Live data from Hacker News

Company withdrawing from Facebook as analytics show 80% of ad clicks from bots

facebook.com

301–310 of 381 posts

Re: Company withdrawing from Facebook as analytics show 80% of ad clicks from bots

#301

My startup is essentially an advertising aggregator (pooling traffic from a variety of publishers and routing it to advertisers) and dealing with things like bot detection is a HUGE chunk of what we work on, technology-wise. Let me try and give you an idea of how deep the rabbit hole can go. - Okay, you want to detect bots. Well, "good" bots usually have a user agent string like, "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Googlebot/2…

Another great way of detecting bots is to redirect the visitor through an SSL connection and sniff their cipher suite. By comparing the list of ciphers the bot presents with a list of known ciphers of major browsers, you can accurately detect a majority of bots. Many bot authors use the same few libraries which never change their cipher suite.

Re: Company withdrawing from Facebook as analytics show 80% of ad clicks from bots

#302
post #296
post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not saying that's not the case, but you have no data or knowledge to back any of that up. I wouldn't assume a problem is easy or hard until I've got sufficient info on it. Too often I've heard "how could XYZ not have done this, fixed that?" Then have that same party sign on board to fix this "easy" problem and get themselves in a world of hurt.

Well I do have at least some data to back that up. I know that they are a walled garden that keeps a ton of user data for every account (even the subset represented in Open Graph is significant). And it's with this knowledge that I make my conclusion. * Accounts subsisting of an unusual proportion of ad clicking activity compared to their other activities are likely bots. * New accounts with no history but high ad cl…

Compare it to google's problem filtering out automatically generated splogs, though - it took them years to make progress against that.

Real human social activity is a lot more random than real informational content in blogs - so fb's problem seems harder.

Also, facebook banning accounts is a much stronger action than google just lowering the pagerank of suspected splogs.

So overall I think fb's problem is harder than a currently google-unsolved problem.

Re: Company withdrawing from Facebook as analytics show 80% of ad clicks from bots

#303
post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I do have at least some data to back that up. I know that they are a walled garden that keeps a ton of user data for every account (even the subset represented in Open Graph is significant). And it's with this knowledge that I make my conclusion. * Accounts subsisting of an unusual proportion of ad clicking activity compared to their other activities are likely bots. * New accounts with no history but high ad cl…

Compare it to google's problem filtering out automatically generated splogs, though - it took them years to make progress against that. Real human social activity is a lot more random than real informational content in blogs - so fb's problem seems harder. Also, facebook banning accounts is a much stronger action than google just lowering the pagerank of suspected splogs. So overall I think fb's problem is harder tha…

Facebook has total control of the users very action since joining Facebook. Much easier than coming across a random HTMl page and deciding on if it's real (whatever real means, YouTube comments are real but are very low signal but a database that runs itself could provide lots of signal).

Re: Company withdrawing from Facebook as analytics show 80% of ad clicks from bots

#304
Pardon my naivety, but why would a third party want to set bots onto Facebook ads? I guess one could hope to exhaust a competitor's marketing budget, but surely this isn't an established tactic.

Even more Machiavellian would be Google doing it to discredit Facebook's entry into the advertising business. I doubt this because they've got too much to lose - if they were discovered, it would seriously hurt their "don't be evil" reputation, which is worth billions to them. And just imagine the anti-trust suit...

Although Facebook stands to gain the most from this, my argument about reputation damage applies there too. So who is paying for the bots?

Re: Company withdrawing from Facebook as analytics show 80% of ad clicks from bots

#305
A response from FB: http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-facebook...

"There must have been miscommunication with Limited Run"

"Facebook says it is investigating claims made by Musician site Limited Run early Monday regarding ad clicks by bots."

"We're currently investigating their claims," a spokeswoman for the company said in an email. "For their issue with the Page name change, there seems to be some sort of miscommunication. We do not charge Pages to have their names changed. Our team is reaching out about this now."

Re: Company withdrawing from Facebook as analytics show 80% of ad clicks from bots

#306
post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

data would be * IP addresses, one can assume a bot would only have a set of addresses they could use, barring botnets. * request patterns, ie: did the bot request css/js, etc * request timeframes * UA strings Sure, its a big data problem, but I can imagine that Facebook has solved these types of scenarios many times over.

What if you start a new Amazon EC2 spot instance (netting you a new IP address), start up Chromium in headless mode (say, using Xvfb), navigate to the website of choice, use mouse automation to start clicking around, click the ad, spend 5 minutes clicking around in a semi-choreographed pattern on the advertisee's website, and then shut down the instance -- only to repeat? Moreover, Amazon is always buying new IP subn…

It sounds like you don't need to go to that much hassle currently, but even that rigmarole is simple enough to combat. The user account should be real, the usage real (comments, photos, messages back and forth) and the friends also real. False positive spam Ids are OK, that will lower your revenue but won't constitute fraud with your customers. Put up a test for uses you think are spamming, the test they already do of identifying photos of your friends would be a good one.

Large numbers of real looking fake accounts should be hard to keep up.

Re: Company withdrawing from Facebook as analytics show 80% of ad clicks from bots

#307
Wonder how they will spin this. First they try the silence mode, see if it dies out if they give no attention. Then deny it was them and they were unaware of the problem BUT they are working on something that will totally eradicate said problem and of course more but we can't give details on us.

Re: Company withdrawing from Facebook as analytics show 80% of ad clicks from bots

#308
Quite interesting top comment on Reddit thread http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/xel55/startup_cl...

"I can confirm this. I used Facebook to advertise my page and went from ~2000 fans to over 6000 within several months. Awesome, right? Wrong. I thought it was weird that the new fans would never, EVER interact with the pages. So I started stalking their profiles. Guess what? Bots/hijacked accounts/fake accounts. How do I know? Many of them have NO friends. Then I noticed something really scary...repeats. Actual pictures showing up more than once for new likes. Very, very few of the accounts were from the USA. I started casually messaging the accounts that looked suspicious. Not a single one with no friends responded. Out the ones that looked legitimate (although with a list of likes that is in the thousands), only a handful replied, and 100% of those people confirmed they found my page through affiliated sites, and not through Facebook itself. I ended the ad program recently and the bots stopped. tl;dr: Do not, under any circumstance, advertise with Facebook. They will feed you fake likes. If you want fake likes, use a site like fiverr to generate them, it's way cheaper and yields identical results."

Re: Company withdrawing from Facebook as analytics show 80% of ad clicks from bots

#309

Isn't this why, oh, around 2005 CPA was the big thing instead of CPC? Personally, I think CPA is absolutely the right way to do internet advertising, and I wonder why FB doesn't do that.

Because they would not make a tenth of the money they do if they did that, obviously.

Most sales or acquisitions originated online are based on rational decisions, not on the appeal of annoying ads.

The day advertisers start to use a verifiable CPA system, 80% of online advertising cease to exist and 95% of today's start-ups see their cash vaporize.

Re: Company withdrawing from Facebook as analytics show 80% of ad clicks from bots

#310

Isn't this why, oh, around 2005 CPA was the big thing instead of CPC? Personally, I think CPA is absolutely the right way to do internet advertising, and I wonder why FB doesn't do that.

Because they would not make a tenth of the money they do if they did that, obviously.

Most sales or acquisitions originated online are based on rational decisions, not on the appeal of annoying ads.

The day advertisers start to use a verifiable CPA system, 80% of online advertising cease to exist and 95% of today's start-ups see their cash vaporize.

Post reply on HN