Slashdot Mirror
Some Bing Ads Redirecting To Malware
An anonymous reader writes "Security firm ThreatTrack Security Labs today spotted that certain Bing ads are linking to sites that infect users with malware. Those who click are redirected to a dynamic DNS service subdomain which in turns serves the Sirefef malware from 109(dot)236(dot)81(dot)176. ThreatTrack notes that the scammers could of course be targeting other keywords aside from YouTube. The more popular the keywords, the bigger the potential for infection."
Posting to undo accidental mod
People use Bing?
Laughter is the Spackle of the Soul.
...ad hosting network (that happens to be used by major search providers) compromised to serve malware.
I suppose you can be mad at Microsoft for not constantly scanning their customers, but "Bing ads" is still misleading in the usual headline sensationalism way...
And we get the MS logo instead of the Borg Bill. :(
...and for those of us who think that ads -are- malware, just targeted at a different processor, AdBlock still takes out two birds with one stone...
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
Aside from the other obvious reasons, such as "it looks awful" and "for the types of things I search for, it's vastly inferior to Google".
If your cpu is overworked by browsing 1 secure site, you might want to consider an upgrade.
I do it because as key lengths get longer, it is harder and harder to browse the HTTPS web using a telnet client. That is even with my pocket calculator nearby!
The actual article is here. TheNextWeb is a stupid site that doesn't work at all if you are not running Javascript. I choose to block most scripts, partly because.. a lot of ads are infected with malware. Yuk.
Never email donotemail@WeAreSpammers.com
I think the pertinent question is whether Microsoft or Google or Yahoo should responsible for the ads they show.
Take any given major website, turn off AdBlockPlus, FlashBlock (or alternatives), and NoScripts (or alternatives). How many ads can you count that are of the nature: "Learn that 1 wierd trick to lose 10 pounds" or "Enter your age to see if you qualify for money to go back to school" or "blah blah obvious scam".
They are everywhere. Now for me, I think much less of a website and the entity that owns it if they are serving these ads. I actually feel that if you get scammed through one of them it should be the website's fault for being party to a crime, because they served you the malicious ad.
If I had a brick and mortar business, and people paid me to stand inside my business and "demo products" or something, and you came in and got scammed, you would be pissed at my business. The business might also be liable.
Obviously the internet is different than meat space. Obviously you cant fix stupid. So who is responsible for serving a malicious ad?
That's a tautology.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Hey man, google STEALS your information! MS told me so. So that must mean that MS doesn't do that. I mean, they'd be HYPOCRITES otherwise. So I use Bing to keep my porn searches safe. My sexual attraction to boobs and butts will remain safe from the NSA.
Whatever your problem is, it's not with SSL.
AES-256 on my old laptop works at 65 MB/s. AES-128 goes at 90MB/s. This might be a bit of a problem if you've got a gigabit LAN and are using it to full capacity, but given that googling stuff amounts to about 24K there's no way that is making a noticeable difference.
Well there's Steve Ballmer, Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer's mom, and Bill Gates' mom.......and that's about it.
Not defending Bing in particular here, but every ad network gets utilized to deliver ads by malicious parties. Every ad company you can think of has staff that work full time just to look for and filter out malicious ads. A pretty significant portion of all malware is delivered my ads that are unwittingly served by sites from Facebook to CNN or any other site you can think of.
Here's a nice link to a NIST report on the matter that you can get to once the government gets back to work. The problem goes back many, many years, so why on earth is this being reported as news?
Well it is. SSH protocol overhead is higher than the minimal TCP overhead on the data connection for an FTP transfer. Whether this is significant or not is a different issue, but the statement is strictly true.
Most people these days who use Google use more than just the search feature, but that being said, even if you don't that is a phenomenally ridiculous reason to switch search engines from Google to Bing.
OK. You have to be trolling. You don't trust Google with your searches, but you do trust them with your entire computer. Excellent.
If you aren't trolling: News Flash: Google isn't protecting your data any less than Microsoft. If Google reports more, it means they are more honest. What you are doing is sleeping with the local whore who swears she never cheats on you because your ex-girlfriend "admitted" that she had sex against her will.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
doesn't every body love bonzi buddy?
lose != loose
Nothing costs $0.
How much are you paying for the air that you can't live without? How much are farmers paying for the rain that waters their crops? How much does a Cory Doctorow e-book cost? How much does it cost to watch a sunset? How much does it cost to write a book? (granted, actually publishing it is >$0 but writing it costs $0.) How much does it cost to noodle catfish?
You're a fool, AC. The things you need the most -- air and water -- cost $0.
Free Martian Whores!