Slashdot Mirror
Malware Installed by LiveJournal Ad
Jamesday writes "LiveJournal recently introduced an ad-supported level. Over the last few days an advertiser used an ad to install the ErrorSafe malware that tried to trick people into believing they had a fault on the computer that needs them to purchase a fix. The ad used a server-side setting and targetted only those outside the US, to prevent LiveJournal's own checks from noticing it. LiveJournal has apologized for the ad and slow response." Even our readers have had to endure more than one browser-crashing ad campaign from time to time. Thanks for sticking around.
What part of "The ad used a server-side setting and targetted only those outside the US, to prevent LiveJournal's own checks from noticing it. LiveJournal has apologized for the ad and slow response." did you not read?
Actually, from their TOS:
VI. INDEMNITY
You agree to indemnify and hold LiveJournal, and its subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, agents, co-branders or other partners, and employees, harmless from any alleged claim or demand, including reasonable attorney fees, made by any third party due to or arising out of your Content, your use of the Service, your connection to the Service, your violation of the TOS, or your violation of any rights of another, whether you are a registered user or not. The user is solely responsible for his or her actions when using the Service, including, but not limited to, costs incurred for Internet access.
and
XIX. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT LIVEJOURNAL SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF LIVEJOURNAL HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE SERVICE; (ii) THE COST OF PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS AND SERVICES RESULTING FROM ANY GOODS, DATA, INFORMATION OR SERVICES PURCHASED OR OBTAINED OR MESSAGES RECEIVED OR TRANSACTIONS ENTERED INTO THROUGH OR FROM THE SERVICE; (iii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iv) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE SERVICE; OR (v) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE SERVICE.
Kernel Krunch - Part of a Complete OS
My simple fix for the security problems associated with Flash is to not install flash. Let's face it, 99.9% of flash is just obnoxious ads anyway. Who needs it.
It's for this reason that any webmaster who insists on using 100% flash to view their site deserves a swift kick to the nutsack.
Google Videos, for one, are all Flash.
Use Firefox and install Flashblock, then you'll have the benefits of both worlds.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
The tricky thing about authorization is, by definition, it requires conscience thought. So one can not authorize something "unaware" of it.
I was thinking of converting to paganism, but where the hell can you find sacrificial virgins these days?
TFA had to do with LiveJournal, not MySpace...
Xserv
"I love lamp."
Yup, yanno why? I'm constantly adminning my home network. CONSTANTLY. pretty hard to set folder permissions and shares and stuff like that when you're not running as admin.
Sucks to use Windows, doesn't it, not being able to use "su -" and control everything from a command window while logged in as a limited-permissions user?
Also, Livejournal, before these ads, was a pretty safe and secure site. Now they put in advertising, some of it flash based, and suddenly I'm nailed by one of their ads and malware hits my system.
Sucks to use IE, doesn't it? Firefox and Flashblocker would have protected you.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Here is one. But because it is based upon Christ's teachings, it would be more of a Theocracy with "communism" as it's economic model.
http://www.hutterites.org/
As for being "moral", as long as they do follow their religious code, they are "moral" by definition.
Now, whether the code they follow would be considered "moral" by someone following a different code, well, that's because "morality" is subjective, not objective.
Firefox and Flashblocker would have protected you.