We've had to ban the application entirely from our work machines. At least when we went through review, even the "clean" versions packaged things that tripped our antivirus software, and at that point, we as an organization decided to stop trusting the author entirely.

There's quite a lot of forum posts where the author defends this practice, so we don't see this reversing any time soon.

We packaged it ourselves and made it available as an SCCM bundle, since users don't have admin rights on their systems anyway.

I'm surprised nobody made a forked commercial version yet.

Remove the adware, replace the logo, sell commercial licenses.

There's FileZilla Pro.

https://filezillapro.com/

As someone who is happy to pay for good software, I can't ever see myself buying a paid version of something (no matter how good it might be) if the author has a history of using dark patterns and showing their apparent contempt for their users with the "free" edition. I'd be constantly wondering what other traps might be lurking in there.

Right. The fact that you can get around something, or that someone failed to do something to you is not the important thing. What matters far more is the fact that they tried and wanted to.

>If you check the filename of the windows installer you download from the frontpage the name is FileZilla_Version_Sponsored-setup.exe

Damn...that reminds me of the old days of sneaky checkboxes hidden in installers, usually actually hidden, that would be pre-checked confirming your consent to whatever ad/spyware to be installed alongside whatever you wanted to install.

I remember that shit being everywhere for a few years. Got tricked by them once or twice and had a hell of a time cleaning things up after.

Yeah, the one I remember was RealPlayer, which during the install wizard had a list of check boxes. The ones initially visible were unchecked, but if you scrolled you'd find the spam consent ones were checked.

RealPlayer... RealAudio... immediately jettisoned back to the 90's :)

Adobe Reader comes to mind

Java...

If you're using filezilla on windows only (not cross platform) then winscp is a great replacement. No worries about ads or repackaging.

WinSCP is great and I find myself using it more and more over FileZilla. I wish there was a WinSCP equivalent for Linux too.

Really depends what you use it for (dual pane SSH file manager/FTP file manager/file manager). You can do this with Nautilus or Fman plus GNOME if you want to, since gvfs abstracts protocols such as FTP, SSH, SMB, ...

On Windows you go such as well, including Fuse/Dokan, and on macOS you got MacFuse. Hence on macOS I use (by default CLI but if that does not cut it) Finder/Fman, and if that doesn't work, Cyberduck. Fman and Cyberduck also work on Windows, on Linux Cyberduck does not work but Fman does. CrossFTP might also work for you, as might Wine.

I'm not sure about all features, such as FXP (which is insecure anyway, and only used in scene).

Came here to say this. There's been adware in the official download for what feels like 7-10 years now.

Does this impact the Filezilla server or just the client?

You could also download it with Ninite. Nothing downloaded with Ninite will install the sponsored versions of software.

Is it really a controversial comment? Or are people just tired of hearing the same "but Microsoft does this this and this" everytime something positive comes up?

Are you saying we all should switch away from Microsoft right this instant? If you aren't, then what? Let's boycott windows defender? Make our windows experience even worse? That will show them.

There are no relevant search results for "windows 10 adware". Can you be more specific?

In the start menu you automatically get stubs for apps like Candy crush, Adobe CC, and others. You never requested them but they'll install on first use.