefox, which installed WITHOUT my approval, FORCED an update to Adobe Flash. This new Flash plugin crashes over and over and over - to the point that I cannot use firefox anymore. This is one very angry customer. Argh.

firefox installed update without approval. big NO NO.
firefox forced update of adobe flash. I hate this crap.
firefox + new flash = totally unstable.
crash after crash after crash - cannot use.
customer angry.
very angry.
argh.

'''I fixed mine by removing the Ask.com extension.'''
Tools
Add-ons
Settings icon
View Recent Updates
Ask.com '''DISABLE'''
Running FF 8.0 on Windows 7 (64-bit)

Google Chrome installing without my consent when I update Adobe Flash Player

To whom do I complain about Google Chrome installing without my consent when I updated Adobe Flash Player? I updated to Adobe Flash Player 11 Active X this morning. I saw no indication that Google Chrome was going to install and given that I have used GC in the past and absolutely hated it I would not have completed the Flash update. If there is an opt-out for Chrome when updating Flash it needs to be more obvious.
I was annoyed but simply uninstalled Chrome and thought that would take care of it. Not so fast! Suddenly links in Outlook emails stopped working. All tolled I spent 2 hours figuring out what the problem was, finding the solution and editing the registry to get rid of Chrome. I have moved beyond annoyed to livid. I am self-employed and did not have 2 hours of my week to devote to this.
I will never use Google Chrome. I tried it, didn't like it and I'm now I'm thoroughly done. Is there a way to permanently opt out of getting Google Chrome?
So again, to whom do I complain?
Tamara Gehle

No one--if they gave a **** int he first place their software gurus woulnd't have created a download that essentially hijacks your computer and installs the google toolbar and google chrome--all without asking for consent. Too much of this crap goes on. Look at your task manager--all sorts of updates and crap running behind the scenes (google update runs constantly on my other computer till I deleted the updater.exe)-too much of it from hidden downloads like this site propgates. And to top it off, I can't edit Adopbe .pdf forms on line and save them anymore. So I found this link: http://www.tracker-software.com/product/pdf-xchange-viewer where you can fill all those fillable fields in your .pdf doc, and save the damned thing. Works just like Adobe used to when you could fill in fields from forms on-line and save it.

Updates Install without user intervention

Hi All,
I am currently using WSUS and GPO's to push updates to our Windows 2008 R2 Servers. We just began doing this within the last couple of months and have created the GPO to "auto download updates and notify for install". The only other
relevant setting is "reschedule Automatic updates scheduled installations" is set to 15 minutes. Based on our setting of "notify for install", I would not expect this setting to have any effect.
Now twice in the last week, individual server administrators have been working on their servers, rebooted for whatever reason and then they report to me that Windows Updates are installing without their approval. Anyone have any ideas how this could
happen?
Thanks

"I'm absolutely sure they didn't either. That's my exact point. The user does not "initiate" an installation of downloaded updates when the system is shutdown/restarted from the Start Menu -- it happens automatically since Windows 7 SP1."
If this is the case it explains what's happening and I have to stop this. What settings then can I use to install the approved updates only if the sys admin initiates it?
There are two ways to approach this:
Configure the WUA to "Notify for Download" (AUOption='2'). As a result, the sysadmin will need to perform two tasks: [1] Download the updates (at which time the Install Updates and Shutdown consideration is in effect, and then [2] Install the updates when
desired. This implies planning in advance to allow for the download time, and then planning for the installation event.
Use the Command Prompt to reboot the server: SHUTDOWN /R /T which will completely avoid the installation of any updates already downloaded.
Personally I would offer this argument for consideration: Why is a sysadmin rebooting a server without consideration for the fact that updates might be pending installation? Most organizations I know
only restart servers as a function of installing updates, usually during scheduled maintenance windows. Any other activities that require a system restart are deferred until that scheduled maintenance window.
A corollary to this is also: Why is a sysadmin unfamiliar with patch state of the system they're responsible for?
Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCSA, MCITP:EA, MCDBA
SolarWinds Head Geek
Microsoft MVP - Software Packaging, Deployment & Servicing (2005-2014)
My MVP Profile: http://mvp.microsoft.com/en-us/mvp/Lawrence%20R%20Garvin-32101
http://www.solarwinds.com/gotmicrosoft
The views expressed on this post are mine and do not necessarily reflect the views of SolarWinds.

HP Utillity installed without my knowledge/permission?

So, I looked in my launchpad and saw that HP Utillity was there, I did not know nor authorize such an installation. It installed today or something because it wasnt there yesterday. So maybe my printer did it, but how come it diddent do it sooner? I used the printer many times before without it. I think it is a legit app, since it was connected to the printer but, how come I did not authorize this?

The Utility is in hard drive level Library/Printers/HP/Utilities. It was installed when you installed the driver for the printer. Why it suddenly showed up in Launchpad, I can't explain.

N8 Belle instaled without user confirmation

I was just plug the usb cable to my N8 just to charge it to my computer as i always do every day cause battery sucks.
after an hour my friend call me to my other phone and he tell me that my N8 is out of reach or it is turned off.
So, immediatly, i went to my room, check my N8 screen and i saw a message to ask for my PIN.
after inserting the PIN, phone ask for my security number (???) and.... **bleep**?
welcome to Symbian Belle!
who do this? without user confirmation? why?
This is Illegal and it called Piracy!
my conatcs and photos where there by all my apps, wifi settings etc where lost.
Thank you Nokia, that's very clever! next time F**k all my stuff and my computer too.
The bigger problem is that there is no Greek language support. I can read Greeks but i Can't write, and menus are all to English
Please help me because.... (*&^$##%^) aaarghhhhhh!
Bytheway, Symbian Belle is stupid, slow, and ugly.
also, i am living alone, so, no one is messing with my computer

@gask10
Whilst default setting within Nokia Suite is to launch application upon connecting device to PC I have never heard of it "clicking" on update confirmations by itself!
If Greek language pack had been previously added to device this would unfortunately be lost upon updating to Symbian Belle.
Happy to have helped forum with a Support Ratio = 42.5

Can individual Adobe Air apps be installed without local admin permission into a user-owned folder?

Is this a supported scenario?
Windows 7 PC.
Adobe Air runtime (latest; 4.0) has been installed by an administrator using a local admin account and the eulaAccepted file is present under the "All Users" profile.
User logs in using her own account which does not have local admin rights.
User downloads an Air app and tries to install it to C:\Users\<username> where she has full write permissions to the disk.
What I observe when acting as the User is that the Windows UAC (security escalation to local admin rights) dialog pops up. Can anyone clearly state what the Adobe Air installer is doing that requires the UAC escalation when installing an app to a user's folder? Thanks.

Thanks for your reply, Chris. We're working around these problems by deploying the Air runtime + the application separately using an administration tool, which is fine for now.
I logged the question because I don't see any registry edits or privileged folder access taking place. I suspect that the UAC escalation has something to do with the "eulaAccepted" file; checking that it exists. I doubt that escalated permissions are really required for this. In the long term, it'd be good if this "use case" could be added to the test cycle of Air; perhaps the UAC dialog could be avoided, improving the flexibility of deployment options.
Ideally the test would start with an adminstrator-installed Air package *without* the EULA being accepted. The user should be able to install apps and approve the EULA without the UAC dialog popping up at all.

Force Apple Software Updates to Install Without User Intervention?

I have a Mac server (Yosemite 10.10.2) that pushes certain Apple software updates to my client iMacs (Mavericks 10.9.4). For example I want to update the Apple Remote Desktop client on all of the clients. Once I log into a client machine I see that the update is available and has been received from my Mac server. The problem is that it is not installed. It appears that I would have to visit each machine and log in and then click install to get this done. I have to believe there is a way to get this done without having to visit every machine. Any ideas would be appreciated.

You might want to look at implementing Munki. Munki is mainly intended as a means of distributing both initial Application installs, but also updates for those applications, e.g. Microsoft Office. It can however also automate installing Apple Software Updates. Importantly it does not require the end user to ever enter any administrator details to allow these updates to be installed.
See https://code.google.com/p/munki/wiki/AppleSoftwareUpdatesWithMunki
(Munki is free.)

Why was McAfee installed without requesting my permission?

Usually when installing Flash Player, I can uncheck the boxes to ensure I don't get that junk installed, but when installing the latest update today, it installed it without requesting permission or even informing me of it, I didn't agree to McAfee, so why was it forced upon me?

This horrible behaviour still exist september 3, 2014 !!
I today got a request to update Flashplayer on my computer, Windows 7 64 bit.
It downloads a file and executing that DOES NOT GIVE ME ANY OPTION TO AVOID MCAFFEE!!
I did abort the installation, and I'm very thankfull that I have choosen to be notified of updates for me to install.
This is very bad, an extra layer of not wanted antivirus software can hurt both system stability and performance.
I do hope that this is an misstake that is adressed in timely manner for customers and notified to top management.
Kind regards
Erik

Give ZEN app file system rights so can install without user login

ZfD 6.5.2 NW 6.5.5
Is it possible to give an app rights to the file system on a Netware
box to find the msi it needs to install even if there isn't a user
logged in to the workstation?
We have an app associated with workstations and when we tried to push
it a number of installs failed because the users were logging on
workstation only.
This is also relevant to apps which install as "unsecure system user"
because they do not inherit the logged-in user's Netware file system
rights. In the past we've given the [public] trustee rights in order to
get round this problem but would like a better solution.
Anthony

See .....................
https://secure-support.novell.com/Ka...AL_Public.html
Craig Wilson - MCNE, MCSE, CCNA
Novell Support Forums Volunteer Sysop
Novell does not officially monitor these forums.
Suggestions/Opinions/Statements made by me are solely my own.
These thoughts may not be shared either Novell or any rational human.
"Craig Wilson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Note: You could also configure the MSI app to "Force Cache". This way the
> install source would be cached to the local PC.
>
>
> --
> Craig Wilson - MCNE, MCSE, CCNA
> Novell Support Forums Volunteer Sysop
>
> Novell does not officially monitor these forums.
>
> Suggestions/Opinions/Statements made by me are solely my own.
> These thoughts may not be shared either Novell or any rational human.
>
> "Craig Wilson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> You may need to assign the MSI to the Workstation object and set the
>> application to "Distribute in Workstation Security Space if Workstation
>> Associated".
>>
>> Apps can be configured to use "User" or "Workstation/System" credentials,
>> but an app will never try one if the other is not available. It simply
>> uses the one for which it is configured.
>>
>> There is a really nice TID someplace that shows what security space
>> different parts of ZEN run in, but I cant find it at the moment.
>> I will keep looking, but many somebody else knows where it is.
>>
>> In regards to your missing icons, most likely nobody has seen it or has
>> any ideas what it may be.
>> I could not.
>>
>> If posts go unanswered, you can always try reposting and mentioning you
>> did not get an answer previously.
>> I know that I dont answer unless I have a good idea of what is wrong.
>> Tossing out guesses my dissuade others from giving their thoughts.
>> But once they know you are not getting any answers, folks tend to toss
>> out more guesses.
>>
>> --
>> Craig Wilson - MCNE, MCSE, CCNA
>> Novell Support Forums Volunteer Sysop
>>
>> Novell does not officially monitor these forums.
>>
>> Suggestions/Opinions/Statements made by me are solely my own.
>> These thoughts may not be shared either Novell or any rational human.
>>
>> "Anthony Hilton" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> Anthony Hilton wrote:
>>>
>>>> Craig Wilson wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Grant Rights to the "Workstation Object".
>>>> >
>>>> > This will address some of the issues.
>>>> > Be sure to not use "Mapped" drives as well.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Craig. I'll do that through the workstation group which the zen
>>>> app is associated with.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, the app uses UNC path.
>>>>
>>>> I'm glad you're still here - my 2 previous threads (17 April and 9 May
>>>> both about missing icons) have gone un-answered and I was beginning to
>>>> wonder whether everyone had moved over to the Zfd7 forums.
>>>>
>>>
>>> No success yet.
>>>
>>> The Workstation group already had RF rights to the directory containing
>>> the msi. The workstation's effective rights show RF to the msi itself
>>> but running the Zen app gives msi error 1620 which suggests either no
>>> access to the source or a share name over 12 characters.
>>>
>>> \\server\sys\public\it\zenapps\supplier_opthalmolo gy\supplier_opthalmolo
>>> gy.msi doesn't seem to breach the 12 character limit.
>>>
>>> Any other ideas?
>>>
>>> Anthony
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Give user the option to update manually, don't do it automatically without user's permission

This is not really a question, but rather a suggestion or complain.
i just saw my firefox upgraded to newest version which i dont remember giving it the permission to.
I know there are many people said it is important because the update fixes security issues.
just an fyi, there are people who doesnt care about security in the browser.
and another thing, there are people who has limited data plan. If the program keeps updating itself which is eating up the monthly data plan, it would cause the user unexpected increase in bill. If anyone would pay for the bill then fine.
and there are people who run firefox on a slower PC, if the program keeps updating itself, the program will eat up more resources resulting an even slower PC, the program wouldnt be useable by then.
I saw people complaining about extension/plugin compatibility too, so it is another problem.
Please keep in mind auto updates are lame and stupid.
thanks for reading this.

<blockquote>I saw people complaining about extension/plugin compatibility too, so it is another problem.</blockquote>
Mozilla isn't responsible for plugins/extensions being compatible on each Firefox version. It's up to the developers to do that. If it doesn't work on Firefox 31 for example, then that's sad. Just wait for an update
There was a previous way by going through the Options menu to disable updates but after disabling it through there, when you would go to Help > About Firefox, it would update regardless of that setting.
I use the below to prevent automatic updates.
You can set these prefs in <code>about:config</code> to disable automatic updating: 
app.update.auto - false 
app.update.enabled - false 
app.update.silent - false 
Another thing to do would be to go into <code>about:config</code> again and set these prefs to blank. Right click > Modify > delete existing > OK.
*app.update.url
*app.update.url.details
*app.update.url.manual

Got the add-on Blur installed without asking for it.How come ?

I was logging to my Internetbank , which then proposed to hide my mailadress via Blur . I said no thanks but then
found that Blur had been added to my browser , and it took me some effort to find out . Maybe the idea of a
fake mailadress is a good one , but I detest companies that sneak in upon you what you have not asked for.
That does definitely not inspire to let them know any secrets . They also wanted to store password for me. NO THANKS!
Karl

This happens many times because there is a program or file that automatically does this. They tend to be scams and may harm your computer. You may not remember downloading it and it may not have been your intention. These things many times are installed with other files or programs making them hard to prevent.
I hope i helped!

TB opens Google Friend Connect without notice or permission-how to stop?

When reading my blog feeds if a site has Google Friend Connect TB opens the browser (even if it is closed) to attempt to connect. I DO NOT want that to happen. How can I stop this? I have the latest versions of TB and Firefox (my default browser).
This is what tries to open:
https://4t4qjto8n6vcba9cabf6v2lrng9ast6r-a-fc-opensocial.googleusercontent.com/gadgets/ifr?url=https://www.google.com/friendconnect/gadgets/members.xml&container=peoplesense&parent=http://mrsthomasinatittlemouse.blogspot.com/&mid=0&view=profile&libs=google.blog&d=0.1-38c007b7_a6d57363_b2cfed96_daa90d95_64c0e870.7&lang=en&country=GB&communityId=04916542568810702175&caller=http://mrsthomasinatittlemouse.blogspot.com/2013/10/norwegian-heart-and-flower-pot-holders.html#st=e%3DAOG8GaDQXgJQUaWakcxmkUQxvD0M%252BrryqweMmc1%252BVk8eUOGaVqbkgywuERSvu7orTVCCxcVmfHixYONmkH8aEKLl3NQ8EI%252BzJ8VV2jVTy1JEVIa5esnxCvqzMRr4CbSvaksqWKMQMcdAo%252F4tLkPBaV11RrupoK%252Fa3l73SLoqsPRYgoRApOc2YQrCpXBDd9Ly1PJQbzGIdJDMYyvA5YrhDLCBdfpXYJmN4zS1IUjkSCmsCIbUDb5yyp35lxSjpMArY0E39okV9NcXmhIVDd44g5ebQjhz4HxgzBwwFqTqDq9CaxHSOlg4XqRQv96UyE%252BVlZ%252BOgET1RGaD%26c%3Dpeoplesense&rpctoken=1292202976&
This is very annoying. I like using TB to read my feeds but if continues to happen I will have no choice but to change readers :(
Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks for replying, but this did not work. As soon as a blogger feed opens in the reading pane it attempts to connect to Google Friend Connect. I don't even have to do anything, it does it all by itself. Earlier when I was marking my feeds so I would know which were blogger at a glance I had about 10 tabs open in Firefox with that link in them!!!

Google safe browsing: meaning of "malicious software being downloaded and installed without user consent"

As an example, see http://www.google.com/safebrowsing/diagnostic?site=google.com
What does this phrase mean? Is it a browse-and-get-owned exploit? Is it for outdated browsers, or modern browsers too? Does it require specific vulnerable plugins to be active, such as Java?

Read the following about "drive-by downloads". Item 2 at the top of the page. User does not need to click on something on the infected page for a download to occur. Simply visiting the page is enough for the download to occur.
*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drive-by_download
You can also read this (3rd paragraph under "Delivery Methods").
*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_threat

What is chrome://browser/content/sanitize.js:136 - how do I get rid of this error message?

What is chrome://browser/content/sanitize.js:136
This is an up-date of my earlier question that remains open.
I deleted (copied and then deleted) my profile and started with a clean slate. Did not make the slightest difference. So I un-installed FF 5. beta and went back to v4
I'd like to try v5 again, but only once this issue can be dealt with.

Are you clearing the cookies via [[Clear Recent History]]?
If you do then you can try to exclude the cookies to see if that helps.
If you use [[Clear Recent History]] to clear the cookies when you close Firefox then Firefox also tries to clear the cookies from plugins like Flash and starts a plugin-container process with the Flash player and possibly other plugins as well for each cookie, so that can add extra time if there are a lot of cookies to remove. 
Also make sure that all plugins are up to date.
You can let all cookies expire when you close Firefox.
*Tools > Options > Privacy > Cookies: "Keep until": "I close Firefox"

Chrome installed without user's permission, how gross of Adobe to do this?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for