Revisiting "VB Project": Kick or Keep?

[Pfui]

In Bill's ongoing Default User Agents of Programming Libraries and Command Line Tools [webmasterworld.com], this UA is described as: "The default user agent name when Visual Basic projects access the internet."

This Mac person isn't 100% sure what that means, and plodding through Goo leaves me more confused/clueless than ever. So-o-o-o:

What do you do with "VB Project"?

It's seemingly been around forever, but in recent weeks I've started to see it used by a handful of real people, all of whom get redirected to a page telling them they have to e-mail for access. One person did, so I asked him about it, about why "VB Project" kicked in after he first visited using a regular browser, about whether he'd used a certain plug-in, or was copy-pasting, or--? His cluelessness made my scant knowledge look Nobellian by comparison:)

An assortment of recent 'first' browsers includes:

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; .NET CLR 3.0.04506)
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; GTB5; InfoPath.2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)

Thing is, the vast majority of the VB'rs I've seen are clearly trouble, hailing as they do from permanently blocked IPs, or not downloading adjunctive files, etc. So I'm content to keep "VB Project" on the Do Not Admit list. It's just that all of a sudden, I'm seeing, and blocking, real people, and all I can do is tell them to use anything but IE.

Thoughts? Thanks!

[wilderness]

Frequently innocents get thrown to the wolves because they are unable (or even aware) that their footprint shoots off rockets.

I've somebody who I communicate with frequently (whose IP floats; exceptions are thus on temporary) that has the Zango Tool Bar installed, which I do not let in my sites.
I've provided links (both explanation and removal) to this friend and yet he never removes it. However, in a month or two, he'll contact me again, inquiring as to why he cannot access.

Safe to assume some innocents may suffer against the masses?

Don

[caribguy]

It's 403'd on my sites. Saw it once only so far.

kicked in after he first visited using a regular browser

That's exactly what I noticed. As far as I can tell, the actual visitor was not inconvenienced by blocking this. I monitored this person's access over several days as he returned, logged in to the site, and did their business.