Senator Ron Wyden

WYDEN TESTIFIES ON SPYWARE, ADWARE
AT COMMERCE COMMITTEE HEARING

Senator has long led efforts to combat
intrusive, consumer-unfriendly computer software

May 11, 2005

Washington, DC – U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), one of Congress’ leading advocates of responsible and consumer-friendly technology growth, today testified before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation about invasive computer software known as spyware and adware. Wyden also outlined in his testimony principles to guide any Federal legislative efforts to stop spyware that are reflected in legislation he introduced earlier this year. Wyden’s bipartisan SPYBLOCK (Software Principles Yielding Better Levels of Consumer Knowledge) Act would prohibit the installation of software on a computer without the owner’s notice and consent. Wyden introduced the legislation in March along with U.S. Senator Conrad Burns (R- Mont.), who also chaired today’s hearing.

Senator Wyden’s prepared testimony follows:

U.S. Senator Ron Wyden
Prepared Testimony before the Senate Committee
on Commerce, Science and Transportation
Hearing on Spyware

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I welcome the opportunity to share with you my thoughts on the twin cyber-plagues of spyware and its brother, unwanted adware. Millions of consumers and businesses across the country and the world have been in a virtual tug-of-war with spyware over who controls their computers, laptops and web-enabled devices. At the present time and in the absence of a strong legislative solution, consumers and businesses lose ground daily to this software scourge.

This committee has been in the forefront of efforts to write the rules of the new economy, and I regret not being able to roll up my sleeves with you on the Commerce Committee to tackle this cyber menace, but I commit to working with you in a bipartisan way to help however I may. I commend you for taking up this issue again, and urge swift action to eliminate these cyber-plagues and restore to consumers and businesses the control they want over their Internet activities.

How big is the problem? Last fall, America Online and the National Cybersecurity Alliance found that 80 percent of those surveyed reported spyware or adware on their computers.

Much of the spyware and unwanted adware travels as imposters via legitimate Internet advertising. Companies enter into advertising arrangements with legitimate Internet ad buyers who, in turn, go to advertising networks that can use thousands or as many as 70,000 affiliates, some of which are not so legitimate. It is among this array of affiliates, who are paid by the click and therefore have an incentive to rack up the largest number of clicks, where much of the rogue software originates. As described by the Los Angeles Times this Monday, “If an affiliate slips a deceptive piece of software into someone’s personal computer and persuades the owner to buy something, the transaction could be passed through three or four businesses – each taking a cut – before the affiliate network hands off the customer to the merchant.”

It should be no surprise then that the twin cyber-plague reached epidemic proportions last year because in 2004, the Interactive Advertising Bureau found spending on Internet ads rose more than 30 percent to almost $9.6 billion.

How does it work? These two cyber rogues wreak havoc through practices that surreptitiously place spyware and other unwanted software on consumers’ computers. These are called “drive-by downloads.” By doing such seemingly innocent things as downloading software, like a screensaver or file-trading program, the user unknowingly imports into the computer software that can follow the user from web page to web page, gathering data on the user’s habits or showing hundreds of pop-up ads. The key point is that the consumer does not want the software, does not know the software is there, and does not know what the software is doing.

What can be done to stop it? A few states have moved or are moving to try to curb the practice, I believe the inherently interstate nature of the Internet calls for a national solution. There are a few key guideposts that should direct any federal legislative effort.

- First, each computer user should know and have control over what software resides on his or her computer. That means drive-by downloads should be banned.

- Second, jumping on a computer should not expose the user to a Coney Island-full of hucksters, where they are tricked into installing software they don’t want or when they can’t identify the source of the ads. Consumers should be informed about who is providing the software and what it will do. Consumers should know if software will track their browsing behavior in order to serve pop-up ads.

- Third, no software should allow any ad or information collected at one website to travel with the user to another website. When a user leaves a website that should be the end of the road for ads affiliated with that website.

- Fourth, consumers need to be able to remove or disable any software they don’t want so that when software is installed on a computer, it is not an irreversible act.

- Fifth, the full weight of law enforcement should be thrown against spyware and unwanted adware, meaning that the Federal Trade Commission as well as state attorneys general should be able to bring action.

- Finally, companies that act in good faith to help consumers get rid of the twin cyber-plagues should be given protection from liability. They should not be scared out of business by the threat of lawsuits from those whose software gets removed.

These principles are reflected in a bill that Senator Burns and I sponsored in the last Congress and that we reintroduced in March, with Senators Boxer and Bill Nelson. Our legislation, S. 687, got strong support from this committee last year, it enjoys support among some key industry players and I offer it up as one way to tackle this problem. I understand the House has begun to move legislation, and I know the members of this committee are anxious to get to work on this legislation. I thank the committee for the chance to testify.

###