RE: [projectvrm] The marketing/cybercrime symbiosis

["T.Rob" < >]

> The marketing industry as a whole can never address the integrity issue,
> because there's always someone who's willing to be a little creepier, a
> little closer to the edge. 

Let's hope that isn't true.  The problem is they lost sight of their mission. 
 More thoughts here: http://iopt.us/1wq8LSW   (At 1805 words it's a short one 
for me.)

> The question is how many of the high-
> reputation brand advertisers will split off from the bottom-feeders.

The most recent exploit in the news wasn't bottom feeders.  The entire model 
based on circumventing consumer controls is indistinguishable from malware.  
It is in fact nothing more than legal malware.


Kind regards,
-- T.Rob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Don Marti 
> [mailto:
 ]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 10:20 AM
> To: Katherine Warman Kern
> Cc: T.Rob; 
> <
 >
> Subject: Re: [projectvrm] The marketing/cybercrime symbiosis
> 
> The marketing industry as a whole can never address the integrity issue,
> because there's always someone who's willing to be a little creepier, a
> little closer to the edge.  The question is how many of the high-
> reputation brand advertisers will split off from the bottom-feeders.
> 
> A little history... We had a good tool against email
> spam: a broad "private right of action"
> in state antispam laws such as Washington's CEMA (
> http://www.dwt.com/advisories/9th_Circuit_Deals_Blow_to_Professional_CANSP
> AM_Complaint_Mills_08_10_2009/
> ).  The federal CAN-SPAM law, backed by the Direct Marketing Association,
> pre-empted state antispam laws and we lost private right of action.
> 
> Yes, the DMA sided with spammers over its own members who send legit, opt-
> in marketing email.
> 
> The same thing is happening now with the IAB and the creepy ads.  Existing
> organizations such as the DMA and IAB have been captured by the
> intermediaries who sit between advertisers and content creators.
> 
> There's a growing recognition from both "ends" that the "middle" isn't
> working.  The question is how to connect dissatisfied web publishers to
> dissatisfied brand advertisers without the creepy stuff in the middle.
> Doc covers the problem here:
> 
>   http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2014/09/16/giving-respect-to-brand-
> advertising/
> 
> Don
> 
> 
> 
> begin Katherine Warman Kern quotation of Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 06:49:33AM -
> 0400:
> >
> > T.Rob, I wish there were a way to convince the marketing industry to
> address the integrity issue. The huge volume of both intentionally
> malicious and unintentionally intrusive marketing makes it more and more
> difficult and expensive for an advertiser with integrity to stand out.
> >
> > K-
> > Katherine Warman Kern
> > @comradity
> >
> > > On Sep 16, 2014, at 8:01 PM, "T.Rob" 
> > > <
 >
> > >  wrote:
> > >
> > > Recently I posted to this list a claim that marketing has become the
> R&D lab for cybercrime.
> > >
> > > 1.      Users find ways to stay anonymous and block ads.
> > > 2.      Marketing devices new adtech to circumvent user controls.
> > > 3.      Cybercriminals ride the rails marketing builds.
> > > 4.      Rinse, repeat.
> > >
> > > I asked whether marketing would ever voluntarily take responsibility
> > > for their role and whether there is a line that even Marketing won't
> > > cross.  In other words, will Marketing ever say "just because we can
> > > doesn't mean we should" and find a business model that does not
> > > support cybercrime.  To my surprise, it turns out I'd overlooked
> > > some significant activity in this area.  The OTA is saying the same
> > > thing, except they are saying it to Congress: http://iopt.us/1r6io96
> > >
> > > "According to OTA research, malvertising increased by over 200% in
> 2013 to over 209,000 incidents, generating over 12.4 billion malicious ad
> impressions."
> > >
> > > " In the absence of policy and traffic quality controls, organized
> crime has recognized malvertising as the “exploit of choice” because it
> offers the ability to be anonymous and remain undetected for days."
> > >
> > > “Failure to address these threats suggests the needs for legislation
> not unlike State data breach laws, requiring mandatory notification, data
> sharing and remediation to those who have been harmed.”
> > >
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > > -- T.Rob
> > >
> > > T.Robert Wyatt, Managing partner
> > > IoPT Consulting, LLC
> > > +1 704-443-TROB
> > > https://ioptconsulting.com
> > > https://twitter.com/tdotrob
> > >
> 
> --
> Don Marti
> http://zgp.org/~dmarti/
>