Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bing has been serving up malicious Google Chrome ads for months

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 249 posts

Re: Bing has been serving up malicious Google Chrome ads for months

#181

Post by the_clarence »

gpm wrote: post #135
sp332 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok but there's no way to know that without searching. Unless you have one of these https://mobile.twitter.com/PulpLibrarian/status/844278365590...

I mean, you could guess. The name even hints at it for anyone aware of the `.net` tld. That's not a great solution, since many people are barely aware what at url is, but I think it should still be one that you and I (as people who are) use. Similarly the article is fixed by guessing that google chrome is probably at chrome.google.com (also chrome.com), firefox is probably at firefox.com, cnn is probably at cnn.com,…

That .com trick works mostly if you are american going on american websites mostly. You seem to be unaware of other tlds.

Re: Bing has been serving up malicious Google Chrome ads for months

#183

Post by beagle3 »

sandov wrote: post #127
jamieweb wrote: post #10

Using browsers to download software should never have become the standard practice... Linux got it right with the built-in package repositories. Unfortunately Windows and Mac have never really adopted the super-easy "apt install this" style.

Package managers are a fundamentally flawed concept: You depend on your distro mantainers to package what you need to install. If it isn't packaged, best case scenario is you get a tarball, which is already too hard for 99% of computer users. Snaps and Flatpaks are still too unpolished. Getting all your user applications (DAW, IDE, etc) from your OS developer (instead of getting it from the application developer) is…

No. Ubuntu makes private package archives (PPAs) very simple to use; many packages are available from the maintainer’s PPA.

There are many alternative repositories for essentially all distorts today; snaps and flatpaks are indeed not yet polished enough, but they are much better and easier for 99% of users than tarballs, so calling tarballs a “best case scenario” is, in my opinion, wrong.

Re: Bing has been serving up malicious Google Chrome ads for months

#184

Post by amarant »

emmelaich wrote: post #167

I mentioned this in a comment over a year ago in a story about paint.net. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14338174 > The Bing search engine is about as bad. A close friend used IE to get Google Chrome. They clicked the first result and luckily I was able to stop them before starting the install on some crapware. So I asked them to be careful to ensure the download site is correct and left them to it. I came back…

Makes me wonder how Microsoft ranks search results. Surely if they were counting links to a page from other pages (like Google does), Google would've come out on top? Or does noone link to Google anymore since people tend to find their way there anyway?

Re: Bing has been serving up malicious Google Chrome ads for months

#185

Post by Fnoord »

jccalhoun wrote: post #141
quickthrower2 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except me, I am on HN and I use Bing.

Me too. I've made at least $50 in amazon gift cards from bing rewards.

I made $0 in Amazon gift cards from DDG, but I did retain my privacy. If you got $50 in gift cards from Microsoft, you can be sure they profited more than $50 from you.

Re: Bing has been serving up malicious Google Chrome ads for months

#186

Post by jstanley »

gpm wrote: post #135
sp332 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok but there's no way to know that without searching. Unless you have one of these https://mobile.twitter.com/PulpLibrarian/status/844278365590...

I mean, you could guess. The name even hints at it for anyone aware of the `.net` tld. That's not a great solution, since many people are barely aware what at url is, but I think it should still be one that you and I (as people who are) use. Similarly the article is fixed by guessing that google chrome is probably at chrome.google.com (also chrome.com), firefox is probably at firefox.com, cnn is probably at cnn.com,…

But what if you guess chrome is at chrome.com, and that turns out to be malware?

Guessing domain names is even worse than Googling.

Re: Bing has been serving up malicious Google Chrome ads for months

#187

Post by robteix »

greenyoda wrote: post #3

The title of this article is deceptive clickbait.[1] The problem has nothing to do with the Edge browser, it has to do with search results returned by Bing, which happens to be Edge's default search engine. If you have a new Windows 10 PC and want to download Chrome, how else could you do it besides "using Microsoft Edge to download Chrome"? So "stop using Edge to download Chrome" is not useful advice. Better advice…

There are actually two problems here:

1. Bing allowing malicious ads

2. Edge not marking malicious sites

Problem #1 has nothing to do with Edge (other than Edge using Bing by default) and I’m sure Google may let malicious ads through from time to time.

But problem #2 is entirely Edge.

> The malicious URL that Bing is happy to promote can’t fool Google or Firefox. When I simply type the above URL into my Firefox browser I’m faced with a bold red page declaring “Deceptive Site Ahead” completely with details and an option to go back.

The recommendation to stop using Edge to download Chrome is indeed wrong though.

Re: Bing has been serving up malicious Google Chrome ads for months

#188

Post by detaro »

robteix wrote: post #187
greenyoda wrote: post #3

The title of this article is deceptive clickbait.[1] The problem has nothing to do with the Edge browser, it has to do with search results returned by Bing, which happens to be Edge's default search engine. If you have a new Windows 10 PC and want to download Chrome, how else could you do it besides "using Microsoft Edge to download Chrome"? So "stop using Edge to download Chrome" is not useful advice. Better advice…

There are actually two problems here: 1. Bing allowing malicious ads 2. Edge not marking malicious sites Problem #1 has nothing to do with Edge (other than Edge using Bing by default) and I’m sure Google may let malicious ads through from time to time. But problem #2 is entirely Edge. > The malicious URL that Bing is happy to promote can’t fool Google or Firefox. When I simply type the above URL into my Firefox brows…

Edge does mark malicious sites ("SmartScreen filter"), it just failed to have this in its index.

Re: Bing has been serving up malicious Google Chrome ads for months

#189

Post by Sunspots »

bhauer wrote: post #129
EpicEng wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a short time about seven years ago when Google was returning a malicious link for Blizard's BattleNet. Had my WoW creds stolen and I wasn't what you would call naive on a computer.

That sucks. I know it's a tired point, but it nevertheless amuses me that someone would search for BattleNet. The name is literally the domain name: battle.net.

The name is not even BattleNet. It's literally always been branded "Battle.net"

Re: Bing has been serving up malicious Google Chrome ads for months

#190

Post by nl »

amarant wrote: post #184
emmelaich wrote: post #167

I mentioned this in a comment over a year ago in a story about paint.net. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14338174 > The Bing search engine is about as bad. A close friend used IE to get Google Chrome. They clicked the first result and luckily I was able to stop them before starting the install on some crapware. So I asked them to be careful to ensure the download site is correct and left them to it. I came back…

Makes me wonder how Microsoft ranks search results. Surely if they were counting links to a page from other pages (like Google does), Google would've come out on top? Or does noone link to Google anymore since people tend to find their way there anyway?

Ads aren’t ranked like pages.
Post reply on HN