Anti-Piracy Video Masquerades As Anti-Malware Education And Is Filled With Lies
from the trust-goes-both-ways dept
As some of you may be aware, Safer Internet Day just passed. Started in the EU, the day is supposed to be used to educate the masses on some dangers that are tangentially or directly connected to the internet, such as malware awareness, cyberbullying, or abuses on social media sites. It’s also heavily supported by the Industry Trust for IP Awareness, which is a UK entertainment industry group that chiefly looks to “educate” the public on how super-awesome copyright is in every respect and how piracy and copyright infringement are the work of Satan.
In a video titled… and I can’t believe I’m going to actually type this… Meet the Malwares, viewers in Australia are “educated” on exactly zero specific malware threats, but they are told that filesharing sites should be avoided completely. And if you’re thinking that there are a ton of other parts of the internet that are far riskier, rest assured that the video insists it’s all about file sharing sites.
What really caught our eye, however, is the statement that pirate sites are the most used propagation method for malware. “Did you know, the number one way we infect your device is via illegal pirate sites,” an animated piece of malware claims in the video.
Forget about email attachments, spam links, compromised servers, or even network attacks. Pirate sites are the number one spot through which malware spreads. According to the video at least. But where do they get this knowledge?
As far as anyone can tell, the people behind the video just made this up. The Industry Trust for IP Awareness claimed that this was based on a paper from 2014, except nobody can find these figures in the paper either. The closest thing in that paper is the claim that illicit streaming websites for copyrighted content were the number one source for malware as 97% of them contain something malicious. But that claim was based on another unpublished study, and that unpublished paper’s actual claim was that out of thirty pirate sites researched “90% contained malware or other potentially unwanted programmes.” These unwanted programs include such everyday annoyances as popup ads. In other words, this whole response reads like a grade-schooler’s made-up bibliography.
And none of that gets us even close to pirate sites being the number one way that malware spreads. The folks over at Malwarebytes, who know a thing or two on this topic, helpfully chimed in.
“These days, most common infections come from malicious spam campaigns and drive-by exploit attacks,” Adam Kujawa, Director of Malware Intelligence at Malwarebytes informs us.
“Torrent sites are still frequently used by criminals to host malware disguised as something the user wants, like an application, movie, etc. However they are really only a threat to people who use torrent sites regularly and those people have likely learned how to avoid malicious torrents,” he adds.
Kujawa goes on to summarize that the claim in the video about pirate sites is generally inaccurate. Which, you know, lies about malware aren’t really a great look from an organization with the stated mission of educating the public on malware. While you may not want to learn how to avoid malware, you should learn not to bother with any nonsense coming from the Industry Trust for IP Awareness.
Filed Under: anti-malware, anti-piracy, copyright, education, malware, piracy, propaganda, safer internet day
Comments on “Anti-Piracy Video Masquerades As Anti-Malware Education And Is Filled With Lies”
This is why you should not trust malware. Animated or otherwise.
Re: Re:
That’s why I use legal pirate sites.
The best computer security measure is an ad blcoker
A decade ago, keeping an up to date virus scanner was the way to go to ensure security. It didn’t work: computers would fill with pop ups that would make it impossible to use the computer and it would have to be restored to factory settings every few months. Better browsers solved this. For the remaning threats, there are ad blockers which is probably the best measure for computer novices (your parents). Will the EU be promoting this simple measure?
Having made NO study at all, YOU are definitely just making it up. -- Do you think the target audience will heed better with a study that'd meet your requirement for absolute proof? Or should a warning be in no uncertain terms?
Because you and your (merely assertive) "authority" MUST admit that torrent sites are a LIKELY source. You are at most only arguing where in a list to rank the risks.
Is it better that people get caught by, say, a 10% chance than a 12%? — NO, the computer is still 100% compromised.
The choice is between WARN of KNOWN LIKELY RISKS, or blithely NOT warn. There’s no middle ground as you imply.
But seems your and Techdirt’s interests somehow are in saying that torrent sites and the stolen software on them is safe! — Why do you at all imply that when EVERY authority agrees that’s 100% percent FALSE?
Next STORY. You are entirely in the wrong on this, due to your piratey bias.
Re: Having made NO study at all, YOU are definitely just making it up. -- Do you think the target audience will heed better with a study that'd meet your requirement for absolute proof? Or should a warning be in no uncertain terms?
Nowhere did anyone say file sharing sites were totally safe. There wasn’t even an implication in this story. But FUD helps nobody (except perhaps the RIAA/MPAA, your leash-holders) so please take your barely-legible and largely irrational rants elsewhere.
Re: Having made NO study at all, YOU are definitely just making it up. -- Do you think the target audience will heed better with a study that'd meet your requirement for absolute proof? Or should a warning be in no uncertain terms?
Flagged for abusive/spam.
Maybe we need a flag for “Delusional”?
Re: Re: Re:
That is why we have the “Funny” vote.
Re: Re:
Or, you know, warn people of likely risks beyond just visiting “pirate sites”—like, say, malicious advertising or behind-the-scenes cryptocurrency mining. Just because “pirate sites” are the most likely source of malware does not mean they are the only source; concentrating on them and ignoring other, possibly more insidious sources does no one any favors.
Re: Re: Re:
Just because “pirate sites” are the most likely source of malware does not mean they are the only source; concentrating on them and ignoring other, possibly more insidious sources does no one any favors.
Not so, it’s quite favorable for those spinning malware education into anti-copyright infringement propaganda by giving them another whack at trying to portray torrent sites as evil dens of sin and villainy, such that even visiting one will cause your computer to explode and your hair to fall out.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
They mischaracterize “caveat emptor” as “Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch’intrate”
Re: Having made NO study at all, YOU are definitely just making it up. -- Do you think the target audience will heed better with a study that'd meet your requirement for absolute proof? Or should a warning be in no uncertain terms?
Torrents are bad.
Torrents are bad.
Torrents are bad.
Wrenches are bad.
Torrents are ..
You’re mamma is rad.
Propaganda is essential.
What?
Break glass, pull handle.
Re: Re: Having made NO study at all, YOU are definitely just making it up. -- Do you think the target audience will heed better with a study that'd meet your requirement for absolute proof? Or should a warning be in no uncertain terms?
YOUR! YOUR MAMMA IS RAD!
..Well, damn. I guess my sense makes as you, then, or whatever.
Re: Having made NO study at all, YOU are definitely just making it up. -- Do you think the target audience will heed better with a study that'd meet your requirement for absolute proof? Or should a warning be in no uncertain terms?
“The choice is between WARN of KNOWN LIKELY RISKS, or blithely NOT warn.”
Warning that the people who pirate will ignore. As ever, you’d be better served getting your corporate friends to streamline copyright and make it easier to get content legally rather than deliberately fragmenting and overcharging the market than you are lying about the words everyone can read for themselves.
“saying that torrent sites and the stolen software on them is safe”
Who is saying that? Not the Techdirt that exists in this reality, and we don’t have visibility of whatever alternate dimension your mental illness has created for you.
Also, "generally inaccurate" is not a lie.
State one actual lie in this. All you do is try to undermine the basis, bring in an unproven “authority” who at most you get “generally inaccurate” out of.
For instance: ” And if you’re thinking that there are a ton of other parts of the internet that are far riskier,” is “generally inaccurate”. The riskiest part of the internet is whatever site you’re on. — Right now for me, that’s Techdirt. — Advising to avoid all known risks might be better, but there’s NO way to rank them.
Re: No, not really
“Did you know, the number one way we infect your device is via illegal pirate sites,”
That for one. They’re not claiming that torrent sites are risky, they are claiming that they are the most risky source of malware online, and given how they came to that conclusion at best it’s a baseless assertion, if not a flat out lie if they knew that it was based upon empty air.
But hey, no need to take my word for it, how about people who’s job it is to deal with malware?
“These days, most common infections come from malicious spam campaigns and drive-by exploit attacks,” Adam Kujawa, Director of Malware Intelligence at Malwarebytes informs us.
(Also, thanks for the laugh in trying to undermine the credibility of an actual authority on malware and how it most often spreads, in defense of a a group merely pretending to be an authority on the subject in a laughably obvious attempt to co-opt internet safety education into anti-copyright infringement propaganda.)
Re: Also, "generally inaccurate" is not a lie.
“Advising to avoid all known risks might be better, but there’s NO way to rank them.”
I used to get way to high too.
Re: Also, "generally inaccurate" is not a lie.
“Right now for me, that’s Techdirt”
It would be better for everyone if it wasn’t. Especially you.
“Advising to avoid all known risks might be better, but there’s NO way to rank them.”
So, you admit that you don’t know if the pirate sites are any more dangerous than other sites? Hmmm…
Not from any actual data but I am pretty sure the number 1 method to get malware are the evil ads that disguises itself as a button. At least from the number of infected computers I have fixed. Usually it is some sort of utility type software webpage. Majority that I have fix are from “Windows Optimizers” crapware but also from a lot of other useful utility software. Find the software you are looking for, click the download link and then it pointlessly takes you to a page with a bunch of adds and about 7 “Download Now” buttons. Most people don’t know how to tell which one the real one is and just download one. Doesn’t matter which one you click, they all download something. Just one is what you are looking for and the others are the Pandora’s box of malware.
Re: Re:
That makes perfect sense, as how many people actually use pirate sites, compared to those who have no clue about aadblockers, noscript etc.?
so what they are saying is that we should NOT trust anyone who takes from other people and makes money off of it?
Anti-piracy video ... filled with lies.
Is there any other kind?
I mean – if you’d have video with some scientific backing, citing some research, … wouldn’t it be immediately declared by MPAA/RIAA as pro-piracy, misguided, or flawed (with ‘what about children’ on the top)?
They are, after all, under siege (so what if imaginary?), so any dissent means treason.
The lesson here is very clear
Be sure you are using an ad blocker while engaging in piracy.
Re: The lesson here is very clear
Also . . .
If you see piracy . . . duck and cover!
Tim, I’ve been on some of those sites and believe me there is malware on them. Good job I’ve got a decent anti-virus program on my PC.
While I’m not on board with mis-educating the public on IPR I don’t have rose-tinted specs on where pirate sites are concerned. There’s got to be a way for them to spot and get rid of the malware uploaded by their users, if only to keep other people on board.
Re: Re:
I don’t think anyone is saying that there aren’t dangerous files on torrent sites, just that saying that they are the number one source of malware is a flat out lie, and ignores much more likely sources in a blatant attempt at vilifying torrent sites in general.
Re: Re: Re:
Fair dues, TOG.
I guess I could see this if their research was conducted in 2004 and consisted entirely of high schoolers using Limewire to download Britney Spears videos and such…
Fake study referenced another fake study, neither of which are provided nor can they be found, and comes to a completely predictable conclusion – totally believable.
Adblockers
Like other people are saying, did this “public service” organization mention the fact that many ad networks have been, and will continue to, serve malware?
How many times have we seen legitimate sites become the unwitting delivery system for malware simply because they use a “trusted” service like doubleclick?
Yet there’s no mention that people can get infected this way?
And did the video talk about Flash ads that contain malware and that Flash should be disabled for safety?
The rightsholders will try anything and everything to spread their BS copyright propaganda.
Anti-piracy video warns of malware, while malware masquerades as anti-piracy.
Thanks for the topic! Interesting point of view!
I was writing an article on the piracy topic for the UK’s writing service (on their website you can find a lot of topics) and I consider that pirate sites are the controversial theme to discuss… there are pros and cons.