Proprietary Software Is Often Malware

Proprietary software, also called nonfree software, means software that doesn't respect users' freedom and community. A proprietary program puts its developer or owner in a position of power over its users. This power is in itself an injustice.

The point of this directory is to show by examples that the initial injustice of proprietary software often leads to further injustices: malicious functionalities.

Power corrupts; the proprietary program's developer is tempted to design the program to mistreat its users. (Software designed to function in a way that mistreats the user is called malware.) Of course, the developer usually does not do this out of malice, but rather to profit more at the users' expense. That does not make it any less nasty or more legitimate.

Yielding to that temptation has become ever more frequent; nowadays it is standard practice. Modern proprietary software is typically an opportunity to be tricked, harmed, bullied or swindled.

Online services are not released software, but in regard to all the bad aspects, using a service is equivalent to using a copy of released software. In particular, a service can be designed to mistreat the user, and many services do that. However, we do not list instances of malicious dis-services here, for two reasons. First, a service (whether malicious or not) is not a program that one could install a copy of, and there is no way at all for users to change it. Second, it is so obvious that a service can mistreat users if the owner wishes that we hardly need to prove it.

However, most online services require the user to run a nonfree app. The app is released software, so we do list malicious functionalities of these apps. Mistreatment by the service itself is imposed by use of the app, so sometimes we mention those mistreatments too—but we try to state explicitly what is done by the app and what is done by the dis-service.

When a web site provides access to a service, it very likely sends nonfree JavaScript software to execute in the user's browser. Such JavaScript code is released software, and it's morally equivalent to other nonfree apps. If it does malicious things, we want to mention them here.

When talking about mobile phones, we do list one other malicious characteristic, location tracking which is caused by the underlying radio system rather than by the specific software in them.

As of May 2025, the pages in this directory list around 650 instances of malicious functionalities (with more than 760 references to back them up), but there are surely thousands more we don't know about.

Ideally we would list every instance. If you come across an instance which we do not list, please write to webmasters@gnu.org to tell us about it. Please include a reference to a reputable article that describes the malicious behavior clearly; we won't list an item without documentation to point to.

If you want to be notified when we add new items or make other changes, subscribe to the mailing list <www-malware-commits@gnu.org>.

Injustices or techniques Products or companies
  1. Back door:  any feature of a program that enables someone who is not supposed to be in control of the computer where it is installed to send it commands.
  2. Digital restrictions management, or “DRM”:  functionalities designed to restrict what users can do with the data in their computers.
  3. Jail:  system that imposes censorship on application programs.
  4. Tether:  functionality that requires permanent (or very frequent) connection to a server.
  5. Tyrant:  system that rejects any operating system not “authorized” by the manufacturer.

Users of proprietary software are defenseless against these forms of mistreatment. The way to avoid them is by insisting on free (freedom-respecting) software. Since free software is controlled by its users, they have a pretty good defense against malicious software functionality.

Latest additions

  • 2025-05

    With Windows 10 soon reaching obsolescence, users whose computer is not modern enough are facing unjust choices, such as paying for updates or buying a new computer. But their best option is to replace Windows with a free operating system, and enjoy the freedom and justice it brings them.

  • 2025-05

    Microsoft Teams has been collecting voice and face data from students of an Australian school, to feed the CoPilot chatbot. It took the school network administrators a whole month to realize what was happening, and disable this malfeature. It was obviously beyond their imagination that Microsoft could have made biometric data collection the default in Teams!

    Let's hope legislators and regulatory agencies all over the world will quickly put a stop to this sort of outrageous practice.

    In any case people would be better off switching to a free-software replacement such as Jitsi Meet for medium-size groups, or Big Blue Button for larger ones. Many public instances are available, and groups of users can also set up their own servers.

  • 2025-05

    Nintendo has been known to remotely brick the Wii until users consented to new, more restrictive legal terms. This company is now pushing tyranny even further: in the 2025 update of its User Account Agreement, it warns that Switch consoles may be permanently bricked if they are not used as authorized.

    In addition, Nintendo can record audio and video chats for moderation purposes. User's consent is required, but there is no guarantee that the recordings will not be sent to third parties. In short, there is no privacy in these chats.

    If you ever consider buying a Switch, think twice, because you will not own it. Nintendo will.

  • 2024-12

    BeReal, a nonfree social media app, pressures users into giving their consent to tracking by means of dark patterns and harrassment.

  • 2025-03

    Amazon has removed the “Do Not Send Voice Recordings” option from Echo devices, including from devices that support local processing of these recordings. All private conversations are now used to train Alexa's “artificial intelligence.” Moreover, if users choose not to save recordings, they will lose some advanced functions of Alexa that they paid for.

    This wouldn't happen if software in the Echo were free. Users would be able to restore the “Do Not Send Voice Recordings” option.

More items…