Talk:Browser hijacking#Merge proposal

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)

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

::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

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)

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

: 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)

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)

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

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)

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)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on Browser hijacking. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=748658833 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 {{tlx|Sourcecheck}}).

{{sourcecheck|checked=false}}

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

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)

: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)

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

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

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)

: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)

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

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)

: 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)

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)

I propose merging Trojan.WinLNK.Agent into Browser hijacking. All "Trojan.WinLNK.Agent" means is a Trojan horse that uses Windows .LNK Shortcuts, and "Agent" is used by multiple AVs for nonspecific malware. Not every instance of browser hijacking needs its own article. --HamburgerRadio (talk) 23:01, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

:{{merge done}} Klbrain (talk) 10:27, 21 October 2024 (UTC)