In this release:

• iStock login fixed again.
• Statistics for 123rf & Fotolia fixed. Note that 123rf stats show up quite slow due to their server speed.
• Fixed: “99% upload – read timeout” error while uploading large files to Panthermedia.
• Removed some internal limitations from the free version.
• Mac: system / hidden folders will not show up in the file tree.
• Mac: some customers reported they could not run PSM 1.7 on their Macs, typically Leopard & Snow Leopard OS. This was caused by improper application packaging for Mac. Get v1.7.1 - it should run OK now.
• Linux releases & Linux support is discontinued from this release on. We prefer to focus on Mac and Win OS only.
• Shutterstock & Dreamstime FTP uploads: large / long batches interrupts fixed

...once again.
So v1.7 can not upload to iStock anymore. We'll fix it in upcoming 1.7.1 as well as a few statistics-related things.

I am happy to announce the release of new PSM v1.7.0!
In this version:

1.New stock agency added! Integrated upload, total stats and per-image statuses, downloads and earnings info for our new stock agency Pixamba. Expand your sales now!

2.iStock login fixed [again] due to further changes on their web.

3.Various EXIF interpretation fixes, ISO speed is now showing correctly in EXIF tab

-- UPDATE August 23 2009 ----------------------
iStock rolled back their login procedure, removing the new 'pop-up' web interface.
So PSM should be updated with the new release 1.6.5 which will also 'rollback' iStock login. We'll release the software update this week.

In fact, I never understood why the new login GUI was claimed on iStock forums to be 'more secure'.
Both the old login (which is back now) and the new (rolled back) login are the simple sequences of HTTPS POSTs and GETs and they both have exactly the same SSL-based level of security. Making some more GET or POST calls with a 'pop-up'-like 'div' element or adding some AJAX calls to the new iStock login procedure does not make iStock web application more secure. Obviously, iStock guys have their own view on this matter.

-- August 22 2009 ---------------------------
It seems that again there is an issue with iStock login.
Probably the changes that iStock made some time ago were not final and they keep changing their login procedure.
We are checking the issue.

... and ProStockMaster v1.6.4 follows these changes. This release also fixes Alamy login, and, hopefully, also fixes the upload of multiple files to Alamy in a single batch.

The new version will be released on this weekend. If you see any weird problem after the auto-upgrade - re-install by downloading the full archive from our web.

I guess most of you already saw this message when logged in to iStockphoto:

The iStock forums post by the same author says:

It's an interesting statement, where the first part is correct, while the second part is very confusing. No financial information to breach, oh yeah, really?

Just a week ago Dreamstime complained in this thread that "we had cases when contributors had their accounts accessed, password changed, payment requested". Now the iStockphoto guys are brave enough to say us they have "no financial information to breach"?

We all know that iStock, like any other stock photo agency has on file your PayPal / MoneyBookers accounts. They also collect funds that have to be transferred to contributors monthly. Should not this stuff be considered as a valuable financial information stored by iStock? And if it is not enough, add here you personal profile details like your home address, phones and your picture ID. And even your images portfolio is in danger since it can be first completely downloaded and stolen and then, just for fun, completely removed from the agency by a hacker who looks for an entertainment on the hacked site.

What happened to iStock on March 3 is not funny at all. And it is a much more serious issue than just a few hours of iStock down time, even if iStock prefers to present it this way. The site stores financial information and digital goods that can be stolen, so their "no financial info stored" statement is very far from the reality.

The point is that during the last few months I wrote to iStockphoto multiple emails pointing them on some security vulnerabilities in their system. The iStock answers always were "you don't have to worry, it is fine", whenever there was any answer at all.

The last email, which explains a serious security flaw in one of the iStockphoto technical interfaces was sent to iStock guys on March 2, 2009. Quite ironically, it was just a day before the site was attacked by the phishers. And quite typically, this email is still unanswered.

So I do worry. In my understanding, having security holes 'by design' is a very wrong approach to the software security concept, particularly for an online system where any security flaw can be explored and used by wise hackers. These people intentionally look for any vulnerability and once found, it will be sooner or later used against iStock customers. Perhaps we can not say at the moment how exactly some security flaw will be used to serve the hackers, but when we will know how it was used to compromise iStock security it obviously will be too late. Fixing the security flaws can not eliminate the next phishing attempt, but it definitely reduces the risk of a successful hacking attack.

Here is the email I just have received from iStockphoto.com:

Let me read you what is written in this message.

Now, please tell me who was the marketing genius behind this correspondence. I just want to shake his (her?) hand.

Dear marketer, what target did you want to reach? If you wanted to get some angry customers, my congratulations, you got them all. I am sure anyone who got such a message feels frustrated and angry after reading it.

So, you want to keep iStock collection 'clean', containing only brilliant images? I see. No doubt this is a good target you should aim to.

Assuming that iStock biggest investment is in human reviewing of images and this investment is taken anyway, it would be enough just to mark images that you do not like anymore as "low quality", handling them respectively in images searches. Adding "this-image-is-a-low-quality-image" DB field is exactly 20 minutes of work for your developers, including testing.
Give your reviewers an option to mark images that they do not like anymore as "low quality" and you guys are done!

Instead, iStock preferred to lose money sending messages like this one above to tens thousands contributors that will be shocked reading them exactly like I was.

How much does you guys cost to bring in a new contributor who generates some sales? Now take this cost and multiply it by the number of photographers that will leave you now - this is the cost of such a marketing communication message. I will not be surprised if many recipients of this correspondence will just stop submitting their images to iStock, which appears to be too good for their artwork, preferring submitting images to other agencies that treat their photographers differently.
Bravo iStock! - good work, great marketing, refreshing approach to customers relationship - thumbs up!

I especially loved "You have two options." quote. I see it this way:
One dark night you meet a robber. He points his gun on you and says:
"You have two options. You either give me your money and then I kill you or I first kill you and then I take your money."
Being a good iStockphoto marketing person, the robber continues: "Do not you worry, my friend. The choice is always yours. You are in complete control here!".
And just because that robber is a bit more polite than the author of the email above he also adds: "Oh, and thank you for doing business with us!".

In a short time after this post has been published I got a personal message from iStockphoto staff, saying that the email discussed in this post was sent out by a mistake and they apologize for the misunderstanding.

According to iStock, what should be sent out was this message:

Obviously, this is a very different message to a contributor. When you get such an email, you see one more [welcome] service from iStock which is designed to help you selling your images that were never sold, at a lower price. Just great, let's try selling this unsold stuff for just $1, why not. And see - there is no single word about image removals!

Mark Dennis,iStock commented out what happened with their Dollar Bin initiative at last: So the gremlins got into the auto email system again, and some people got an email saying that the files will be deleted after 30 days if they're not selling.

Well, it seems that these gremlins, goblins and trolls were quite human and very intelligent, were not them? I guess that they really enjoyed what they did to the company, these cute little pets of iStockphoto.

Jokes aside, I am glad that iStock clarified their position now, and even probably took the entire gremlins family out of the iStock email system this time?

Mark, if you want my advice - next time just deduct the damages costs from the gremlins salary. Typically, it works at its best avoiding further similar attempts.

iStock also has sent 'the right' email to their contributors now, so if you just like me got the 'remove it or else' email discussed above, wait for the next message from iStock. As you see above, the second email looks much better than the first one.