Is spyware hurting webmasters?

[Menard]

I have been hit with malware infections in the past; at least before I started slacking off of my computer skills, like back when I knew the ins and outs of Windows 95 and 98, I could deal with a lot of problems. I am just so lost on newer versions of Windows, and it seems malware authors are being even more devious.

The other night, not even having been on the internet for 5 minutes using someone else's computer, it got hit with this Security Tool malware that has been all too common; just within a small circle, my sister, two nieces, and others I know have been hit with it, and I cannot recall any such malware I've dealt with in the past which has been so widespread among so many people  I know.

The computer is down; it won't even load Windows, not even in safe mode. I battled with it for 4 hours before that trying to remove files, editing the registry and configuration files, and it still stayed.

I'm taking it by this weekend to a place, I know people there, where I can have the contents of the hard drive stored to other media and then have the hard drive wiped and a fresh install of Windows done.

What has been the source of these infections?

Ad Servers.

Unless it is a reputable ad server service (and does anybody know any outside of Google?), I have been vehemently opposed, and quite vocal at times to other webmasters, with regard to using ad services. One seriously needs to investigate any ad service before putting it on their sites. Just one malicious user who uses the service to spread malware hurts a lot of computer users if an ad service is not critically checking themselves.

Another drawback from that, IMO, is that it hurts webmasters. I have been hesitant as the this most recent infection to visit any new sites, and hesitant about visiting any sites I know which are ad heavy, whether I am able to block their ads or not.

If a webmaster, and someone who can get into the insides of Windows who is not a stranger to malware infections is hesitant about visiting sites, how does a not so computer literate user feel?

The only sites which benefits from such a rampant infection loose on the internet, largely, if not only, spread by careless webmasters who use questionable ad services, are the big name, so-called trusted sites like Google's various services, eBay, Amazon, MSN. Being that a god chunk of the internet is owned by the aforementioned site, it really makes one wonder who stands the most to benefit from putting a scare in people about visiting other sites, you know, sites owned by people like us.

I do know the feeling of hesitancy will pass, and I do have safeguards on this computer where the computer which got infected had little or none, but the age old excuse that people who do not protect themselves deserve what they get does not wash with me.

I know a webmaster (actually I know several ) who is well intentioned, IMO, and certainly more knowledgeable than myself by a long stretch, but how many times does it take for a member of one's forum to complain about visiting the site and ending up with a problem on their computer before the webmaster realizes that the answer is not 'I've dealt with the problem and the ad service has blocked that ad from their service', while offering suggestions on how to protect themselves better, when the answer should be 'I have remove that ad service from my site and apologize that I was too incompetent to check them out in the first place'?

One instance of a visitor having an incident with malware is one too many, but, unfortunately, like business in everyday life, there are too many people who are willing to take risks with others for a buck and make excuses after the fact about how it was the victims fault without curing the problem which caused it.

This type of attitude is going to affect every webmaster who does give a clam in a negative way. The webmasters who are running ad services on their sites which have infected visitors are not going to take those services off of their sites.

The only solution that I can see is other webmasters maintaining blacklists naming names of websites and ad servers which are responsible for malware. We can at least build a negative reputation for offenders rather than turning a blind eye to it, or it just continues to where more people are hesitant to visit sites outside of the big and 'trusted' sites.


The site which infected the computer I was on is Top1001sites.com

I have a topsite vote button from their site on one of mine, and am in dire need of removing it when I get back to Cave City where my files are on my laptop, so nobody else visits that site from mine (hardly likely anyway as I was probably the only one voting for my site).

It was an adserver which served the malware; as far as I can tell. I don't care whether if the webmaster is directly responsible or not; there is an ad server serving malware through their site at the least. Visiting that site without having ads blocked via a current blacklist will get your computer infected with a nasty piece of malware that is going to either cost you a lot of money to fix, or time and effort in swapping files and completely reinstalling Windows.


P.S. Yes, I am venting, still po'd about the incident, and do realize that there are other ways malware can be served through sites, of which the webmaster is completely innocent. I think, though, poorly managed ad services are a major problem to site visitors and can eventually hurt webmasters in general by creating a bad reputation for small sites by people who are hesitant to visit them.