Jump to content

Cre8asiteforums

Discussing Web Design & Marketing Since 1998
Closing May 25. Investment Opportunity.

Sign in to follow this  
bobbb

5 fake Chrome ad blockers, you could be hacked

Recommended Posts

Google removed five fake ad blockers from the Chrome Store after they were flagged by a researcher, but they had already been downloaded more than 20 million times.

AdRemover for Google Chrome (10M+ users)
uBlock Plus (8M+ users)
Adblock Pro (2M+ users)
HD for YouTube (400K+ users)
Webutation (30K+ users)

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/if-you-downloaded-one-of-these-5-chrome-ad-blockers-you-could-have-been-hacked/

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Google doesn't vet the goods advertised in the Chrome Store. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vetting requires actual human quality assurance testing. As adding human moderation to UGC would remove Google's best liability shield AND is contrary to their fundamental algorithm automated crowd sourced not our problem competency worldview...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, iamlost said:

Vetting requires actual human quality assurance testing. As adding human moderation to UGC would remove Google's best liability shield AND is contrary to their fundamental algorithm automated crowd sourced not our problem competency worldview...

I agree.

Google and plenty of other highly used websites have a   "What?  Me worry?" business model that is only to their advantage and to the great detriment of their users. 

The law allows them to collect, organize and distribute damaging and even illegal content without worry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the boat of care for consumers left around about the time of the launch of AdWords.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since we are speaking of the departed boat of care and Google

I've been doing some searching on the coin mining some sites are doing but are not telling you upfront.
Firstly, is this Badware? Norton thinks so. As does EMSIsoft any most probably all the others.

You know who has all this info? Google and Bing. They scrape every site. If I can see a .js call to coinhive .com (or other) in the source, so can they.

Google has a safe browsing service to which Chrome and Firefox subscribe. Anyone can subscribe if they want. Bing must have it's own. So how come coinhive .com  et compagnie are not listed? Google must not think deceptive coin mining is Badware.

Here is one of their criteria: Social Engineering (Phishing and Deceptive Sites)
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/6350487

Certainly sounds like a fit to me. (Deceptive Sites)

Test a site here: https://transparencyreport.google.com/safe-browsing/search

A search for "CD cover" lists this one on top: www. cdcover .cc and it does coin mining via coinhive .com

...and while I am on a rant, you know who could help with Badware? Amazon. Most Badware is hosted on their AWS service. A scan once in a while would help eliminate some. It's not like they are lacking computing power.

Here's another one Google. You are a registrar so you know when domains are registered. When someone registers names like lsdfsadfsadfweu .info and pqrewkbfdewjhewbewjhwe .info does it not seem suspicious (these two were involved in fake tech support scams). It's obvious to me.

OK so don't force them to be dropped but safe browsing could investigate. You have all that "AI" to connect the dots between people and event and data points, so how about a bit of AI devoted to safe browsing. Payback for all the data we give you.

rant over

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Adblock Plus scores big legal win: It's not breaking the law, German supreme court rules
https://www.zdnet.com/article/adblock-plus-scores-big-legal-win-it-doesnt-break-antitrust-law-court-rules/
Auto starting ZD video

Quote

 

Adblock Plus has a rather controversial business model. It runs a whitelist of sites and services whose ads it does not filter out, because they are not annoying -- that is to say, they don't pop out, autoplay sound, or otherwise irk users.

There's nothing stopping the Bild publisher from shutting out users who are running ad blockers in their browsers, the court pointed out.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×