Slashdot Mirror


Porn Sites More Infected Than Thought

nk497 writes "Porn sites are five times as likely to host malware as previously thought, with 3.6% offering up a digital infection of some sort, according to a researchers who set up their very own adult sites for a new study. One reason for the high rate of malware is that the online porn industry makes use of affiliate programs, where one site will drive traffic to another in exchange for links, cash, or simply free pornographic material to use. Because such programs don't check who they're doing business with, and sites use disguised links and other clandestine methods to drive people to different pages, it's easy for criminals to abuse the system to spread malware. Researcher Gilbert Wondracek said, 'They inadvertently have created an ecosystem that can easily be abused on a large scale by cyber criminals, and that's worrying.'"

170 comments

  1. That's ok... by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 4, Funny

    But that's ok... only ethically bad people use pornography, right? Right?

    What? You mean risks to one part of the internet make it less safe for the rest of us? Gasp!

    --
    Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
    altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
    1. Re:That's ok... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I used to be involved in the porn business (no, I didn't fuck any girls on camera but I did get a blowjob now and then). Let's just say far more than 3.6% of the girls I worked were infected. We don't have time to wait for her outbreak to clear up so we had to use odd angles, prop placement, or just keep her panties on.

    2. Re:That's ok... by Technician · · Score: 3, Funny

      You are here cruising Slashdot, where visitors can post links and such to stories, news articles, photos, and even porn sites posted by trolls. Just because you don't visit porn sites intentionally, dosen't mean someone with bad intent won't provide a link to a site. Mods often mod them down to troll before the general public provides lots of traffic.

      How do you know the link below is safe? The name of the site doesn't always indicate the contents.
      http://crazybuilders.com/ Note, the link is safe for work.

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
    3. Re:That's ok... by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic/rhetorical

    4. Re:That's ok... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your sarcasm detector seems to be broken, you might need a replacement.

    5. Re:That's ok... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      _I_ know it's safe because I block all scripting with noscript. Adblock plus helps too...

    6. Re:That's ok... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic/rhetorical

      Facetious even.

    7. Re:That's ok... by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But that's ok... only ethically bad people use pornography, right? Right?

      According to quite a few people, yes. Pornography exploits women by treating them as objects or "pieces of meat" for sinful men. There are many who hold such opinions and who argument and lobby strongly for pornography to be heavily censored or more preferable banned in order to protect women and especially children.

      Funnily enough, most of these same people beleive a woman's place is in the home, subservient to her husband, and largely removed from the democratic process. So something tells me they're not in it for the women they're supposedly fighting for.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    8. Re:That's ok... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Why is this a troll when it should be informative...I will always use odd angles, prop placement and panties when I surf the Internet from now on.

    9. Re:That's ok... by Maarx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic/rhetorical

      Where I come from, we shorten that sentence to "wooosh".

    10. Re:That's ok... by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      I thought so too, but then when he said, "One part of the internet make it less safe for the rest of us," I realized he really does think pornsites are bad, in the same way politicians say having a red-light district is bad for the whole city, and then bulldoze those blocks.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    11. Re:That's ok... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, check this site out

      http://stackoverflow.com/

    12. Re:That's ok... by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 1

      The end of the prop skateboard video - is that behind Arsenal Mall?

    13. Re:That's ok... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Pornography exploits women

      Hell, if that's being "exploited" then somebody exploit me.

    14. Re:That's ok... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the other group that thinks it's exploitation is the feminist type - who do not have the women at home stuff

    15. Re:That's ok... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember if you surf porn without protection your computer will get a virus.

      If you FK without protection you will get a virus.

    16. Re:That's ok... by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 1

      I used to be involved in the porn business (no, I didn't fuck any girls on camera but I did get a blowjob now and then).

      Did you get paid fairly once your job responsibilities spiraled?

    17. Re:That's ok... by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>only ethically bad people use pornography, right?

      Wrong. Sex is not "bad" - it's perfectly natural. It includes both bad and good people. - As for the danger I think you should be okay if you stick to safe sites like http://www.domai.com/ or www.google.com which either don't link to other sites, or else filter out the crap (google blocks dangerous sites). And of course keep your NoScript on. Plus Web of Trust (for dual protection).

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    18. Re:That's ok... by bigrockpeltr · · Score: 1

      time to put a condom over my monitor... or my network cable... hmmm

      --
      $ unzip, strip, touch, finger, grep, mount, fsck, more, yes,fsck,fsck,fsck,umount, sleep
    19. Re:That's ok... by 2obvious4u · · Score: 1

      Just because you put "Note, the link is safe for work.", does that really mean that it is? It modded +4 funny at this time, so maybe it is, but then maybe it isn't, maybe that is why it is funny. +5 informative might prove the link to in fact be safe and hopefully the moderation of -1 Troll would in fact prove it to be NSFW.

    20. Re:That's ok... by kalirion · · Score: 1

      Note, the link is safe for work.

      Obligatory xkcd.

    21. Re:That's ok... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to quite a few people, yes. Pornography exploits women by treating them as objects or "pieces of meat" for sinful men.

      Strangely no one ever says the men in these are being exploited or peices of meat even though they are doing the exact same thing the women are doing in the movie. Also the women get paid about 3 times more than the men.

  2. Simple one-person solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    For random web browsing on assorted sites, boot up from a Linux boot CD. Your entire OS will be in memory, nothing on your HD is touched.

    1. Re:Simple one-person solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      And here I was thinking your "simple one-person solution" was to browse porn sites...

    2. Re:Simple one-person solution... by shentino · · Score: 1

      I'd rather use a condom.

    3. Re:Simple one-person solution... by westlake · · Score: 1

      For random web browsing on assorted sites, boot up from a Linux boot CD. Your entire OS will be in memory, nothing on your HD is touched.

      Except perhaps your data files.

    4. Re:Simple one-person solution... by yotto · · Score: 1

      Assuming you mount it...

    5. Re:Simple one-person solution... by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah as long as you don't mount, you should be okay.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    6. Re:Simple one-person solution... by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ...nothing on your HD is touched.

      What hard drive? ;-)

    7. Re:Simple one-person solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, because I have nothing better to do than reboot my computer 100 times a day.

    8. Re:Simple one-person solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID!

    9. Re:Simple one-person solution... by digitig · · Score: 1

      I think the solution was aimed at those who don't flick quite so often between porn and work as you evidently do.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    10. Re:Simple one-person solution... by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "Right, because I have nothing better to do than reboot my computer 100 times a day."

      So use a Linux VM instead. It's trivially easy nowadays.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    11. Re:Simple one-person solution... by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "What hard drive? ;-)"

      Someone with mod points mod up!

      Live CD/DVD booting is handy stuff, and will keep you going even if your hard disk dies.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    12. Re:Simple one-person solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You should ask your doctor about Viagra.

    13. Re:Simple one-person solution... by ArundelCastle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because when I want to take a ten minute break for random browsing, I *really* want to shut down everything I'm in the middle of doing and reboot twice.

      OTOH, if more porn sites said they were best viewed on Linux, I'm sure it would help market.. er... penetration.

    14. Re:Simple one-person solution... by Macrat · · Score: 1

      Yeah as long as you don't mount, you should be okay.

      That's what SHE said.

    15. Re:Simple one-person solution... by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      For random web browsing on assorted sites, boot up from a Linux boot CD. Your entire OS will be in memory, nothing on your HD is touched.

      Unplug your HDD too. Otherwise your Linux CD can often mount your drive read/write, and if it has a vulnerable version of FF, you're owned since the default user usually has passwordless sudo privs.

    16. Re:Simple one-person solution... by nabsltd · · Score: 1

      So use a Linux VM instead. It's trivially easy nowadays.

      And, to get that "live CD" behavior, configure the VM software to revert to the base snapshot each time the VM is rebooted.

    17. Re:Simple one-person solution... by hduff · · Score: 1

      For random web browsing on assorted sites, boot up from a Linux boot CD. Your entire OS will be in memory, nothing on your HD is touched.

      No touching. Nice.

      --
      "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
    18. Re:Simple one-person solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry, all the Linux users already know all the best fag pr0n sites.

    19. Re:Simple one-person solution... by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>That's what SHE said.

      If you really want to satisfy a woman, bring a vibrator. Machines are faster then men.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    20. Re:Simple one-person solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      linux is not OSX. go troll somewhere else!

    21. Re:Simple one-person solution... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      "And, to get that "live CD" behavior," just boot the CD image.

      I've set up a VM in which to run LiveCD images, just to compare the various distros. The only "hard drive" available is a small swap file. I don't even need the swap file, but I supply it just in case something on the LiveCD wants to complain about the absence of the swap.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    22. Re:Simple one-person solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>>That's what SHE said.

      If you really want to satisfy a woman, bring a vibrator. Machines are faster then men.

      Way to go champ! Use that vibrator and force her to orgasm in 15 seconds flat. That way you'll stand a good chance of not coming before she does.

    23. Re:Simple one-person solution... by Kitkoan · · Score: 1

      For random web browsing on assorted sites, boot up from a Linux boot CD. Your entire OS will be in memory, nothing on your HD is touched.

      Doubt the average user would do that since they either 1)don't know its an option or 2)tend to be afraid of Linux. Now, being 'tech support' for my friends I get see to see what they are doing and where. I have to admit, its seems to be quite rare that they are going to porn sites since porn sites have gotten this bad press for causing system issues. It surprised me at first but then I found out where they were all getting their 'porn fix'. Pretty much every torrent site has a 'porn' section with a huge porn selection of full videos. No malware, full video's at a much higher frame rate then those shady porn websites.

      --
      Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,
    24. Re:Simple one-person solution... by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 1

      Be sure to ask him if you're healthy enough to have sex.

      (Then watch as he holds his chin, turns his head sideways a bit, and squints at you for a few seconds.)

    25. Re:Simple one-person solution... by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 1

      ... meanwhile Real Men are using Windows to surf for straight porn ... [ducks]

    26. Re:Simple one-person solution... by hairyfeet · · Score: 2, Informative

      Faster? What is this, a race? Nah, vibrators is just a cheap cop out. You wanna turn that woman into a puddle of goo and curl her toes? you listen to your old play hairyfeet: You use your hands and most importantly...your voice. The whole time you are exploring her body, you tell her how sexy she is, how you love watching her writhe on your bed, how you can't wait to be inside her, how you can't wait to taste her, how you love to feel her clit throbbing beneath your fingers, and before you can get anything else out her back will be arching and she'll be wailing like a banshee. Then you need to pet her down while telling her how beautiful she looks when she comes. Trust me, the girl WILL be coming back for more and more.

      As for TFA, as a PC repairman I'd say a good 75%+ of the buggy PCs that cross my desk come from guys surfing pron sites. The rest are from girls falling for FB and IM bugs. It got to the point I did some research and found a free site (not linking here to avoid giving them the /. effect) that has 1000 hours of porn easy, so I just point my customers that keep getting porn bugs towards this site. It may cost me some repeat business, but I get enough from referrals as it is, and cleaning porn bugs is...eeew.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    27. Re:Simple one-person solution... by SudoGhost · · Score: 1

      anonymous@linux:~$ unzip
      anonymous@linux:~$ mount
      anonymous@linux:~$ fsck
      anonymous@linux:~$ unmount

    28. Re:Simple one-person solution... by spiralx · · Score: 2, Funny

      Huh, good sexual advice on /., this must be a first in the 10 years I've been reading it...

    29. Re:Simple one-person solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      COMCAST SUCKS-my analog cable for $64/month was phased out. The new digital cable requires boxes for my 4 sets. Cost $85

      I swear to God that everyone on Slashdot is a fucking puss anymore. Man up bitch or drop your cable.

    30. Re:Simple one-person solution... by nabsltd · · Score: 1

      "And, to get that "live CD" behavior," just boot the CD image.

      True, but you can customize an installed-to-HD distro to be exactly what you want, and keep it patched up (as long as you remember to temporarily disable the "revert to snapshot" while patching).

  3. 3.6% by deadhammer · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'd better run a full scan just in case.

    Not like I've been to as many porn sites as would be necessary to be statistically likely to have gotten infected. Several times over. Nosiree!

    --
    I'll be honest, we're throwing science against the wall to see what sticks. -Cave Johnson
    1. Re:3.6% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Noscript, adblock plus, spybot/blaster, a few good i/o monitors, weekly scans, no worries.

      It's easy to get infected with low-lying malware, which is everywhere now. Everywhere.

      I'll only be concerned when they can past the moron line of defense.

    2. Re:3.6% by kalirion · · Score: 1

      Noscript, adblock plus

      "Oops, this site requires javascript to work. Please enable javascript to watch this 17 shemales, 1 teakettle video!"

  4. Funding by zonker · · Score: 0

    Wonder where they got the porn for their study? Did they submit their own collections? Or did they purchase it? Love to see the PO on that one.

    1. Re:Funding by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 2, Informative

      Did they submit their own collections?

      Porn SITES .

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  5. Yea right by mrsteveman1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    according to a researchers who set up their very own adult sites for a new study.

    Strictly for research purposes :)

    1. Re:Yea right by jack2000 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      We may joke all we want but it's about time porn distribution sites be managed by scientists. Meticulous classification of each video, maybe they can track usage statistics for fetishes etc.

    2. Re:Yea right by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      No doubt the professors/ researchers got some volunteers from the local coed community.
      (blinks)
      So where was this site again?

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    3. Re:Yea right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow, that would be awesome.

    4. Re:Yea right by moderatorrater · · Score: 4, Funny

      Coed: Why are you doing these things to me and taping it again, professor?
      Professor: For science!

    5. Re:Yea right by Fumus · · Score: 1

      Tags are the way to go for porn. The first person to open up a website creating lists of tag words based or MD5 sums for your porn file collection to import in a file tagging program will be rich.

    6. Re:Yea right by jack2000 · · Score: 1

      Google:
      Gelbooru
      Danbooru
      rule34.paheal

    7. Re:Yea right by bjourne · · Score: 1

      Joke all you want, but they already are. :) What people jack off to already is closely tracked, even what porn works best for different countries and states. I can tell you already that what most people are interested in, is plain vanilla sex, but what matters is what kind of porn people are prepared to pay for and under what circumstances, and vanilla sex ain't it. Porn is just as competetive as any other internet business.

    8. Re:Yea right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No I won't. I'll GPL the code behind it. I'm actually working on that as we speak :)

    9. Re:Yea right by Fumus · · Score: 1

      Or e641, but I was targeting video files. Hosting them costs bandwidth and uploading them by users just to get the tags is infeasible, thus the MD5 sums. I'm sure there are thousands of "most popular" files which are shared and not changed but have dozens of file names each. My idea is pretty much MusicBrainz Picard but for porn clips.

    10. Re:Yea right by jack2000 · · Score: 1

      sharing protocols like DC++( and gnutela and countless others) already use TTH, there are TTH listing sites, basically what you ask for is already out there, it's just not specialized for porn. It will have the TTH-es/Magnet links for such files though.

    11. Re:Yea right by Merls+the+Sneaky · · Score: 1

      I blinded her with science!

  6. Uhmm... no, duh? by mark-t · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wow... what a shocker! Porn sites have lots of malware! Who woulda guessed?

    Really... who on earth is actually surprised by this?

    1. Re:Uhmm... no, duh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      No shit. File this under "beyond obviousness."

      Slashdot needs to focus on real nerd stuff. For example, my computer is really slow lately and should have more links on how to deal with that!

    2. Re:Uhmm... no, duh? by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Unsafe behavior leads to spread of viruses, film at eleven.

      (Eleven what?)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Uhmm... no, duh? by Tanktalus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They just did. This article is on exactly that topic. :-P

    4. Re:Uhmm... no, duh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is really depressing - whichever way you go (manual/virtual or real meat) you always have consequences and they often enuff manifest as viral infections......

      I have thought however that the 'dangerous' sites are more widespread - 3.6& as in TFA does not seem be much. Another thing - can you imagine disappointment when a pr0n hungry human does a search on pron sites and some given links lead him/her to TFA - I mean there are surely no examples of baits used or.....

    5. Re:Uhmm... no, duh? by Fartypants · · Score: 1

      Wow... what a shocker! Porn sites have lots of malware! Who woulda guessed?

      Really... who on earth is actually surprised by this?

      Exactly. My first reaction was, Porn Sites More Infected Than WHO Thought? Everybody knows porn sites are infected. That's why you use "porn mode" with AdBlock, no?

  7. Weird by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Weird.

    That is WAY lower than I'd have expected.

    1. Re:Weird by digitig · · Score: 1

      You're probably surfing the more -- er -- specialised stuff, then.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
  8. Re:Not only that but... by blai · · Score: 2, Insightful
    --
    In soviet Russia, God creates you!
  9. Alternatively by SamSim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't know the stats, but maybe it's more correct to say that malware sites are more likely to host pornography than they are to fall into other categories? It's probably the best way to attract large streams of users.

    1. Re:Alternatively by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Ya I think you need to work to separate sites that happen to have porn on them for various reasons, and sites who's business it is to sell porn. Just because a site has porn on it doesn't make it a porn site, at least not for a useful definition of the term. Now while I'm sure there are actual porn sites that are shady, I'm betting that there are far less than shady sites that try to use porn to lure people. After all, if your business is charging people a monthly fee for access, you want to keep them happy. Infecting them would be stupid. So you make a few bucks for the malware infection, but lose $20+ per month because the subscriber goes elsewhere.

    2. Re:Alternatively by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know the stats, but maybe it's more correct to say that malware sites are more likely to host pornography than they are to fall into other categories? It's probably the best way to attract large streams of users.

      This.

      We saw the same thing with captcha cracking porn and rom sites. Both parties are getting something that they want out of the exchange.

    3. Re:Alternatively by The+Hatchet · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, there are tons of ways to attract large streams of users, but I think you are write hear. From what I have seen, most porn sites infected with maleware are literally stealing the porn from other sites, none of it is original, and you can never actually reach good porn, just links to porn that link to virii.

      To be honest, it sounds to me like the porn industry hates those bastards as much as we do.

      Also, having a stream of users that is not in a clear state of mind, frantically looking for something good to get off on, so they are really not as likely check the credentials of the site or think at all before clicking on something. It probably makes them easier to manipulate, and therefore easier to hack.

      --
      Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also, ...
    4. Re:Alternatively by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

      I think you are write hear.

      Holy homophones, Batman!

    5. Re:Alternatively by ZirconCode · · Score: 1

      It's probably the best way to attract large streams of users.

      What are these large streams of users you are speaking about?

    6. Re:Alternatively by perryizgr8 · · Score: 1

      but I think you are write hear.

      man, are you using some kind of voice recognition or something?

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    7. Re:Alternatively by The+Hatchet · · Score: 1

      no, I wrote it at 5 in the morning, and was practically falling asleep. But I really should get that voice recognition stuff back up and running.

      --
      Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also, ...
    8. Re:Alternatively by Nethead · · Score: 1

      Took that long to whack off? You need to visit better porn sites, or work on determining your exact fetish.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
  10. Just like in real life... by GilliamOS · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You might catch something playing the field if you don't use protection!

    --
    "There might be intelligent beings created by God in outer space even if there are none here on Earth." -Anonymous
    1. Re:Just like in real life... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Fortunately, slashdot users never run into that sort of "real life" problem.

  11. So basically by NotSoHeavyD3 · · Score: 0

    Porn sites are like porn stars, both are heavily infected.

    --
    Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
    1. Re:So basically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Fuck off you Christian Taliban scum. "Oh noes! Somebody is having unconventional sex outside of the bounds of a Christian marriage! They must be infected with all kinds of diseases!"

    2. Re:So basically by erroneus · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually no. Sex professionals take their occupation quite seriously. It is the non-professional who is lose and fast with their machines and their sexual practices. Do you think just "keeping a high moral standard" will keep you safe? Think again.

      Just as with computers, preventative measure and testing are needed. For me, I run Linux, Firefox, no-script and adblock. Testing isn't quite as required for me, but I routinely check processes running and the like. Sex workers frequently get tested and people in the industry know what other people in the industry have been up to for the most part. "average people" get sex diseases a LOT more often than sex industry pros.

    3. Re:So basically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
      How much condom porn is there? Not much.
      How much unprotected 'face shot and swallow" is there? a lot.
      How much preventative measures? Very little.
      How much testing? Monthly!!
      But only HIV will kick you out of the business.
      The other STDs are very common if scientific reports are to be believed. Outbreaks for the other stuff prevent work for a week if AIM Healthcare is to be believed.
      So if you take infected as being HIV only, sure, porn stars don't hardly have it. The other stuff can be up to 30%

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1892037/

    4. Re:So basically by arielCo · · Score: 2, Informative

      They do test, but the window period can be as high as three months with plain ELISA, down to a month if you spend extra for Western blot, and that means that when someone comes out positive, all his/her partners within that period have to be tested as well as their respective partners. It happened in 2004 (5 infected) and 2009 (16 infected).

      Back on topic: I haven't gotten anything from the web *ever*, perhaps for the simple discipline of not authorizing ActiveX components, applets and other gimmicks.

      But that's me; I guess less computer-literate *and* porn hungry guys make easier targets - "Yes, Ok, Yes, show me the movies already!".

      --
      This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
    5. Re:So basically by hduff · · Score: 1

      Back on topic: I haven't gotten anything from the web *ever*, perhaps for the simple discipline of not authorizing ActiveX components, applets and other gimmicks.

      But that's me; I guess less computer-literate *and* porn hungry guys make easier targets - "Yes, Ok, Yes, show me the movies already!".

      I do the Linux/Firefox/Adblock/NoScript thing and also don't do the usual stupid stuff.

      But that puts me in the minority and I routinely re-disinfect the computers of Windows-using friends and relatives who are not stupid and try to be careful when they browse the web or install software.

      There are many ways to infect a system (even Mac and Linux) and more will always be found. It's a battle that can't be won as the economic incentive for the "enemy" is to great to cease their innovation and onslaught and the software too complex to ever "fix" completely. and there will always be trade-offs between convenience and security.

      One can only take reasonable precautions and expect reasonable, not perfect, results.

      The attack vector through porn sites is not likely to be fixed (no financial incentive to do it and the site operators likely don't care about malware infections they may be passing along), so you can either avoid them or use on old computer dedicated only to porn browsing (or the Linux or Windows on CD approach) .

      --
      "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
    6. Re:So basically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is the non-professional who is lose and fast with their machines and their sexual practices.

      It should be loose, not lose. I think this is the first time I've found someone making the typo this way around.

  12. Tits or GTFO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Only old men that get caught by their wives via porn mailing lists use porn sites. Kids nowadays use 4chan, which are typically more tech-savvy than their old male counterparts. Whomever uses porn sites with java on gets what they deserve. If you need to turn on java to see pictures, it's probably not a safe site. Also, providing log-in info and an e-mail address to access porn to a website that is likely compromised is a bad idea, which is why 4chan is great because you don't need to readily sign up for a premium account (lol).

    1. Re:Tits or GTFO by clustro · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Totally agree.

      I personally have never had any problems whatsoever getting my hands (err... eyes rather) on pr0n, without any sort of virus nonsense. It still amazes me how gullible are, installing those bullshit porno-dialers on their computers and getting a $500 phone bill the next month for calling long distance to Christmas Island or some damned place.

      For all intents and purposes, the pornography-access problem is solved - there is no incentive for anyone would pay for pornography anymore. Even if you locked-down every leaked porno video from a paysite, there are still tons of insanely hot (and stupid) girlfriends, hood rats, and drunk chicks willing to get nekkid for the testosterone-charged 4chan hordes - completely free of charge. Some even fuck on camera and let their boyfriends upload it to youporn. And there is always beloved Bittorrent and Usenet.

      Just be sure to have NoScript (and maybe RequestPolicy too) on to be safe. TrueCrypt is also handy for securely storing the hit parade.

  13. Funny Off-Topic-But-Related Note by no1home · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I work for a facility where a large number of our computers are for public use. We do not filter access (but if children are near someone known to be surfing porn, we have that person stop surfing such material). We all know some people choose to surf porn here, though it boggles the mind why.

    One day, I saw an older lady take a wet-nap style cleaning towel from the container we provide and begin cleaning the keyboard with it. I expressed my concern over using a WET-nap for an electronic part (they're for cleaning the desk, seat, hands, etc.).

    Lady: But you know they watch porn on these PCs, right?
    Me: Yes. We aren't allowed to filter the content. But cleaning the key...
    Lady: And you know these porn places are infected with all kinds of viruses, don't you?
    Me: ....?

    --
    I hope this comment is well received... I could have moderated instead!

    Persecutors will be violated!
    1. Re:Funny Off-Topic-But-Related Note by JansenVT · · Score: 1

      That old lady is either a comedic genius or a fool. Good one :D

    2. Re:Funny Off-Topic-But-Related Note by Aladrin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      On the other hand, the kind of person that surfs for porn in a public place is the kind you want to clean up after, computer viruses or not. She's making a smart move, if for the wrong reason.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    3. Re:Funny Off-Topic-But-Related Note by Noughmad · · Score: 2, Funny

      Must be a genious. When I talk I'm having real trouble separating bold from italics, and she combines them without even trying :)

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
    4. Re:Funny Off-Topic-But-Related Note by antdude · · Score: 1

      Who and where is this facility? :P

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    5. Re:Funny Off-Topic-But-Related Note by hduff · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, the kind of person that surfs for porn in a public place is the kind you want to clean up after, computer viruses or not. She's making a smart move, if for the wrong reason.

      She should just glove up before keyboarding if she's that concerned. That even reduces the risk of getting a cold. Places that provide public-use computers might even want to make gloves available.

      --
      "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
    6. Re:Funny Off-Topic-But-Related Note by zephvark · · Score: 1

      This was ranked +5 insightful? Oh, Slashdot, how far you have fallen. If pornography is a virus, you can infect me all day long. I'm damned if I expect to see any difference in my behavior. Sex isn't a bug, it's a feature.

    7. Re:Funny Off-Topic-But-Related Note by justinlee37 · · Score: 1

      Maybe she was just pointing out that the computers could get viruses while also cleaning the keyboard to get rid of the germs/sperm/shame/whatever. Her words and her actions at the time aren't necessarily related. She might not be as dumb as we're assuming.

    8. Re:Funny Off-Topic-But-Related Note by Fjodor42 · · Score: 1

      For all that really matters in this world at this time, mod the parent of this comment up, and the grandparent way down to troll!!!

      --
      "The number you have dialed is imaginary. Please rotate your phone 90 degrees and try again."
  14. uh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    DUH

    welcome to 1995 your just now figuring this out?

  15. So can we..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    call these MTDs?

  16. Tagged as std? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shouldn't this article be tagged as "std" ?

  17. Bad Advertisers in General by Bieeanda · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Porn sites aren't the only ones promiscuously mixing affiliates: there's a great deal of it going on with otherwise decent web advertisers as well, with results that range from the merely annoying to just as dangerous. It's very difficult to track the sources down beyond the first few layers because the whole thing is a bunged-up mess.

    1. Re:Bad Advertisers in General by Vekseid · · Score: 1

      Monetizing adult sites is a difficult proposition. Selling material directly is difficult, with so much available for free. Setting up donations for adult sites is nearly impossible for a multitude of reasons, and mainstream advertisers like Google, Yahoo and Microsoft won't touch them. To top it all off, you are paying for even higher bandwidth costs.

      So when someone creates a large adult site, and starts feeling the pinch of hosting costs, the "Get 25 cents per visitor who installs our software! We're not evil, really!" convinces some when they see tens to hundreds of thousands of visitors.

      Because traditional advertisers won't touch adult sites, it forces porn purveyors to take shadier deals. Which gives the industry a worse reputation, which convinces traditional advertisers that they were right in avoiding them, and so on.

  18. Gambling sites by Grand+Facade · · Score: 2, Insightful

    probably take a close second to pron.

    --
    Rick B.
  19. e-crabs? by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 1

    We are doomed!

  20. Mmmmmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm eating vanilla pudding.

    1. Re:Mmmmmmm by paiute · · Score: 1

      I'm eating vanilla pudding.

      Did you raid the refrigerator at the F&E clinic?

      --
      If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
  21. It's a ripe environment for scammers by Perp+Atuitie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    not only because of the sloppy tech, but because of the clientele. Lots of money flowing from folks trying to lose their real identities and who are less likely than most to try and seek investigations if they get scammed. Doesn't get better than this.

  22. Then mount them read-only by tepples · · Score: 1

    Your entire OS will be in memory, nothing on your HD is touched.

    Except perhaps your data files.

    A well-made live CD operating system mounts your internal drives read-only, requiring escalation to administrator (cancel or allow?) to enable writing. Your files are safe.

  23. "Film at 11" explained by tepples · · Score: 2, Informative

    Unsafe behavior leads to spread of viruses

    We knew that qualitatively. The article provides a quantitative measure, which allows drawing stronger conclusions about how to improve security against distribution of malware through ad networks. It's the difference between "are there infections" and "how much".

    film at eleven.

    (Eleven what?)

    Eleven hours after high noon. Before modern electronic news gathering, television news would often report the story at 6 PM and then have the "film" (footage shot on the scene) available for the 11 PM newscast.

    1. Re:"Film at 11" explained by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Later on, they realized it's also a good marketing technique. Good for the pocket-lining, not necessarily for the customoproducts[1]. Keeps people drawn in until the money-shot. "Something you eat every day might kill you tonight! Find out more after your dinner is long since consumed!)

      [1] We need a new word for this. Television shows, web sites, newspapers, etc. make their money from advertising, but do provide an actual product or service to entice people to view the adverts. In other words, there are two groups of people giving custom: the ad agencies, and the viewers, but one group is also the product for the other group. Unfortunately, I'm not nearly witty enough to come up with an appropriate term, so custom-o-products is what ya get.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    2. Re:"Film at 11" explained by R.Mo_Robert · · Score: 1

      Before modern electronic news gathering, television news would often report the story at 6 PM and then have the "film" (footage shot on the scene) available for the 11 PM newscast.

      I live in the Central Time Zone--my news is at 10, you insensitive clod!

      --
      R.Mo
    3. Re:"Film at 11" explained by hduff · · Score: 1

      film at eleven.

      (Eleven what?)

      Eleven hours after high noon. Before modern electronic news gathering, television news would often report the story at 6 PM and then have the "film" (footage shot on the scene) available for the 11 PM newscast.

      You could have said "o'clock PM" and saved 34 words, but this is Slashdot . . .

      --
      "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
    4. Re:"Film at 11" explained by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      What would Jimmy Buffet say? Oh yeah - "It's five o'clock SOMEWHERE!"

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    5. Re:"Film at 11" explained by drkim · · Score: 1

      ...but sadly, nothing ever happens in the Central Time Zone.

      Next up:

      A cute kitten up a tree is rescued by firemen...

      Sears rolls out it's summer fashion line...

      Preparations are already underway for next year's "Cheese Fest: 2011"...

      ...and Chuck with high school sports and the "Farmer's weather report," all (pause) after this.

  24. Hmmm... by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 2, Funny

    Porn Sites More Infected Than Thought

    I'm pretty sure "thoughts" aren't subject to the same kinds of infections...

  25. Some ROM sites are clean by tepples · · Score: 1

    We saw the same thing with captcha cracking porn and rom sites.

    But some ROM sites are clean. Wii Shop Channel has plenty of (legit commercial) ROMs; the only viruses it has are in Dr. Mario Online Rx. PDRoms.de also has plenty of (legit freeware) ROMs; the only viruses are (again) in the occasional Dr. Mario clone.

  26. But-Related by Ghoser777 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Haha, you said but-related.

    --
    James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
  27. Right but they... by hsoftdev17 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Right but they also have boobies! Maybe but me, but everything is about risk versus reward. Malware, boobies, malware, boobies... hmmm.... Seems worth it to me.

    1. Re:Right but they... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must live a very sad and lonely existence.

  28. Yikes I read that title wrong... by Dahamma · · Score: 1

    At first I thought it said "Porn Stars More Infected Than Thought"...

  29. Usage statistics for fetishes by Vekseid · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have experience in this area (see my sig). Harmless fetishes have a bit of a viral quality to them, sometimes following a pattern of Step 1) Revulsion Step 2) ??? Step 3) "You know, that's kind of hot."

  30. safe sex by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    Is there any kind of sex that is safe? Real sex and netsex can result in an infection.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    1. Re:safe sex by PatPending · · Score: 5, Funny

      Is there any kind of sex that is safe?

      My dog humping your leg?

      Anyway, here's a true story:

      When I was self-employed, my dog, Jake, used to lay on the floor by the check-out counter.

      One day while a guy was checking-out, Jake started licking his balls.

      Seeing this, the guy commented, "Gee, I wish I could do that!"

      I replied, "Go ahead--Jake won't mind.

      --
      What one fool can do, another can. (Ancient Simian Proverb)
    2. Re:safe sex by PatPending · · Score: 4, Funny

      Clarification:

      One day while a guy was checking-out, Jake started licking his (Jake's) balls.

      --
      What one fool can do, another can. (Ancient Simian Proverb)
    3. Re:safe sex by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      I was kind of freaked out at first. Trying to imagine a store where someone would put their (naked) balls on the check-out counter. For whatever insane reason I kept imaging it being the local hardware store, probably because there is a dog there too.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    4. Re:safe sex by gzine · · Score: 0

      funniest story i have heard in a while.

    5. Re:safe sex by bazorg · · Score: 1

      I think most folks understood the first version. Next time you tell the joke you can write "Jake started licking its balls". :)

    6. Re:safe sex by drkim · · Score: 1

      Thank you for the clarification.

      Otherwise it might seem that he felt obligated to return the favor, and lick Jake's balls.

      Or perhaps, assuming that Jake was already licking the customer's balls, the customer was commenting that Jake wouldn't mind assistance with licking the customer's balls. Again, possible, but less funny.

  31. Porn itself is a virus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm just saying.

  32. Ubuntu Conversion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    by Means of Natual Selection.

  33. What's this? by supertrinko · · Score: 1

    Porn!? On my malware sites??

    --
    If it rhymes it must be true.
  34. This "research" is stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hello Humanoids, If you setup your own fake porn sites & they get hacked the only person to blame is yourself not the "porn". The content of the site has NOTHING to do with security and why slashdot would post this is absolutely freaking disturbing. Slow news day?

  35. Selecting targets... by N0Man74 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think most of us realize that scammers, cheaters, criminals, and fraudsters prefer 2 types of targets:

    1) Those who are safe/easy prey.
    2) Those who they can justify doing it to, or even deserve it.

    Because of too many people find porn to be embarrassing or shameful, some people may not want to report or fight back. They make themselves into easy marks. Also, it's easy to find people who want porn, especially free porn (because of embarrassment, lots of people don't want their identities and payments traced back to them for these sites).

    Also, because porn is perceived as such a shady thing, it's easy for some to justify screwing over these types of people.

    In the end it's about getting away with it without being plagued by a guilty conscious.

    1. Re:Selecting targets... by turkeydance · · Score: 1

      well, if i owned Avira or any other anti-malware service, i'd hit these porn sites with some stuff only i could fix. Microsoft Security Essentials could monetize this to the moon.

  36. And you know this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    how?

  37. Obligatorily Sinfested by TeknoHog · · Score: 1
    --
    Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  38. You reminded me of this by arielCo · · Score: 1
    --
    This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
  39. Nope, use a virtual machine by howardd21 · · Score: 1

    For random web browsing on assorted sites, boot up from a Linux boot CD. Your entire OS will be in memory, nothing on your HD is touched.

    Why not just use a virtual machine and not save changes? It would remove the issues around your local data, and be much faster without a reboot.

    --
    no comment
  40. well, I guess it is nice to know... by axl917 · · Score: 1

    that you're now as likely to catch something from an internet tartlet as you are from a street-walking hooker.

  41. That's all good and dandy, but... by BagOCrap · · Score: 1

    Where the hell is the list of safe sites?!

    --
    -- Chaos, panic, pandemonium... My job here is done!
  42. share! by portscan · · Score: 2, Funny

    from tfa: "More than 90% of the 35,000 pornographic domains analysed in the study were free sites."

    links, please.

    1. Re:share! by hduff · · Score: 2, Funny

      from tfa: "More than 90% of the 35,000 pornographic domains analysed in the study were free sites."

      links, please.

      Forget the links.

      Pics or it didn't happen.

      --
      "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
  43. Bullshit ! by eulernet · · Score: 2, Informative

    One reason for the high rate of malware is that the online porn industry makes use of affiliate programs, where one site will drive traffic to another in exchange for links, cash or simply free pornographic material to use.

    No, it's totally wrong.
    It's simply because the most dangerous ads are the ones which pay the most.

    Malware authors know that if they want to infect sites, they just have to propose more money than Google's Adsense and similar companies.
    They'll recover this money after a few infections.

    Also, I'm pretty sure that a lot of malware authors create free porn sites, just to avoid paying for ads.
    I saw that on a lot of cracks collections sites.

  44. Does it correlate with the incidence of STD's? by gatkinso · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That would be interesting.

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  45. You insensitive clod! by PPH · · Score: 1

    nothing on your HD is touched.

    Some of us have floppies.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  46. Breaking news! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This just in:

    Water is damp.

  47. Some sites have REAL PEOPLE not actors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sites like sinful swingers has a good chat area with much adult content (/wink) and because they are run by a bunch of people that do it for the fun of it, they got no reason to host crap like spyware. Seriously, check out your local swinger/get together site and meet real people, people not out to get to your wallet through your dick.

  48. WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING AT THERE, SON? by Philip+K+Dickhead · · Score: 1

    "uhhh... I'm doing malware research..." (grin)

    --
    "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
  49. Is this justified? by Mathinker · · Score: 1

    For random web browsing on assorted sites, boot up from a Linux boot CD. Your entire OS will be in memory, nothing on your HD is touched.

    Unplug your HDD too. Otherwise your Linux CD can often mount your drive read/write, and if it has a vulnerable version of FF, you're owned since the default user usually has passwordless sudo privs.

    I know your advice is sound from a "maximize security" point of view, but does the threat level actually justify this for average users? Do you have experience and/or have uncovered accounts of escalation from a browser vulnerability of a live CD to sudo to infecting a secondary OS which is accessible via access as data files?

    Just curious (as a fellow paranoid).

    1. Re:Is this justified? by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Do you have experience and/or have uncovered accounts of escalation from a browser vulnerability of a live CD to sudo to infecting a secondary OS which is accessible via access as data files?

      Not even anecdotes, but the trivial nature* of the theoretical process makes me think someone has done it, and anyone using a Linux live CD might have Linux as a primary OS on their HDD, which makes for a juicy target. If it's an ordinary Joe that received a friend's old live CD, then he'll be even less likely to upgrade, but the HDD OS will probably be Windows.

      *how many people apt-get update && apt-get upgrade firefox on their old Ubuntu 8.04 LTS live CD that they might use occasionally when they can't find a newer live CD? That FF (or even one from a newer live CD) must have a few exploits. One command under the "ubuntu" user is all that's needed to start the ball rolling...

    2. Re:Is this justified? by Mathinker · · Score: 1

      > which makes for a juicy target

      Bayes would disagree, but, whatever. Frankly I think that household users of Linux in general are still unimportant enough (in frequency) that they're rarely targeted by web-based exploits (I do agree that we've been seeing an increase in "infiltration"-type exploit attempts, however --- those can be more worthwhile since they affect all users of the software which is successfully infiltrated).

  50. Bull. F*CKING. SHYTE: John Holmes, 3k infected!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'ld like to introduce you to my big friend, the WMD that cleansed the lands of Allah: John "1/4 yardstick" Holmes. This MAN had the bravery to have untested, unprotected, anal and vaginal girl and gayman sex that sent over 3k pornstars to the bankruptcy courts with AIDS. I don't mean AIDS like the helpful teacher-AIDS, I mean the kind of AIDS that helps get these mother and fatherfuckers out of my censored videostore cubicle. Holmes is the messiah of Satan in this regard. He showed America that the only way to get rid of all these damn wicked sinners is snort some coke, get a fresh batch of AIDS from your nearby street-corner GNAA's, and then clock-in on the set to delivery the dirty package.

  51. As "previously thought" by WHOM? by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

    [citation needed], [weasel words] and so on. Personally, I assume that porn sites are just as infected as their on screen talent. Who thought they weren't?

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  52. Hurry up and mature, society. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sites with adult content have severely limited choices when it comes to on-page ads--most advertisers don't want their banners appearing next to some glistening meat chasm. So adult site operators that want this revenue stream have to go to bottom-of-the-barrel services that are a lot less discriminating about which advertisers and their methods they accept.

  53. Videodrome..? by drkim · · Score: 1

    Infected pr0n! This is amazing news. At least to anyone who never saw Videodrome back in 1983.