Slashdot Mirror
Malware Delivered By Yahoo, Fox, Google Ads
WrongSizeGlass writes "CNET is reporting that Avast has tracked over 2.6 million instances of malware that have been served up to unsuspecting web surfers since last December by ad services such as Yahoo's Yield Manager, Fox Audience Network's Fimserve.com and even some from Google's DoubleClick. Some high-profile sites include The New York Times, Drudge Report.com, TechCrunch and WhitePages.com. The practice has been dubbed 'malvertising.'
I usually suspect the users of 'careless web activity' when I delouse a PC, but now I'm going to have to give some the benefit of the doubt."
Say no to unsolicited content altogether! Adblockers ftw.
which is totally what she said
Yet another reason to use ad blockers. I'm starting to think Firefox should come with it out of the box.
AccountKiller
Having been an IT admin in my former life, and also having operated in a similar fashion to you, allowing unfettered access to the internet for our employees (it was a Fire Department, and the staff was there for 48 hrs straight, so allowing them some creature comforts such as facebook and youtube was appreciated). Having solid, centrally managed AV on each client machine, along with limited local user rights seemed to be effective.
I wish more facilities would take this tact instead of letting some firewall with a blacklist subscription slowly narrow the available internet to static sites that are considered "safe." True irony that advertising from some of these safe sites are now delivering payloads. Ironically, where I work now (not in IT), plenty of popup ads from news sites make it through, so I would assume we're vulnerable through this vector.
Ocean is land, covered with water.
I would like to support sites by viewing their ads but if it leaves you more open to viruses even on high-profile sites then it is not worth the risk.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
And Ars Technica says I shouldn't block ads.
I repeatedly told their staff that I don't block Ars Technica, but I do block ad servers. If they want to send me ads let them server them from their own domain.
Sites resposible for ad-vectored infections should be hit with hundreds of small claims court lawsuits to recoup the costs to clean up the infections.
Maybe then they'll learn.
Obviously, the biggest hurdle we're having to deal with is user education. I've got a select few folks in various departments learning to work with ad-block and no script, but for the average person, it's hard to figure out what they need to unblock and what they can block with no ill effects. It's frustrating to them, and by extension, our helpdesk guys who end up fielding calls from the same people (over and over) with the same questions. Of course, the other issue we have is vendor lock in, with their stupid sites working correctly ONLY in IE. I hate that, but in my case (financial industry) it's so rampant there's nothing we can do about it except lock stuff down as best we can.
That said...these large companies that aren't paying attention to the ads their serving are just as at fault as any un-educated (or even educated) user is.
Sent from your iPad.
Very good point, especially in light of Ars Technica's recent plea to users to stop blocking ads.
I, too, would be than more willing to disable the protective measures I've got in place, but as long as these sites rely on third party advertisers that are more concerned with eyeball collection than system security, we have a stalemate. If sites want me to see their ads, they have the burden of making sure the ads are safe (less annoying, would also be good). If I lower my guard out of "friendship" for a site, only to get a drive by download as a reward, I'm going to take it as a major breech of trust.
I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.