The practice of using web advertisements to distribute malware is called malvertising (malicious advertising). Online advertising is a source of revenue for many companies, even if it comes with its own set of dangers, malvertising being one of them. Such ads come in various forms-text, images, banners, graphics, animations, pop-ups etc.
Cybercriminals use various advertising strategies to infect legitimate websites with their malware which then infects the device used by you to browse that particular website. Many such malware programs are auto-run and thus can infect your devices automatically if you visit an infected page. Once you visit such a page, you are automatically redirected to servers set up by cybercriminals.
These servers record the user’s details and select the ideal malware that can be used to attack their system. The worst part is that the carrier websites, which are mostly legitimate ones, are not in a position to know the originator of the malware, owing to the complexity of webpage design and the various URLs involved in showing you the page.
With each passing year, these attacks are becoming more advanced and sophisticated, bringing newer levels of threat to online security through worms, Trojan horses, viruses, and ransomware. These attacks, masked by internet anonymity, have the power to hack personal as well as organizational and government computers and systems wreaking havoc.
One of the first such attacks Melissa (1999) is an early demonstration of just how destructive viruses can be. Posing as a Word file containing passwords to adult sites, it stoked curiosity and, when opened, executed a macro to resend the virus to the first 50 people in each user’s address book. Melissa was reportedly responsible for $1.1 billion in damages.
WannaCry (2017) was dubbed the biggest malware attack in history infecting 230,000 computers across 150 countries. Even though the attack was killed in quick time yet more than $130,000 in ransom fees had been paid by that time.
Even reputed websites like BBC, MSN, AOL, and The New York Times could not escape malware attacks and were affected in 2016. Investigations suggest that cybercriminal networks are getting more high-tech with the investment of big money for buying malicious ads and server access.
The anonymity provided by the web and the ability to use a perfectly legitimate big name website freely and easily makes the work of cybercriminals quite easy. Plus big websites outsource their promotional content through a range of third-party advertising networks, which makes it even better for criminals as they can upload their malware on trusted URLs. There is simply no filtration when a company registers its name with an ad network and the bidding and buying process is often automatic.
The most alarming part is that even if you try to avoid shady sites, you cannot be sure of avoiding malvertising as cybercriminals use reputed sites to spread their malware, often by means of automated processes to authorize dubious downloads or clicks. Often invisible web pages called iframes are used for this purpose so the malicious code is hidden from the user and host site until it is too late.
It is very difficult for the host site administrators to trace the source of an infection. Often they are unaware of malware in their domain, and might not know about the ad content being streamed on their site. This makes the task of tracing the source of a malware campaign extremely difficult and helps cybercriminals to attack various sites without much worry.
Online ads are a great tool for marketers and a neat way to monetize websites. But these ads do affect your privacy and security. The ability of advertisers to allow their subscribers to buy targeted promotions by which they are able to show you ads according to your taste, preference, and location also means a great opportunity for the malvertising industry.
As the ad dimension is no longer limited to desktop and infects mobile users as well, this only means that more users will now get infected. The malware generators can see the platform you use to access their links and can send the right files on your device, depending on the platform you use. So doesn’t matter which platform you use, you’re never safe from these malvertisements. You might think you’re safe on your iOS device but all devices are equally vulnerable to such attacks.
Smartphone users are set to hit the six billion mark by 2020. As a consequence malware makers and distributors to turn their attention towards opportunities to infest the mobile sector in order to extend their reach and thus profits. In 2014, about 16 million smartphones and tablets were infected with mobile malware and with advertisers expected to spend more on mobile advertising than all traditional media, this trend is sure to grow.
Keep your web browsers, operating systems, security and other software regularly updated. Most software developers apply safety patches on updates so your devices have more chances of being secure with the latest updates than the older ones.
Use an ad-blocker to filter out unwanted promotional content. But it could lead to some inconvenience as some leading websites ask visitors to turn off their ad-blockers
Disable programs like Adobe Flash and Java if you do not use them. You may also turn on the click-to-play plugins (after which you would be asked for permission before Flash or Java applications are run on your browser).
Mobile users can buy an ad management tool as these tools assist in tracing malicious code to its source.
There are anti-exploit programs that may act as a last line of defense against any malicious code that manages to break through.
Make sure you have installed anti-virus software on your computer or smartphone. Keep the anti-virus app updated as well.
The best way to fight the malware would be for digital advertisers and website operators to tighten up their policies about ad-serving networks and for the people to be aware and alert about the security threat posed by malware.
Andrew Wordell’s anticipation finally came to an end. The 45-year-old man born without a p***s, due to a rare genetic defect, managed to make love for the first time in his life with the help of medical science. The man from Manchester acquired a bionic p***s in a painful and long-lasting surgery that took place at the University Hospital in London.
The surgery lasted for ten hours and the surgeons used muscles, nerves and skin from Andrew’s hand to solve the problem. The pioneering intervention cost about 50,000 pounds and, as it turns out, was highly successful.
The bionic p***s functions as follows: in the groin there is a button that inflates the instrument with normal fluid pumped through a valve placed in its s*****m. The fact that the system is tied to the testicles gives him hope to be able to make a baby, something he deserves.
“It’s fantastic. At last I and the Feds have done it. It is the icing on the cake, “Andrew said to Sun in his first time, while he said he was absolutely delighted with his” ridiculously big “p***s.
After the surgery, the 45-year-old had an erection for ten days, and he had to wait six weeks before he could get sexually with his 28-year-old beloved. Andrew was born with bumps and though he had testicles he did not have a p***s.
His life was particularly difficult as he did all he could to hide his problem from his comrades. Until he ever felt the need to talk about it as he said “I could not go on living a lie”. So she appeared on a TV show and revealed the truth. “There was no other way, so I thought that instead of saying it to everyone, let me say it good to everybody.”
In the past, when his psychology had reached the Nadir, he had attempted suicide, but thanks to early police intervention, he was saved by taking a second chance.
Khashoggi, a Washington Post columnist and a critic of Saudi's powerful crown prince, disappeared three weeks ago after he entered the Saudi consulate in Istanbul to obtain documents for an upcoming marriage.
Riyadh's reaction since - it initially denied knowledge of his fate before saying he was killed in a fight in the consulate - has left several Western governments incredulous and strained ties with the world's largest oil exporter.
On Sunday, Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister, Adel al-Jubeir, said that Khashoggi had died in a "rogue operation".
But some of his comments appeared to contradict previous statements from Riyadh, marking yet another shift in the official story.
A clutch of countries, including Germany, Britain, France and Turkey, have pressed Riyadh to provide all the facts, and Chancellor Angela Merkel said Berlin would not export arms to Saudi Arabia while uncertainty over Khashoggi's fate persisted.
"One cannot help but wonder how there could have been a 'fistfight' between 15 young expert fighters... and a 60-year-old Khashoggi, alone and defenceless," Yasin Aktay, an adviser to Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan and a friend of Khashoggi's, wrote in the pro-government Yeni Safak newspaper.
"The 'fistfight' argument regarding Khashoggi's death is a scenario which was hastily made up, as it became clear that all the details of the incident will soon come out," Aktay wrote.
Turkish sources say authorities have an audio recording purportedly documenting the murder of the 59-year-old.
For Saudi Arabia's allies, the question will be whether they believe that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who has painted himself as a reformer, has any culpability.
"This was an operation that was a rogue operation. This was an operation where individuals ended up exceeding the authorities and responsibilities they had," Jubeir told US broadcaster Fox.
"They made the mistake when they killed Jamal Khashoggi in the consulate and they tried to cover up for it," he said. Jubeir extended condolences to Khashoggi's family.
He said the Saudis did not know how Khashoggi had been killed. That contradicted the public prosecutor's statement a day earlier that Khashoggi died after a "fistfight" with people who met him inside the consulate.
It also contradicted two Saudi officials' comments to Reuters that it was a chokehold that killed him.
Jubeir also said the Saudis did not know where Khashoggi's body was, though one of the Saudi officials had told Reuters it was wrapped up in a rug, taken out of the consulate in a vehicle and handed over to a "local cooperator" for disposal.
Prior to Jubeir's interview, a senior Saudi official laid out a version that itself contradicted earlier explanations.
That account includes details on how 15 Saudis sent to confront Khashoggi had threatened him with being drugged and kidnapped and killed him in a chokehold when he resisted.
A member of the team dressed in Khashoggi's clothes to make it appear as if he had left the consulate. Support for that strand of the account appeared to come from footage aired by CNN showing a man dressed as Khashoggi walking around Istanbul. CNN described the images as law enforcement surveillance footage.
Some top US lawmakers turned their ire on the crown prince and said they believed he ordered the killing. "Do I think he did it? Yes, I think he did it," Republican Senator Bob Corker, the influential chairperson of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in an interview with CNN.
Both Republicans and Democrats have turned their attention to the role of the prince, with whom President Donald Trump and his son-in-law and White House adviser Jared Kushner have cultivated a close relationship.
Over the course of the crisis, Trump's comments have varied from appearing to downplay Riyadh's role in the incident, to warning of potential economic sanctions. He has repeatedly highlighted the kingdom's importance as an ally.
In an interview with the Washington Post, he said "obviously there's been deception, and there have been lies."
Saudi Arabia has no intention of unleashing a 1973-style oil embargo on Western consumers and will isolate oil from politics, energy minister Khalid al-Falih told Russia's Tass news agency.
Authorities were taking statements from five Turkish employees of the Saudi consulate on Monday, NTV said. Twenty consulate workers, including the consul's driver, gave statements to prosecutors in relation to the incident last week, NTV has reported previously.
Italy is full of cultural heritage and there are many historical relics that aren't know to the majority of tourists visiting the country. A remarkable one is the "Gigante", a 14 meter high image of Neptune, the ancient sea god, holding the waves . The statue is located at the end of a popular sunbathing beach in the Italian riviera town of Monterosso del Mare (one of the five villages in the Cinque Terre). The sculpture was originally meant to decorate the seaward edge of the stylish Villa Pastine and the architect Francesco Levacher drew the first project.
Italian sculptor Arrigo Minerbi, whose works were praised by poet and novelist Gabriele D'Annunzio, built it from concrete in 1910. Minerbi was also the author of the famous bronze doors on the Duomo in Milan. The devastation caused by allied bombs have heavily damaged the giant figure, turning it into an armless ruin. The rough seas during a terrible storm in 1966 further damaged its figure, only to give it a romantic weathered charm. The Gigante quickly became an iconic symbol of the town, and it still attracts the well-informed tourists.
Other attractions in Monterosso del Mare include the Castle, the parish church of St. John the Baptist, the old convent, which is visible from all parts of the Cinque Terre and is a prime destination for tourists thanks to the "Crucifixion", attributed to Van Dyck, and, of course, the marvelous beach. On top of that, visitors can enjoy the local cuisine: Mediterranean seafood is plentiful in the town's restaurants. Anchovies of Monterosso are a local specialty designated with a Protected Designation of Origin status from the European Union: a dish not to be missed after wandering along the little village streets or sunbathing on its shores.