Is Trusttoolbar Spyware?


read the attachment.

too many cowboy anti spyware companies who are just too eager to grab your money with no care for whether what they report is good or not is causing this confusion!

I applaud the ones who fulfill their responsibility and correct their mistakes.


And here is some of the respected magazines who analysed Trusttoolbar and wrote a review about it:,aid,120501,00.asp


[attachment deleted by admin]


I think it is a shame that some companies still consider this product spyware. It looks bad for Comodo and damages your reputation.
When I first considered installing CPF I came across a number of reviews that said this contained the spyware TrustToolbar.
However, I was fortunate enough to come across reviews that were able to dismiss this and show what great products CPF and TrustToolbar actually are, but, unfortunately many people will just take the first review about it containing spyware and never think about Comodo again. I know I’m glad I looked further into this and I hope others do to, to correct this.


Thanks Mike.

It really frustrates me to have such cowboys in the “security” field, charge customers and don’t deliver decent enough product. Unlike a heuristic algorithm that classifies something by mistake, spyware is easier to identify and done usually manually and those people who have classified it has done so because they have NOT bothered to check the product. So how can you possibly trust these companies who don’t even bother to analyse the software they report on!




I completely agree with you, and that is why I won’t purchase Webroot SpySweeper, because they have not yet removed it. Spyware Doctor which I have does not detect Comodo as spyware, neither does Ad-Aware, or Ewido, or even Spybot, people think because it’s Webroot or some other program that has a good name detects it is spyware that it is spyware. I feel your frustration.


Thank you for your support Justin.
Much appreciate it.


No problem Melih, it’s just it is really riduculus that theses companies won’t actually look into what they call and detect as “Spyware” it really shows how much they care about the customer.

list of Anti Spyware products who have cleaned up their act or never reported Trusttoolbar as spyware is here… Comodo Forum


Look at this Company, they were totally misguided and misinformed
I wrote the below email to them, but not sure if it will get to them or not as they don’t have a proper contact details. If you can find their details, can you pls also inform them about their mistake!!! Thank you…

My email below:

You make a false statement about Comodo! Comodo has never made any malware of any kind! Some Antispyware companies had wrongly classified our security software as Spyware, but now they have corrected their mistake and apologised and spysweeper no longer reports it as spyware either now that they corrected their mistake! All these spyware companies were responsible enough to correct their mistake and send an apology letter to Comodo,113.0.html

I hope you run a responsible operation and will correct your statement in a public forum!



As much as I would like them to reply back on a forum, I really doubt they will I am sure they may fix the problem on their site but I doubt they will reply on a public forum.

Well depends on whether they want to keep their mistake hidden away or be a responsible company and own up to a mistake they have made!



I am sure they will fix their mistake but I doubt that they will post in a public online forum, not many companies would want to do that. But then again, never heard of them so I really don’t know what they will do.

[url][/url] actually lists the allegedly bad things Comodo does. (hijacker, hinders computer performance, etc.) hijacker, silently reports visited urls, etc., etc., etc…

[url] hijacker and other “bad names”

[url][/url] listed as spyware



[url][/url] Research completed 04.20.2005. Based on eTrust PestPatrol Spyware Scorecard v2.0 Trust Toolbar v3 violates the following criteria: First, Changes browser settings, for example the default search provider, home or error page(s) etc., without user permission at time of change. Trust Toolbar installs an Internet Explorer URL SearchHook (c:\windows\system32\srhook.dll). When a user types an address into Internet Explorer without including a recognized protocol, IE will utilize the available SearchHook. Second, silently connects to an unintended location to transmit personal information. URLs entered in IE are transmitted to

How can so many people be so wrong?

I have nothing to say beyond what the above references state. If you decide to dispute them, please take it up with them directly. Cloudeight does its own tests and when we’ve tested your latest version, we’ll report our findings good or bad.

It appears that Comodo has a terrible reputation with some very reputable companies (Computer Assoicates, PC Tools, etc.). I’m not much one for “old sayings” but one I agree with because it is usually true is : “where there’s smoke there’s fire.” A lot of smoke coming from the Comodo camp, eh? Well, just read the references above.

You ‘doubted’ I’d answer (oh! I really do dislike forums); but I thought it would be illuminating to show your “forum members” what other companies (besides ours) say about Comodo. Remember: They say it, not me (it appears you’re trying to make this into some sort of personal vendetta).

I doubt this post will remain long :slight_smile: Hey! You doubted me - touche’.


Hi Melih,

I also sent an email to them saying the following:


As a user of Comodo I think, it is wrong what you say. These are excellent security products and Spysweeper and many other do NOT detect this as spyware anymore. You should rethink what you said, because I and many othere on the Comodo forums think you are wrong.
Comodo Forum

This was there reply:

And it is not fair to judge what we wrote over a year ago as current. You'll remember we once recommended Comodo, then when they released a new version it had spyware like attributes. That was many versions ago. We have not recently reviewed it.

Software, computers, the Web, indeed life, are not static. They are dynamic. Only a fool would ever think otherwise. We panned Dell very hard for about 8 months until they finally removed the garbage from their new computers. When we verified that they cleaned up their act we wrote another review.

I am certainly not going to take the word of a bunch of people on some forum as fact. I’ll test the program on several computers and review it again. If it comes out clean this time, I will certainly say so.

Forums are not a good place to get verifiable information. Case in point? Windows Vista Forum is full of mis-information and tips and tricks that don’t work and even harmful in some cases. And, gee, the Windows Vista forum is replete with people with initials after their names :slight_smile:




Thanks for reading and responding to us! The reason why there is only a handful of players who are still left falsely reporting is very simple: Anti Spyware companies exchange their signature information. So its easy that a mistake is going to be shared by all of them! You reported in your public posting the following:

" It appears that the Trust Toolbar is anything but trustworthy. In fact it’s recognized by SpySweeper", here is a question for you:

TC: Does Spysweeper still report it as spyware?

If not why not? You will see that respectable and responsible anti spyware vendors are correcting their mistakes! Its ok to make mistakes as long as you are big enough to admit and correct them! Hey we are all humans and sometimes we rely on the information provided by others which prove to be wrong! For god sake, take a look at George Bush :slight_smile:

Did you read the letters likes of ISS has written apologising for the misclassification or the magazine articles about Trusttoolbar?

TC: Do you think ISS is wrong?

Come on TC ( , noone is trying to be nasty here, just setting the record straight!

thank you for you time and I look forward to your cooperation!

CEO - Comodo

PS: removing your post, why? How can I establish trust with our users if I can’t deal with any and every issue about our products in public!

PS: Why do you think I doubted you? I don’t even know you! Please re-read what I wrote in my email:
“I wrote the below email to them, but not sure if it will get to them or not as they don’t have a proper contact details”. I was only saying, the contact information I found might not be the right one to get to the right people, thats all!

Thanks Mike

Their assumption is wrong thinking that there is a spyware in the first place! There isn’t. Its simply that Anti-Spyware companies are modifying their false positive, we haven’t changed the product at all! Product is still same version of Trusttoolbar and will be the same, as its a great Identity Assurance product! The ThunderCloud claimed spysweeper detected it as spyware, well test it again, we haven’t changed the product see if it finds it as spyware! It won’t, and ask them why :wink:

What is very disappointing and somewhat liable is their statement below:

“Even though there is no evidence that there is anything questionable about Comodo Firewall we cannot support any company who makes spyware/adware/malware or any kind of questionable software at all. TC & EB”

They are implying that Comodo makes spyware/adware/malware, which is totally and utterly wrong and they admit there is no evidence either!!! Beat that!!! The very anti-spyware product they used, SpySweeper, to base their statement has corrected their mistake, yet TC has not! TC, guys, hey look its ok to be making decisions based on wrong information. You did not know any better and you trusted 3rd parties. But when you realise this information was incorrect and when you realise that the very source you relied upon has now corrected their mistake, its only fair for you to correct your statement too!

Come on guys, fair is fair!


Hmm… I don’t like the inference behind all of this.

I can understand that an individual company’s software might mistakenly detect a certain bit of software, in this case the Trusttoolbar, as being a hijacking-performance-hogging-spy. But, I’m having trouble with all those seperate companies coming up with the same conclusion.

Even an amateur, like myself, armed with a traffic analyzer & dll/file/registry monitor quickly established that it wasn’t doing anything even remotely suspicious. To me this implies a couple of things… 1) It is likely that some of them share “detections” with each other… blindly and/or that 2), in any event, nobody at these companies has actually checked Trusttoolbar themselves. They couldn’t have. They don’t check new detections?!? (Yes, I know I’m repeating myself, but I found this a stunning omission). Either that or they should have got a techie to examine Trusttoolbar rather than their Security Guard! (Guys, if you really don’t have any one that can check this stuff for you, then please do drop me line. ;D)

This is very disappointing. Shame on you all. Seriously. :frowning:


No, Comodo are not included in that above statement. It’s aimed at the dectectors, rather than the detected.

There is one potential “get-out” for the detectors that would, at least, mitigate the lesser offence of the actual detection. To your knowledge, does the Trusttoolbar run and/or deploy in such a way that is similar to the way an actual hijacking-spyware does? Or, perhaps, have any of the dectectors claimed that?


Thank you for your commonsense! Its hard to get that from certain antispyware vendors!

I think the problem came about when BHOs (Browser Helper Objects) were seen as a no no, especially if it made a connection to “somewhere”. Trusttoolbar provides identity assurance by checking the company behind a website, for that, just like a DNS server, it must ask the central server for the information about the owner of the domain so that it can display it. Some trigger happy anti-spyware vendor (we think it was Lavasoft to start with, when Lavasoft was the main antispyware vendor in those days) classified it as spyware cos it made a connection, and this without even analysing what the product actually does. And funny bit is that check out what they say about it on each antispyware site, they are all different! One claims it injects advert, the other one says it gives out personal information etc. Its a common practice to exchange samples amongst Anti virus/spwyare companies. And all I can guess is that everyone started putting it in their db without analysing it! Its cheaper to just put another signature into your anti spyware db then to actually analyse it.

So there you go… a bit of background on poor old Trustoolbar, and we thought we were helping the community by providing Identity assurance for free! :slight_smile: It turned out to be a nightmare for us and for our brand due to irresponsible anti spyware companies and now we are trying to clean it all up!


ok4u (TC :

I was hoping you could answer my questions in my above post as fast as you answered my first post :slight_smile:

Where are you? Why are you not answering? Like you I want our users to know everything about this issue so please come and help us by answering the questions.

thank you.


ok4u writes on 11-07-06 “How can so many people be so wrong?”, under a list of eight links describing Trust Toolbar as some kind of spyware.
After clicking on all the links I’m starting to understand this: it were actually five, not eight, different links. Some links were linking to different addresses from the same programs. Not very strong if you need this kind of tactics to make your point.

No, I don’t use Trust Toolbar, and I’m not going to use it.
No, Comodo doesn’t pay me (hint, hint)
Yes, I remove malware for about fifteen years.


yet another day has passed today 13th July 06 and representatives are no where to be seen! It takes a big man to come and apologise and a small man to hide in a hole somewhere unseen :wink: ! lets see which one is the guys who run are! I am confident that they are big enough to understand that the information they relied upon was wrong and will correct their advice accordingly! It happens, but would appreciate if they came back and corrected their advice, which was based on a wrong advice by the antispyware product they used. And now that this antispyware company who they based their decision on, has corrected their mistake, it would be only reasonable for TC to correct their advice too.