Comments on: Doubleclick Involved in Malware Distribution http://www.darknet.org.uk/2007/11/doubleclick-involved-in-malware-distribution/ Ethical Hacking, Penetration Testing & Computer Security Thu, 04 Dec 2008 21:45:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Nobody_Holme http://www.darknet.org.uk/2007/11/doubleclick-involved-in-malware-distribution/#comment-74370 Nobody_Holme Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:50:58 +0000 http://www.darknet.org.uk/2007/11/doubleclick-involved-in-malware-distribution/#comment-74370 NONE of them seem to check on a daily basis... And the "report bad ad" links some sites use are always long-winded and annoying, so nobody uses them... Thing is, i've been seeing malicious ads on a daily basis for so many years (high-speed flashing likely to cause epileptic fits, and downloading trojians/spyware sounds like malicious) from both doubleclick and google ads at least that I just gloss over them. Admitedly, I do spend a bit much time on sections of the web you have to be PC literate to know about, so they cant catch many people, BUT, they've been there for years, so its kind of like overdraft charges, or other long-running problems that need a high-profile action to bring to make them bother. NONE of them seem to check on a daily basis… And the “report bad ad” links some sites use are always long-winded and annoying, so nobody uses them… Thing is, i’ve been seeing malicious ads on a daily basis for so many years (high-speed flashing likely to cause epileptic fits, and downloading trojians/spyware sounds like malicious) from both doubleclick and google ads at least that I just gloss over them. Admitedly, I do spend a bit much time on sections of the web you have to be PC literate to know about, so they cant catch many people, BUT, they’ve been there for years, so its kind of like overdraft charges, or other long-running problems that need a high-profile action to bring to make them bother.

]]> By: Goodpeople http://www.darknet.org.uk/2007/11/doubleclick-involved-in-malware-distribution/#comment-74077 Goodpeople Sun, 18 Nov 2007 20:44:55 +0000 http://www.darknet.org.uk/2007/11/doubleclick-involved-in-malware-distribution/#comment-74077 I'm not saying that Doubleclick are the bad guys, but apparently this has been going on for some time. I expect Doubleclick and other adspace resellers to _at_least_ check every sold banner on a daily basis. That would prevent the bad guys from buying bannerviews with a totally innocent banner and later replacing the banner with a malicious one. It seems that they have a system in place now. But that doesn't clear them of the responsibility. They could have foreseen.. etc. I’m not saying that Doubleclick are the bad guys, but apparently this has been going on for some time.

I expect Doubleclick and other adspace resellers to _at_least_ check every sold banner on a daily basis. That would prevent the bad guys from buying bannerviews with a totally innocent banner and later replacing the banner with a malicious one.

It seems that they have a system in place now. But that doesn’t clear them of the responsibility. They could have foreseen.. etc.

]]> By: Nobody_Holme http://www.darknet.org.uk/2007/11/doubleclick-involved-in-malware-distribution/#comment-73548 Nobody_Holme Fri, 16 Nov 2007 17:58:52 +0000 http://www.darknet.org.uk/2007/11/doubleclick-involved-in-malware-distribution/#comment-73548 And this is why my adblock is set to ban doubleclick content, google ads, and anything like that i see. Basically if I see an ad, the soure URL is added to my banlist. I think that file is up to 2mb of plaintext now... And as much as i hate to defend ad companies, I dont think this is doubleclick's fault... And they did stop it. Meh. And this is why my adblock is set to ban doubleclick content, google ads, and anything like that i see. Basically if I see an ad, the soure URL is added to my banlist. I think that file is up to 2mb of plaintext now…

And as much as i hate to defend ad companies, I dont think this is doubleclick’s fault… And they did stop it. Meh.

]]> By: Goodpeople http://www.darknet.org.uk/2007/11/doubleclick-involved-in-malware-distribution/#comment-73461 Goodpeople Fri, 16 Nov 2007 11:51:28 +0000 http://www.darknet.org.uk/2007/11/doubleclick-involved-in-malware-distribution/#comment-73461 One would expect that a reputable company like Doubleclick has a mechanism in place to prevent this sort of thing from happening. Quite frankly, I'm shocked. This goes much further than educating endusers alone. Every company that makes money on the net should be primarily focussed on the security aspect of their business. Of course Doubleclick never intended anything like this ever to happen. But it did, and aside from taking steps to prevent this from ever happening again (which I'm sure they're working on as we speak), I think they should be held accountable. After all, they are the facilitating party. I guess the guys at Google might want to reconsider.. One would expect that a reputable company like Doubleclick has a mechanism in place to prevent this sort of thing from happening. Quite frankly, I’m shocked.

This goes much further than educating endusers alone. Every company that makes money on the net should be primarily focussed on the security aspect of their business.

Of course Doubleclick never intended anything like this ever to happen. But it did, and aside from taking steps to prevent this from ever happening again (which I’m sure they’re working on as we speak), I think they should be held accountable. After all, they are the facilitating party.

I guess the guys at Google might want to reconsider..

]]> By: Pantagruel http://www.darknet.org.uk/2007/11/doubleclick-involved-in-malware-distribution/#comment-73293 Pantagruel Fri, 16 Nov 2007 00:43:29 +0000 http://www.darknet.org.uk/2007/11/doubleclick-involved-in-malware-distribution/#comment-73293 Seems like they are getting more aggressive at pushing there rubbish down viewers throats. Like -normalsecrecy- mentions, this might be good market potential for the likes of MacAfee, Symantec and others. Furthermore any plugin or add-on for IE of FireFox blocking such crap would be welcome to the everage Jane and Joe. On the high end you could consider filtering content to root out these pop-ups and potential mallware getting through. Seems like they are getting more aggressive at pushing there rubbish down viewers throats.
Like -normalsecrecy- mentions, this might be good market potential for the likes of MacAfee, Symantec and others. Furthermore any plugin or add-on for IE of FireFox blocking such crap would be welcome to the everage Jane and Joe. On the high end you could consider filtering content to root out these pop-ups and potential mallware getting through.

]]> By: normalsecrecy http://www.darknet.org.uk/2007/11/doubleclick-involved-in-malware-distribution/#comment-73241 normalsecrecy Thu, 15 Nov 2007 20:16:56 +0000 http://www.darknet.org.uk/2007/11/doubleclick-involved-in-malware-distribution/#comment-73241 i wonder if it would be too much trouble for some of the consumer grade security software providers (mcafee, symantec) to enhance their products to block adservers like doubleclick from displaying content while browsing. i'm talking about modifying the hosts file to deny such servers or something like that... i wonder if it would be too much trouble for some of the consumer grade security software providers (mcafee, symantec) to enhance their products to block adservers like doubleclick from displaying content while browsing. i’m talking about modifying the hosts file to deny such servers or something like that…

]]>