Well, here goes... I'm "investing" $20 for the rest of HN to find out how accurate it is.
Okay so it's scanning... it has found a bunch of development things, gifs from my website work which isn't porn -- recycle binned stuff -- okay watching this, it's just bringing up every single file that contains a list of extensions; it's included under "videos" things like "DVDMaker sample" which certainly aren't porn. I don't think "passwordField.png" located in programData/skype is pornographic.
The websites it has found don't appear to be any I have ever visted, although some are (and they're popular sites) about half aren't. Either it's fabricating the websites or I've visited sites that embed data from these other sites? Plausible I guess.
What an awful product, albeit effectively marketed.
Methinks you misunderstand. This is a money-at-all-costs gambit, not a pinnacle-of-science-and-engineering product.
It could have been made by someone following popular HN advice: a.) target women by b.) preying on a weakness (here, a sense of insecurity) then c.) extract money.
it get's repeated ad-nauseum by an individual with little else to offer.
You've been on HN for less than an year. I'm not sure you're ready to start passing judgement on how much one of the most helpful contributors has to offer.
Sounds pretty fraudulent in that case, since the advertising materials clearly imply that it's detecting porn, not just listing all image files on the computer. I mean bad classification would be one thing, but not even attempting, while claiming that it does, seems like another. Maybe demand your $20 back?
citricsquid - thanks for the info. Did it give any false negatives for you?
To all complaining about the product giving false positives: think about it from the user's perspective. If you ran this program, and it showed you no results, you'd probably just think it didn't work. Showing you a scattering of false positives "proves" that it at least did something. And checking down the list makes you feel like you completed your audit.
Not a professional reverse engineer. But the jar is not obfuscated and is fairly easy to understand.
The jar loads a "model" which is a serialised version of a class containing keywords from a url constructed from the applet params "codebase" and "getmodelurl".
It looks into
1. Chrome, firefox, and IE histories
Matches history with sites in the "model"
2. Main filesystem
It enumerates all the files in the file system, checking if it is either a picture, or a movie, then checks if the filename matches the list of keywords obtained from the "model".
Okay so it's scanning... it has found a bunch of development things, gifs from my website work which isn't porn -- recycle binned stuff -- okay watching this, it's just bringing up every single file that contains a list of extensions; it's included under "videos" things like "DVDMaker sample" which certainly aren't porn. I don't think "passwordField.png" located in programData/skype is pornographic.
The websites it has found don't appear to be any I have ever visted, although some are (and they're popular sites) about half aren't. Either it's fabricating the websites or I've visited sites that embed data from these other sites? Plausible I guess.
What an awful product, albeit effectively marketed.