ads.txt标准的纵向分析

M. Bashir, Sajjad Arshad, E. Kirda, William K. Robertson, Christo Wilson
{"title":"ads.txt标准的纵向分析","authors":"M. Bashir, Sajjad Arshad, E. Kirda, William K. Robertson, Christo Wilson","doi":"10.1145/3355369.3355603","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Programmatic advertising provides digital ad buyers with the convenience of purchasing ad impressions through Real Time Bidding (RTB) auctions. However, programmatic advertising has also given rise to a novel form of ad fraud known as domain spoofing, in which attackers sell counterfeit impressions that claim to be from high-value publishers. To mitigate domain spoofing, the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) Tech Lab introduced the ads.txt standard in May 2017 to help ad buyers verify authorized digital ad sellers, as well as to promote overall transparency in programmatic advertising. In this work, we present a 15-month longitudinal, observational study of the ads.txt standard. We do this to understand (1) if it is helping ad buyers to combat domain spoofing and (2) whether the transparency offered by the standard can provide useful data to researchers and privacy advocates. With respect to halting domain spoofing, we observe that over 60% of Alexa Top-100K publishers that run RTB ads have adopted ads.txt, and that ad exchanges and advertisers appear to be honoring the standard. With respect to transparency, the widespread adoption of ads.txt allows us to explicitly identify over 1,000 domains belonging to ad exchanges, without having to rely on crowdsourcing or heuristic methods. However, we also find that ads.txt is still a long way from reaching its full potential. Many publishers have yet to adopt the standard, and we observe major ad exchanges purchasing unauthorized impressions that violate the standard. This opens the door to domain spoofing attacks. Further, ads.txt data often include errors that must be cleaned and mitigated before the data is practically useful.","PeriodicalId":20640,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Internet Measurement Conference 2018","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Longitudinal Analysis of the ads.txt Standard\",\"authors\":\"M. Bashir, Sajjad Arshad, E. Kirda, William K. Robertson, Christo Wilson\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3355369.3355603\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Programmatic advertising provides digital ad buyers with the convenience of purchasing ad impressions through Real Time Bidding (RTB) auctions. However, programmatic advertising has also given rise to a novel form of ad fraud known as domain spoofing, in which attackers sell counterfeit impressions that claim to be from high-value publishers. To mitigate domain spoofing, the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) Tech Lab introduced the ads.txt standard in May 2017 to help ad buyers verify authorized digital ad sellers, as well as to promote overall transparency in programmatic advertising. In this work, we present a 15-month longitudinal, observational study of the ads.txt standard. We do this to understand (1) if it is helping ad buyers to combat domain spoofing and (2) whether the transparency offered by the standard can provide useful data to researchers and privacy advocates. With respect to halting domain spoofing, we observe that over 60% of Alexa Top-100K publishers that run RTB ads have adopted ads.txt, and that ad exchanges and advertisers appear to be honoring the standard. With respect to transparency, the widespread adoption of ads.txt allows us to explicitly identify over 1,000 domains belonging to ad exchanges, without having to rely on crowdsourcing or heuristic methods. However, we also find that ads.txt is still a long way from reaching its full potential. Many publishers have yet to adopt the standard, and we observe major ad exchanges purchasing unauthorized impressions that violate the standard. This opens the door to domain spoofing attacks. Further, ads.txt data often include errors that must be cleaned and mitigated before the data is practically useful.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20640,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the Internet Measurement Conference 2018\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"16\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the Internet Measurement Conference 2018\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3355369.3355603\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Internet Measurement Conference 2018","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3355369.3355603","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

摘要

程序化广告为数字广告买家提供了通过实时竞价(RTB)拍卖购买广告印象的便利。然而,程序化广告也引发了一种被称为域名欺骗的新型广告欺诈形式,攻击者出售声称来自高价值出版商的伪造印象。为了减少域名欺骗,互动广告局(IAB)技术实验室于2017年5月推出了ads.txt标准,以帮助广告买家验证授权的数字广告卖家,并提高程序化广告的整体透明度。在这项工作中,我们对ads.txt标准进行了为期15个月的纵向观察研究。我们这样做是为了了解(1)它是否有助于广告买家打击域名欺骗(2)标准提供的透明度是否可以为研究人员和隐私倡导者提供有用的数据。关于阻止域名欺骗,我们观察到超过60%的Alexa Top-100K运行RTB广告的发布商采用了ads.txt,广告交易所和广告商似乎都遵守了这一标准。关于透明度,广泛采用ads.txt使我们能够明确地识别属于广告交易所的1000多个域名,而无需依赖众包或启发式方法。然而,我们也发现ads.txt距离发挥其全部潜力还有很长的路要走。许多发布商尚未采用该标准,我们观察到主要的广告交易平台购买了违反该标准的未经授权的展示次数。这为域名欺骗攻击打开了大门。此外,ads.txt数据通常包含在数据实际有用之前必须清除和减轻的错误。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Longitudinal Analysis of the ads.txt Standard
Programmatic advertising provides digital ad buyers with the convenience of purchasing ad impressions through Real Time Bidding (RTB) auctions. However, programmatic advertising has also given rise to a novel form of ad fraud known as domain spoofing, in which attackers sell counterfeit impressions that claim to be from high-value publishers. To mitigate domain spoofing, the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) Tech Lab introduced the ads.txt standard in May 2017 to help ad buyers verify authorized digital ad sellers, as well as to promote overall transparency in programmatic advertising. In this work, we present a 15-month longitudinal, observational study of the ads.txt standard. We do this to understand (1) if it is helping ad buyers to combat domain spoofing and (2) whether the transparency offered by the standard can provide useful data to researchers and privacy advocates. With respect to halting domain spoofing, we observe that over 60% of Alexa Top-100K publishers that run RTB ads have adopted ads.txt, and that ad exchanges and advertisers appear to be honoring the standard. With respect to transparency, the widespread adoption of ads.txt allows us to explicitly identify over 1,000 domains belonging to ad exchanges, without having to rely on crowdsourcing or heuristic methods. However, we also find that ads.txt is still a long way from reaching its full potential. Many publishers have yet to adopt the standard, and we observe major ad exchanges purchasing unauthorized impressions that violate the standard. This opens the door to domain spoofing attacks. Further, ads.txt data often include errors that must be cleaned and mitigated before the data is practically useful.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Reducing Permission Requests in Mobile Apps A Look at the ECS Behavior of DNS Resolvers RPKI is Coming of Age: A Longitudinal Study of RPKI Deployment and Invalid Route Origins Scanning the Scanners: Sensing the Internet from a Massively Distributed Network Telescope Learning Regexes to Extract Router Names from Hostnames
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1