Backdoor Found In OpenX Ad Platform 43
mask.of.sanity writes "A backdoor has existed for at least seven months in a platform sold by OpenX, the self-described global leader of digital advertising which counts the New York Post, Coca Cola, Bloomberg and EA among its customers. The backdoor was contained within the official OpenX package and recently removed. Security researchers say it meant those who downloaded the compromised software could have provided attackers full access to their web sites."
Would you steal a Car? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
So pretty much Malware ads only with full websites
Also EasyList Blocks the Sucuri site
And this is why I tell friends and family to run Adblock plus and keep it updated so you have a lot lower chance (if any) to see ads from websites you *believe* are safe delivering malicious code via ads.
Re: Would you steal a Car? (Score:5, Insightful)
Ha-ha-ha.
At work we have a PC which runs with no ad-blocking. Opening a web site often involves staring at a blank window for thirty seconds or more with a status bar saying something like 'Waiting for ads.bollockx.com'.
If the web wasn't such an ad-infested Swamp Of Suck, people wouldn't be blocking them.
Re: (Score:3)
Demonstrating the Heisenberg joke principle. Explaining or measuring the funniness of a joke instantaneously makes in no longer funny. (Also applies to sarcasm)
Re: (Score:2)
Quit trolling.
*I* pay for the bandwidth. Ads are stealing from *me* both in time and money.
Re: (Score:2)
You're paying for the *bandwidth*. You're not paying for the *content* of the web pages you are going to. They have to pay for their employees, etc. somehow. (I say this as someone who hates ads probably as much as you do.)
Re: (Score:1)
Then what are we stealing?
Theft, by definition, means you take the original and the prior owner *no longer* has said item.
Last I checked, not viewing ads on tv or the web doesn't mean I was stealing anything from said companies trying to sell me something.
Re: (Score:2)
You must be the kind of person who steals candy from babies too.
Honestly, there is no legitimate reason to run Adblock if you live in an English speaking part of the world. You block, you're a thief. This is not like video interstitials on TV/youtube that waste your time by not being skip able.
The bandwidth argument can only be applied to 2.5G EDGE networks.
The real problem with OPENX is that it's the example that proves the rule that open source doesn't automatically make something better.
I appreciate a good ad. However, I'm no more interested in being assaulted by annoying ads than I am in being accosted by muggers. I don't routinely block, but if they affront me with auto-playing noisy dreck, you can bet I'm going to block them.
And tell your brat to stop crying.
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly, there is no legitimate reason to run Adblock if you live in an English speaking part of the world. You block, you're a thief.
I don't think I have once clicked on an ad (deliberately) online, in all of my 20 years or so of using the internet. I don't use advertisements as a decent source of information.
I've only recently started using adblock, because I see myself as a thief if I steal all the advertisers bandwidth without ever clicking or buying. They're paying for this exposure.
I generally tr
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
EasyList has a serious flaw: it doesn't add EasyPrivacy by default. Spying servers are nearly as likely to contain extra risks as ad ones.
Re: (Score:2)
interestingly, has always been open source (Score:5, Interesting)
OpenX makes an interesting example of a technically open-source project that fails to benefit from open-source much at all. It's GPL'd, but they don't support any kind of public development (no public revision-control systems or anything), and they even make you register to download the source [openx.com]. The page where you do so mostly just tries to convince you not to do so. A third-party site mirrors the open-source version [opensource.be] for no-login downloads, but it seems just out of personal interest, since he's the developer of a predecessor to OpenX. It's not clear there is anybody who cares about this codebase or ever looks at it outside the company. Hence, technically open-source, but trying as hard as possible not to be.
Re:interestingly, has always been open source (Score:4, Interesting)
Having said that, I don't see much there that is newer than the official "community" release.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
OpenX has been through many twists and turns. I started using it with my employer when it was called phpAdsNew; it then became OpenAds; then OpenX.
It gradually went from a passably supported and FOSS-minded project to a hybrid model, with the FOSS part atrophying very quickly. It became clear to us that this was a liability and we stopped using it. We're now actively avoiding hybrid models like this.
Finding a 7-month-old backdoor vindicates our suspicions.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes - its been exploited to. I admin a site - and we were hit quite hard by this. Im amazed that its taken this long for the exploit to be acknowledged.
Re:interestingly, has always been open source (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm the third party you're talking about, the developer of phpAdsNew. Sadly, things took a turn for the worse when the company OpenAds (now OpenX) decided to make a business out of the advertising server. Although they've made a lot of money, the open source version has been neglected completely.
I put the download page online because I didn't like the fact that you had to register, but I'm haven't been involved in the project since 2002, so there's not much I can do about this shameful bug.
Re: (Score:2)
Everything has "Hidden Backdoors" in it... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I'll take ads I can block over Geocities websites with five fonts, eight colors and blink tags.
Another reason to hate web2.0'horrea (Score:4, Insightful)
The Internet was conceived to share ideas and information, everything else is utter BS in the name of money grubbing.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably just an accident (snicker) (Score:2)
"Security researchers say it meant those who downloaded the compromised software could have provided attackers full access to their web sites."
"Security researchers say it meant those who downloaded the compromised software undoubtedly provided attackers full access to their web sites."
There...fixed that for you.
Fixed in openx 2.8.11 (Score:2)
It is fixed in 2.8.11
http://forum.openx.org/index.php?showtopic=503521628 [openx.org] has openx's response.
Quick check on your servers by going to the openx base directory and doing an md5:
md5sum \
plugins/deliveryLog/vastServeVideoPlayer/flowplayer/3.1.1/flowplayer-3.1.1.min.js \
plugins/deliveryLog/vastServeVideoPlayer/player.delivery.php \
lib/max/Delivery/common.php
These md5's match the problem files:
558c80e601fb996e5f6bbc99a9ee0051 plugins/deliveryLog/vastServeVideoPlayer
Ad blocking (Score:3)
I had already blocked all ads served by openx servers (by URL regexp) long before this, after a couple of bad happenings on ad sites running openx.
It apparently is an unreliable platform. This finding only proves that.
However, I also think the ad platforms should make 5 steps back to become credible and acceptable again.
An ad server should be called from some customer-specific URL on the website and then serve a JPG or PNG with the ad. Period.
All the hoopla with javascripts fetched from different places, iframes, active content (like flash) etc has made it into an unreliable
piece of junk that just asks for being blocked. When I block it, they should not blame me but blame themselves.