Live data from Hacker News

Google Says 5% of Visitors to Its Sites Have Ad Injectors Installed

techcrunch.com

91–100 of 156 posts

Re: Google Says 5% of Visitors to Its Sites Have Ad Injectors Installed

#91
I am one of these spammers. I had a chrome extension and was approached by revjet.io about adding injected ads. The ads typically overwrite the sites normal ads.

I see it as stealing the ad revenue from the content creator(which is often Google), which is the same as using adblock.

(the extension mentioned that ads were being used and you could also disable them)

Re: Google Says 5% of Visitors to Its Sites Have Ad Injectors Installed

#92

I googled for "Open Office download" on a family's computer and went with the first download -- download.com or cnet, I think. It downloaded very fast and I thought "well, maybe it's just an initializer that torrents the rest". NOPE. Within 30 seconds of the installer, it prompted to install an ad-bar in the browser. I quickly closed and researched for the official site. It was scary, being a technical professional,…

This is fundamentally Microsoft's fault. The shareware culture of Windows is insanely insecure these days. Any sane operating system should have a packet manager, with all the software you could want included, and nothing you don't.

Re: Google Says 5% of Visitors to Its Sites Have Ad Injectors Installed

#93

If you turn on CSP reporting for your web-site you'll see a LOT of reports about attempted script injection into your site. When you research it you'll find that these come from malware/extensions which are pushing ad content and other nonsense.

Similarly, if you have a site set up to make an ajax connection back to your server whenever an uncaught javascript exception happens (protip: if you do this, make sure to throttle it, or else if you push a bad update that makes users' browsers get stuck in a loop throwing errors, they will all try their damnedest to DDOS you!), then it's very easy for most of the reported errors to not actually originate from your site's own scripts but be from browsers broken by adware. I've been very surprised that I haven't seen more talk about this until now.

I remember trying to track down a bug a few users reported, and I finally discovered that the users all had a specific piece of malware that replaced the javascript setTimeout function with a version that only took two arguments, which caused my code to break in frustratingly subtle and mystifying ways.

Re: Google Says 5% of Visitors to Its Sites Have Ad Injectors Installed

#94

Well maybe they should stop allowing download sites that offer ad infected downloads to buy the top spots on the google search results page? https://i.imgur.com/Ote9c2k.png Adwords is probably one of the main infection vectors for malware these days. Previous rant: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8879229

Your rant is outdated. This is what "download firefox" looks like now: http://i.imgur.com/dG7wONC.png

My 2nd link on google when searching for "firefox" is an ad-injected installer on firefox.safe-downloading.com (appreciate the irony of the domain name).

Re: Google Says 5% of Visitors to Its Sites Have Ad Injectors Installed

#95
post #89
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what is stopping them from having the placeholders a specific size, instead of expanding them when the javascript finally loads/starts up? If that sort of thing was unfeasible to do then fine, I'll give you your point. But they have no excuse. So they're either just too lazy to do it properly (and enjoy the nice mis-clicks on ads) or they just like the mis-clicks on ads and did it purposefully.

I'm not familiar with the systems, but I imagine that not knowing the eventual size of the ad would prohibit that. Or the fact that you'd have to have the user insert some HTML alongside your currently very simple entry.

Most likely A/B testing showed increased revenue on the page when they did the slimy javascript jump.

Re: Google Says 5% of Visitors to Its Sites Have Ad Injectors Installed

#96

Well maybe they should stop allowing download sites that offer ad infected downloads to buy the top spots on the google search results page? https://i.imgur.com/Ote9c2k.png Adwords is probably one of the main infection vectors for malware these days. Previous rant: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8879229

Usually those kind of ads get shot down just on trademark. At least that's been my experience. I could never bid a term like that in adwords.

Re: Google Says 5% of Visitors to Its Sites Have Ad Injectors Installed

#97
post #2

You can't trust anybody except for open source repositories. The easiest way to get such trash on your computer is installing software from a commercial vendor. Oracle is one major source of headache, if you aren't careful you'll find your 'java' install also gives you a severe case of malware/crapware. There are whole companies dedicated to this concept of piggy-backing junk.

The Linux model: you install software from repositories curated by people you trust - distribution maintainers. No viruses, no bundled adware, just simple no-bullshit software repositories. I have a hard time understanding why techies continue to put up with Windows and OSX.

Perhaps because in OS X I (mostly -- about on par with Linux) install software from repositories curated by people that I trust (Apple, Homebrew), and then I don't have to put up with Linux.

Re: Google Says 5% of Visitors to Its Sites Have Ad Injectors Installed

#98
There is a while industry of Pay Per View (PPV) ad networks that basically operate this way. A few that come to mind: Trafficvance, LeadImpact, Media Traffic and DirectCPV.

I don't know where Trafficvance gets their traffic but it seems to be pop-over ads probably from some installed software. DirectCPV seems to be interstitial ads that the sites actually choose to use (think big news sites with an ad before you read the article). Most of them seem to be spyware/crapware driven. Those are the only two I've worked with in the past so I can't speak on the others.

Re: Google Says 5% of Visitors to Its Sites Have Ad Injectors Installed

#99

I googled for "Open Office download" on a family's computer and went with the first download -- download.com or cnet, I think. It downloaded very fast and I thought "well, maybe it's just an initializer that torrents the rest". NOPE. Within 30 seconds of the installer, it prompted to install an ad-bar in the browser. I quickly closed and researched for the official site. It was scary, being a technical professional,…

This is fundamentally Microsoft's fault. The shareware culture of Windows is insanely insecure these days. Any sane operating system should have a packet manager, with all the software you could want included, and nothing you don't.

With Microsoft having that large a share of the PC market this would result in anti-trust lawsuits.

I think this issue must be solved on a regulatory level, i.e. Google (and Bing!) should be punished for providing malware links (and the actual providers of course).

Re: Google Says 5% of Visitors to Its Sites Have Ad Injectors Installed

#100

I googled for "Open Office download" on a family's computer and went with the first download -- download.com or cnet, I think. It downloaded very fast and I thought "well, maybe it's just an initializer that torrents the rest". NOPE. Within 30 seconds of the installer, it prompted to install an ad-bar in the browser. I quickly closed and researched for the official site. It was scary, being a technical professional,…

This is fundamentally Microsoft's fault. The shareware culture of Windows is insanely insecure these days. Any sane operating system should have a packet manager, with all the software you could want included, and nothing you don't.

This is one of the reasons why I love using Chocolatey. Downloading and running an installer from an arbitrary site feels both quaint and dangerous.
Post reply on HN