• The_Mixer_Dude@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think your should read again. You seemed to understand the parts separately but when they came together you got a bit confused

    • _bug0ut@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      My guy, I don’t know what you want from me. A Google ad is purchased in a legitimate manner, but the ad itself actually links to a page where you download malware.

      You answered really fast, so you clearly didn’t read the actual source material I linked at the bottom - specifically the Distribution section.

      • The_Mixer_Dude@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        It was already explained in the original article. It’s not what you want to believe but it is the actual situation and I’m not gonna spend forever writing a response because it won’t actually change the fact of you reading things

        • _bug0ut@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The “original” article is the one I linked - the one written by the actual security researchers at MalwareBytes who did the research on this malware and then provided the detailed write up (which is what security researchers do). The one shared in the OP is referencing that article.

          But it’s all good. All you had to do was tell me you can’t read and I would’ve backed out of this thread like 2 responses ago. :) Have a great night!

          • The_Mixer_Dude@lemmus.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            I mean, at the end of the day the malware is being allowed to install on the computer is it not?