Malvertising attacks are distributing .NET malware loaders

Malvertising attacks are being used to distribute virtualized .NET loaders that are highly obfuscated and dropping info-stealer malware. The loaders, dubbed MalVirt, are implemented in .NET and use virtualization through the legitimate KoiVM virtualizing protector for .NET applications, according to threat researchers with …

[sarusa]

Ad blocker is mandatory

I really suspect I'm preaching to the choir here, but let me be the one to state the obvious.

This is why you need an ad blocker everywhere you go, or you're just having random sex without condoms in Haiti. Every single ad network has been compromised at some point, even the small 'indie' ones you'd like to support, and most of them have been compromised repeatedly because the attackers are more determined than the ad companies. Even if they beg you to turn off ad blocking, don't, or you'll get hit by a driveby.

I subscribe where I can - and if El Reg had an option I would do it (am I missing one?). I read you as much as I read Ars Technica, which I subscribe to.

[Black Label1]

Re: Ad blocker is mandatory

or you're just having random sex without condoms in Haiti.

Interestingly enough, I believe browsing without ad-blockers is more dangerous than having fun in Haiti without condoms (see PrEP)

[dwodmots]

Remember that time when adblock wasn't self-defense?

Yup, me neither.

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, I do, but it's very long ago. Long ago they were mostly JPEG graphics, with the occasional bigger GIF which was frowned upon because in those days we were all very conscious of the cost of data and the fact that those ads were eating up the bandwidth WE paid for.

Then someone came up with the idea of active content, and online malware was born. May he forever live in hell with a wirebrush up his rear end.

[DishonestQuill]

Don't forget the detol or gingerbeer for lube!

[Sceptic Tank]

.NOT

Wasn't .NET's one claim to fame the protection it was offering inside a controlled environment? Suddenly it seems like just another software abstraction layer away from the hardware with little added benefit.

(That much ballyhooed stinking garbage collector doesn't even shield you from memory leaks. For example: it goes on strike when you didn't know that there was a trick to closing a form properly and you idiotically thought the garbage man would take care of it. There's something to be said for knowing when an object goes out of scope. RAII cough cough).

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: .NOT

Wasn't .NET's one claim to fame the protection it was offering inside a controlled environment?

Wow wow wow, slow down, brother. First observe who exactly was claiming that, and how much credibility they have with respect to security.

If you bought that one I have a London bridge for sale..