Google DoubleClick essay first draft
Note: This is the first draft. Many issues like Mozilla and Google Analytics are not covered in detail yet. Final essay will be posted in April. Thanks Brendan Eich for the inspiration for the essay.
Of course, users often has little control and benefit over storage of user data and ad retargeting by trackers too, especially when many parties are involved. Of course, some provides more control than others.
This essay will
describe the history of Internet advertising at Google. I will also
talking about the ethical issues of some of the kinds of ads that
Google produces, and why Larry/Sergey didn’t consider them for
example. Of course, it is worth noting that Google isn’t the only
one involved in the ad bubble.
The first kind of
ads that Google did was AdWords, dating back to 2000. AdWords was
based on search keywords, and the text ads was displayed at the top
of the search results (labelled as ads) and was relatively simple.
Typically the highest bidder was shown, and the advertiser paid
Google when the user clicked on the ads. AdWords involved relatively
little tracking at least initially and will not be mentioned much
here. At this time Google was taking a stand against popup ads.
AdSense was ads
shown on webpages themselves, based on JavaScript. It was invented in
2003. AdSense at least initially was based on keywords on webpages
themselves (which Google fetched from its cache for example), which
advertisers could bid on. Like with AdWords, Google and websites gets
paid when users click on the ads. It also involved little tracking at
least initially, but the malware problems will be described here.
Google bought
DoubleClick in 2008. DoubleClick was invented in 1995. It made more
sophisticated ad tracking via cookies and the like famous (which was
often called “retargeting”), and the problems will be described
here. DoubleClick themselves called its product “Dynamic
Advertising Reporting and Targeting” at one point for example.
Initially DoubleClick was mostly banner ads, and many users developed
so called banner-blindness from these ads.
One of the problems
of ads is malware. Typically advertisers take the highest bidder of
ads and fill as much space as possible with ads, making malware like
exploit kits difficult to prevent. To make things worse, companies
can only spend a limited amount of money on ads, so sites often have
to take the highest bidder and sometimes websites even use multiple
ad networks. Flash was famous for many exploits for example, and
these days in general plug-ins are dying off (Java was even worse for
example). Of course, there are browser exploits too like in Firefox
and Chrome.
Though the vast
majority of exploits in kits are typically already patched, sometimes
unpatched zero day exploits get delivered by ads like in the case of
https://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/us/security/news/zero-day-exploit.
There is a market for exploit kits in general, and zero days are
particularly valuable.
One of the most
famous of ads that contain malware was at Forbes, where the Angler
exploit kit was served via pop-under ads after the site asked users
to turn off ad blockers. Of course, asking users to turn off ad
blockers or otherwise fighting against them is not a good idea in the
first place.
Douglas Crockford
tried to prevent malicious JavaScript in ads at Yahoo with AdSafe,
including cross site scripting attacks. Of course, JavaScript is a
Turing complete language making this more difficult, and Flash is
even more complex. This is especially an issue when browser exploits
are involved.
Another problem is
tracking. The current economy is a debt-based economy based on
consumption. The more money advertisers can extract from consumers,
the more they are willing to spend on ads. This results in tracking
getting creepier and creepier. Most of the tracking is called
“retargeting” and it is often based on cookies and JavaScript.
For example,
DoubleClick has cross-device retargeting introduced in 2015. Of
course, it is limited to logged-in users tracking via the user
account at least initially which any websites can do, but it
illustrated the trend. Google changed the privacy policy to allow
Google accounts to be used for such logged-in user tracking in 2016.
Of course, users often has little control and benefit over storage of user data and ad retargeting by trackers too, especially when many parties are involved. Of course, some provides more control than others.
So why didn’t
Larry/Sergey consider the issues when buying DoubleClick for example?
One reason I assume
is that no one cared as much about security when AdSense added Flash
ads for example, with exploits not as common as now.
Google’s ad
blocking involves annoying ads, but don’t fix the issues described
here. Apple’s ad blocking targets retargeting, but does not make
ads less annoying.
Comments
Post a Comment