Porn sites safer to browse than blogs, personal sites: report

http://www.technolog.msnbc.msn.com/...fer-browse-blogs-personal-sites-report-744304

 

Because there is lots of money to be made with adult content paid memberships and all. The amount of hits they get per day is overwhelming, you bet there safer.There not exactly clean now though - are they.

 

I'm actually not one bit surprised at this. Porn sites (and many sites, actually) take heat for being infected because of ads placed on them. In fact, ads are usually the first place you'll get infected (if not downloading a file yourself). Personal websites are very easy to set up in minutes by a hacker or some other troublemaker, and they don't usually get the exposure a porn site does (I couldn't type that line and not chuckle), making them not care about rep and easy to vanish in thin air overnight when the damage is done.

 

This is good news indeed. From now on I'll just tell my wife: "Hey, you want me to be 'safe' when I'm browsing the web, don't you?"

 

I remember when i first used windows for the first time a rookie and explored the adult side,I got slammed with web pages openning,there most of been hundreds of them.Every time I tried to close the browser a hundred more would open. what a way to learn.

 

Amen to that.

 

Interesting ... I'd noted to myself quite a while back that adult-oriented sites, particularly the larger and better-known ones, seemed to be particularly fastidious about staying malware-free. Nice to see it's now more or less "official" info.

 

You still run into that from time to time (not meaning *you*). It's generally not malware at all, just tons of redirect script. On the flip side of that, said redirect could land you on an infected page, but the redirect itself is just annoying rather than harmful.

 

Very true.

 

Use NoScript with Firefox, and it should block almost all those redirects.

 

Yep, and you'll know which links/photos/whatever will be "redirect traps" because clicking on them won't work.

 

Now more excuses for men.

 

I have heard this as hearsay but hadn't ever seen any stats on it. Fascinating.

I'm going to postulate that the reason that larger porn sites aren't quite as malware-infested as you'd think would be this: they run web servers that are big enough to require a professional's expertise. Or at least from a business perspective, they're interested in up-time enough to pay for decent IT work. Plus, some require a subscription and would be highly motivated to keep those users confidential- who would sign up for a potentially embarrassing service if the usernames & passwords got leaked like Sony's did?

Conversely anyone with a dubious opinion can set up a web server in their living room with terrible security & highly vulnerable code. Often they don't know anything about server security & wouldn't even know how to tell if they got cracked.

The article didn't really differentiate between small independent porn sites and large mainstream (for lack of a better word) sites. But I would suspect that the smaller the porn site, the more likely it is to contain malware. I don't think we can blanketly conclude that all porn sites are not likely to contain malware, because all porn sites are not created equal.

Surely someone in Wilders could do some research on that subject... you know, for the good of the forum. LOL

 

I've always heard that porn sys-admins are very impressive. If you've done work for the porn industry (in terms of IT...) it looks very good on a resume.

 

Let us know how that works out for you, Hungry Man

 

"Porn" is the first word on my resume.

 

And I was thinking you were going to say it was your middle name...

 

Your hired,when can you start.

 

You, sir, Win the Internets.