Google Ads go NUCLEAR, foist exploit kit

Security bod Maarten van Dantzig says a large number of Google ads sold through Bulgarian reseller EngageLab have been pointing users to the dangerous Nuclear exploit kit. The Fox-IT binary basher found the campaign, which may at the time of writing have been subject to the Choc Factory's boot, could result in a "very large" …

[Mr C]

matter of trust

I wonder if peeps at Google are screening all elements involved in its prime business model (which is selling adds) to try and avoid disasters like this.

I kinda trust Google (and its startpage) to be safe from nasties like this, i unblocked it from noscript so it can run javascript.

Maybe i should think it over :/

[oldtaku]

AdBlock

Sorry to belabor this again, but since sites keep whingeing at me about it - once again, this is why we can't trust any ad network on any site. Even if I like the site and want to support it, I know they have no control over the crap that gets served up by their ad network.

I support many sites with subscription or Patreon (and variants), but ads will continue to be treated like the diseased filthy slags they are.

[Ralph B]

Re: AdBlock

Unfortunately, some of my favorite websites - including The Register - are financed mainly by the ads they allow to be shown on their pages. Or at least, I am told they are there if you don't use an adblocker. (Actually, I have seen them when I very occasional visit on my iPad.)

It must make ad rate-negotiation quite interesting. The Reg: "Our visitors are responsible for $10,000+ of IT product purchasing per year, so pay us more." Advertiser: "Yeah, but most of them use adblockers, so charge us less."

It would be nice if the advertisers could be trusted not to do bad things, but since they are in the business of telling lies for money, that's hardly going to happen, is it?

[phil dude]

Re: AdBlock

mod-up "telling lies for money".

And yet, you have to *work* for a living, eh?

P.

[Owain 1]

Re: AdBlock

I had to turn off ad blocker and refresh TheReg to see what you meant. Gosh it looks terrible with the advertising. I hadn't realised. Back on now. Phew.

[Crazy Operations Guy]

Re: AdBlock

If you want to support El Reg and still block ads, just buy some swag from the store. I would think that the profits gained from those purchases would offset the loss of profits from blocking advertisements.

[phil dude]

Re: AdBlock

Or someone could realise that ads are just plain old crap.

It is not just the random nature of them , but the simple fact that no person could possibly purchase even a small %age of the ad volume on ANY website.

A bit like Amazon and their REALLY stupid algorithm.

"You just bought a DVD of X. Perhaps you would like the Bluray version?"

See Icon.

P.

[Charles 9]

Re: AdBlock

"It is not just the random nature of them , but the simple fact that no person could possibly purchase even a small %age of the ad volume on ANY website."

Trouble is, the needed %age to turn a profit is in the low fractions of a percent. IOW, just one hit in several thousand is enough, and if one follows P.T. Barnum, there will always be enough sicker to make the whole business worthwhile. Not to mention the ads are getting tougher to block, leaving you with two choices: suck up or abandon the Internet.

[Crazy Operations Guy]

Yet my co-workers wonder

Lately I've been adding rules to drop packets from advertising networks on the firewalls, including DoubleClick and Google Analytics. My users are forced to use old version of IE (Internal apps that break on anything newer) so I have to do everything possible to protect them.

[Sebby]

Re: Yet my co-workers wonder

Yep, I have also had to resort to blackholing ads/trackers in DNS.

It's sad, really, but stories like this are just icing on the cake.