Why an ad-blocker needs to be part of your anti-virus suite

[robkelk]

And also why your anti-virus suite needs to be heuristic-based instead of signature-based.

The Register: Let adware be treated as malware, Canuck boffins declare after breaking open Wajam ad injector

The technology industry has numerous terms for sneaky software, including malware, adware, spyware, ransomware, and the ever adorable PUPs – potentially unwanted programs. But there isn't always a clear difference between malware and less threatening descriptors.

In a research paper distributed this month through pre-print server ArXiv, a pair of researchers from Concordia University in Montreal, Canada – Xavier de Carné de Carnavalet and Mohammad Mannan – show that in the case of software known as Wajam, these categorical distinctions obscure how adware relies on the same untrustworthy techniques as malicious code.

[Black Aeronaut]

About damn time someone started on this! The first fucking clue should have been when we had that rash of fake advertisements that injected malicious code through java scripts.

[Labster]

And yet Chrome is planning to remove support for adblockers in the near future. They'll have some limited support, but limit it to 30k rules -- even EasyList alone has 42k rules. So you'll have to pick and choose which ads you want blocked. From the author of uBlock Origin, gorhill's take is here. If you want the full, current blocking ability, you'll have to get a contract for Chrome Enterprise Edition. It's only $50 per user, per year, but you have to contact sales to get it. The change won't affect AdBlock Plus, a trusted partner of Google.

So, I think today is the day I finally leave GMail.