5 ms·
> publishers actually vetted the products I work in ad technology for a publisher. We put in a lot of effort to make the tech fast, lightweight and secure for
by ddalex 7y ago
> publishers actually vetted the products
I work in ad technology for a publisher. We put in a lot of effort to make the tech fast, lightweight and secure for our visitors - we hate bad ads too. We screen our partners, use whitelists and monitor what JS is running on the site.
This being said - things sometimes slip through the cracks. Somebody with a browser-based 0-day will pay huge CPMs to insert their ad and own thousands of machines. We can't
prevent this - if you have any ideas on how, I'd love to hear it.
- smt88 7y agoI don't think reviewing code for malware scales, especially in a competitive industry like online ads. You have to automate it, and automation isn't foolproof. You can either: 1) disable JS in ads entirely, or 2) give all users an option to pay for an ad-free site. Since few publishers do either, I'll continue to use my adblocker and simultaneously pay the publishers I think we can't do without (e.g. ProPublica).
- ddalex 7y agoI agree that getting directly payed by users is a much better outcome. But the reality is that people don't want to pay us directly (in the US markets; we charge directly in other markets and it's working beautifully)