Manufacturers have long used and abused bundling software to collect placement fees from software marketers. Implicit in the bundling is the belief that the software will be beneficial to the user in some way — or at least cause them no obvious harm. But there have always been potentially unwanted programs (PUPs) in the mix.

These days, this practice is under critical review by security experts who are concerned that it may provide a vector for attackers. If a bundle includes software that eschews security best practices, cybercriminals might be able to exploit the weak spots.

A Full-Barrelled Assault

Things have gotten out of hand. According to Bleeping Computer, this type of mutant adware/malware installs backdoors and rootkits. It then employs persistence techniques to make the programs very difficult to remove.

Even Microsoft wants to zap some of these PUPs. Softpedia reported that the tech giant decided to add the SupTab, Sasquor and Ghokswa PUPs to its Malicious Software Removal Tool (MSRT) recently.

PUPs can amount to full-barrelled assaults on a user. Combine this with the security implications of using unaudited and untrusted software, and you have a real problem.

Redefining Potentially Unwanted Programs

Malwarebytes has had enough. The cybersecurity research firm is changing its internal definition of PUPs, extending the parameters in functional and far more exclusionary ways. It is sure to meet vendor resistance.

That resistance can even take legal form. Let’s say a PUP vendor crams a useless program into a bundler. The end-user license agreement (EULA) might allow the vendor to sue anyone who calls the software malicious or identifies it as PUP-related malware. Producers have bitten the ankles of past security product creators this way.

According to the Malwarebytes blog, the firm received “a mountain of letters with legal letterheads demanding that we stop. Now some people might think of this as something that would slow us down, but we see it as proof that we are making a dent in the development and distribution of PUPs.” Sounds like the experts aren’t giving up so easily.

Unfortunately, it seems that PUP pushers are only shut down when victims come forward and sue the vendors themselves.

More from

Most organizations want security vendor consolidation

4 min read - Cybersecurity is complicated, to say the least. Maintaining a strong security posture goes far beyond knowing about attack groups and their devious TTPs. Merely understanding, coordinating and unifying security tools can be challenging.We quickly passed through the “not if, but when” stage of cyberattacks. Now, it’s commonplace for companies to have experienced multiple breaches. Today, cybersecurity has taken a seat in core business strategy discussions as the risks and costs have risen dramatically.For this reason, 75% of organizations seek to…

How IBM secures the U.S. Open

2 min read - More than 15 million tennis fans around the world visited the US Open app and website this year, checking scores, poring over statistics and watching highlights from hundreds of matches over the two weeks of the tournament. To help develop this world-class digital experience, IBM Consulting worked closely with the USTA, developing powerful generative AI models that transform tennis data into insights and original content. Using IBM watsonx, a next-generation AI and data platform, the team built and managed the entire…

How the FBI Fights Back Against Worldwide Cyberattacks

5 min read - In the worldwide battle against malicious cyberattacks, there is no organization more central to the fight than the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). And recent years have proven that the bureau still has some surprises up its sleeve. In early May, the U.S. Department of Justice announced the conclusion of a U.S. government operation called MEDUSA. The operation disrupted a global peer-to-peer network of computers compromised by malware called Snake. Attributed to a unit of the Russian government Security Service,…

How NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 Tackles Risk Management

4 min read - The NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 (CSF) is moving into its final stages before its 2024 implementation. After the public discussion period to inform decisions for the framework closed in May, it’s time to learn more about what to expect from the changes to the guidelines. The updated CSF is being aligned with the Biden Administration’s National Cybersecurity Strategy, according to Cherilyn Pascoe, senior technology policy advisor with NIST, at the 2023 RSA Conference. This sets up the new CSF to…