4 ms·

They should go the FB/Goog route and claim it was a bug.

• dx034 9y ago
  Which is probably what a legal counsel would've advised them to do. Get rid of the "feature" without admitting to what it actually did. Would've been much harder to prove how they used it without them admitting to it.
• chopin 9y ago
  Would that hold water? A file was added to the installer which has clearly nefarious purposes. As well the output produced by running that file was caught by another executable and sent home. Pretty hard to say that this wasn't intentional. Even if you would claim it was bundled erroneously, why would that be part of your code base anyway? It has no legitimate use there.