TheJoker
Premium,VIP,MVM
join:2001-04-26
Alexandria, VA
| Rogue AntiSpyware Ads on DSLReports
I just opened the Security Forum on my work computer and had not logged in yet, and was surprised to find that there were two ads right at the top of the page for companies on the Rogue/Suspect Anti-Spyware Products & Web Sites listing at »spywarewarrior.com/rogue_anti-spyware.htm. One was for SpywareBot/spywarebot.com, and the other was for defeatspyware.org, a site that "pushes some rogue/suspect products". Granted, it was listed as a Google ad, but still, this is a security forum and the ad was from a company that should be avoided. Along the right side of the page, were two different ads from a company that had been delisted from the rogue antispyware list, NoAdware, written and using two different URLS's to make it appear as though it was two different companies (NoAdware.Net and Free-Adware-Scan.com), and another dubious ad not listing a company, but supposedly going to anti-spy.info that didn't work.
I don't know what can be done to filter Google ads, if anything, but thought the discussion was appropriate to this forum. It's not just a problem with Google ads here, but with sponsored ads in general, as if you search for a legitimate antispyware application, the sponsored ads, which are at the top and highly likely to be clicked on by unsuspecting users, are often for rather unsavory applications that may later cause users to need help cleaning their systems. |
|
Cudni
La Merma - Vigilado
Premium,MVM
join:2003-12-20
Someshire
| not the first and not the last time it happened.
»What is WINANTIVIRUS?
again like you i don't know if anything can be done about those google ads over which this site has no control
Cudni
--
Some are born to failure, others achieve it, all deserve it.Help yourself so God can help you.MVP, Microsoft Windows Security 2006 |
|
Jrb2
Premium
join:2001-08-31
2 edits | reply to TheJoker
(removed by me) |
|
suzi
Premium
join:2004-05-01
| reply to TheJoker
It is possible to have some degree of control over the Google ads.
»www.google.com/services/adsense_···ge7.html
The last I heard, there is a limit of 200 URLs or domains that a site can block. Some of the rogue advertisers change URLs frequently, so it can be difficult to keep up with them, according to what I've heard from other site owners.
--
Spyware Warrior
Microsoft MVP Windows Security 2005 - 2006
Sunbelt Software Consultant |
|
salzan
Experienced Optimist
Premium
join:2004-01-08
WA State
| reply to TheJoker
Many of the folks that would see those ads are unsuspecting visitors to this forum. Their showing up on this forum suggests to those same unsuspecting people that they are somehow endorsed by this security forum. I think there is a way to filter the Google ads by the website but since the companies go by so many names, even creating a blacklist would be a constant effort. And some would probably still slip through.
Most of us that are regular to this site will recognize the ads for what they are but the casual visitor is certainly at risk.
--
A silver bullet without a gun is just a fancy rock. |
|
Psicop
More human than human
Premium
join:2005-12-21
| reply to TheJoker
Easy way to remove that TRASH!:
Use this FF extension (if you happen to b a FF user):
»https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/743/
 |
|
Cudni
La Merma - Vigilado
Premium,MVM
join:2003-12-20
Someshire | for all other browser users 
»Site FAQ »Ad blocking options
Cudni |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA | reply to TheJoker
Tell nil or cabana about it. |
|
CalamityJane
Premium,VIP,MVM
join:2002-08-27
Eustis, FL
| reply to TheJoker
It happens on all the sites that have ads from Google - those do slip through. As Suzi said, you can filter some but not all of them always. I've seen them at BleepingComputer, CastleCops, SpywareBeware and just today saw one on TomCoyote's that was for PrivacyCrusader. 
--
It takes a disaster to make a woman out of a femaleMicrosoft MVP/Windows Security 2003-2006Proud Member of ASAP (Alliance of Security Analysis Professionals) |
|
TheJoker
Premium,VIP,MVM
join:2001-04-26
Alexandria, VA
| reply to TheJoker
Actually, that's what I was really getting at, the problem overall, not that they were here. When you search for a security product on Google, you sometimes get inundated by the sponsored ads for exceedingly dubious products, where the ads are often intended to mislead. I told someone at work they needed to get a copy of Ad-Aware, and they searched for it, and ended up paying for something on the rogue list because of the similar sounding name and the prominence of the sponsored ad.
--
Proud ASAP member since 2005 |
|
pudelein
join:2005-06-18
Oak Ridge, TN | reply to Psicop
That FF extension CustomizeGoogle is a great find! Just what I have been needing for a longtime. Thanks for suggesting it! |
|
John Galt
Forward, March
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
 ·CenturyLink
| reply to Cudni
said by Cudni  :again like you i don't know if anything can be done about those google ads over which this site has no control Premium membership...!
There are ADs on this site...??!!
--
A is A |
|
SuperJoker
join:2005-11-21
Yermo, CA
·Verizon Online DSL
·Verizon west (ex G..
| reply to TheJoker
I find spyware almost all the time, I use FF 1.5.0.7(pre) and I make sure that any cookies that are deleted stay deleted as there is a check box under Options, In Privacy on the Cookies Tab and the check box is there, It's labeled: "Unless I have removed cookies set by the site" and that is Below: "Allow sites to set cookies". I use Spybot - Search & Destroy 1.4 to find them with and I do It daily and I look for updates daily too. 
--
Joker1: 2-285 cpu @ 3.25GHz[H8DCE]v1.01, Bios 9/14/05 soon
Joker2: 1-165 cpu @ 2.65GHz[MS-6702E]v1.0, Bios 9.3
Joker3: 1-270 cpu @ 2.36GHz[K8N-DL]v1.03, Bios 1008
(10.02GHz crunchin 4 SETI w/the PC Perspective Killer Frogs) |
|
greenhatch
join:2005-08-14
UK! | reply to TheJoker
AdMuncher is your friend. |
|
Mele20
Premium
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI | The tiny but mighty Proxomitron is your even better friend. |
|
centacre
join:2003-03-17
Cypress, TX | If you're staying with freeware then I would agree, but if you're willing to pay then I would not. I have used them both and I have to say that Admuncher is tough to beat. |
|
Ender3rd
join:2001-07-15
East Granby, CT | reply to Psicop
Another thank you for posting the firefox extension.
Ender
--
My Jeep is not an SUV. Your SUV is not a Jeep. |
|
astirusty
Premium
join:2000-12-23
Henderson, NV
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to suzi
said by suzi :Some of the rogue advertisers change URLs frequently, so it can be difficult to keep up with them, according to what I've heard from other site owners. Maybe the site could implement a filter method that was up-datable by site administrators, mods, and some of the select few (MVM) that are trusted with posting security updates??? The main idea would be to distribute the workload.
It wouldn't hurt if a representative of Google, were to agree to accept "heads-up" warnings about the questionable Ads from a few key members. The representative could evaluate the Ads for appropriateness not only for this site, but for other sites. Google might loose some Ad revenue, but keeping their Ad viewers safe and happy is critical for their business. |
|
ZZZZZZZ
Premium
join:2001-05-27
PARADISE
| reply to John Galt
Lol ~~~~~~~~ that's what I was thinking! What ads?
--
BRING OUR TROOPS HOME,NOW!!!!! |
|
claudeo
join:2000-02-23
Redmond, WA
| reply to astirusty
said by astirusty :said by suzi :(snip)It wouldn't hurt if a representative of Google, were to agree to accept "heads-up" warnings about the questionable Ads from a few key members. The representative could evaluate the Ads for appropriateness not only for this site, but for other sites. Google might loose some Ad revenue, but keeping their Ad viewers safe and happy is critical for their business. I agree. If enough people write to Google complaining about the ads they should get investigated and pulled. But only if the complaints include documentation of why they are determined to be for malware. Google does not want to turn down ads (and the revenue they bring) just because they offend good taste or good manners. There has to be a very good reason. |
|
