1

For the longest time there has been an implied, some might even say explicit, connection between computer infection and online pornography. According to one developer of AntiVirus software that connection has now been well and truly broken.

Ondrej Vlcek, the CTO at AVAST Software, has announced the results of research which suggests that for every 'adult' site that is infected in some way there are 99 sites with non-sexual content that are also infected. That's worth running by you again, websites with non-adult content outscore porn sites when it comes to being infected by a ratio of 99:1

"We are not recommending people to start searching for erotic content" Vlcek insists "but the statistics are clear, for every infected adult domain we identify there are 99 others with perfectly legitimate content that are also infected". The AVAST research discovered that, in the UK alone, there were more infected domains being uncovered on a daily basis containing 'London' as a keyword than those containing 'sex'.

Earlier this year I was reporting how in Britain we appear to prefer most everything online, from Twitter to news, over porn anyway. So it would appear that the myth has been busted that visiting porn sites is the most dangerous of online activities.

However, none of this means that porn sites are somehow the safest place online either. Truth be told the same 'safe surfing' advice applies no matter where on the web you are travelling: have up to date AntiVirus software and firewalling in place, use your common sense and don't download or install anything you are not 100% sure is genuine.

As Editorial Director and Managing Analyst with IT Security Thing I am putting more than two decades of consulting experience into providing opinionated insight regarding the security threat landscape for IT security professionals. As an Editorial Fellow with Dennis Publishing, I bring more than two decades of writing experience across the technology industry into publications such as Alphr, IT Pro and (in good old fashioned print) PC Pro. I also write for SC Magazine UK and Infosecurity, as well as The Times and Sunday Times newspapers. Along the way I have been honoured with a Technology Journalist of the Year award, and three Information Security Journalist of the Year awards. Most humbling, though, was the Enigma Award for 'lifetime contribution to IT security journalism' bestowed on me in 2011.

3
Contributors
3
Replies
10
Views
7 Years
Discussion Span
Last Post by Dcurvez
0

The sites might not be infected but a lot of porn sites dish out malware and tracking cookies. These are not exactly good for your computer. Also, my antivirus (mysecuritycenter)does block sites and for a reason. I would continue to trust my antivirus on these decisions when it comes to safe surfing.

0

The research includes malware. If a website hosts and distributes malware then it is infected as far as security researchers are concerned.

As for tracking cookies, there are far more non-adult content sites 'dishing out' them as well.

Nobody is saying you should not trust your AV software, just that the knee-jerk reaction that all adult sites are dangerous is wrong. All sites should be treated as equally dangerous until proven otherwise.

0

yes, I agree happygeek.
It is not that I am a avid porn viewer LOL..in fact I stay away from them just cuz they really dont have what I want. Dont have anything against anyone that does go though,, it is alot safer for everyone as long as someones need is getting filled through visual stimuli.

with that said I do want to get back to the subject at hand..I spend my time searching recipes, genealogy and software development sites..and the amount of times I have gotten viruses/ or have had viruses come in on those sites are sadly to say..just as much..if not more.. as what others have gotten from porn sites.

The fact of the whole matter is this, I dont care if you have top dollar to the nines defense on your computer..if you hit that button, you tell the antivirus/computer..that I WANT THIS..and it HAS to give it to you. LOL..what really needs to be done here in my opinion is these antivirus companies really need to quit going after "signature strings" and start going after "character traits". what I mean by this is that there has been more than enough "studies" that show how a virus acts..what it does. The focus should be placed on this. if it acts like a virus and has all of the telling signs of a virus..it is probably a virus LOL..if it looks like a dog and acts like a dog..then it is probably a DOG! heheheeeee

if the antivirus companies would start to focus on this, then maybe..just maybe there would be alot more "safer Surfing" going on.

Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.