At least 18 public-sector websites in the UK and US send visitor data in some form to various web advertising brokers – including an ad-tech biz in China involved in past privacy controversies, a security firm claims.
[…]
In the US, .gov websites are not supposed to run ads. In the UK, ads are allowed on .gov.uk websites, subject to some limitations. The .gov and .gov.uk sites flagged by Silent Push each publish an ads.txt file that spells out the businesses allowed to automatically sell that site’s ad space to advertisers as a visitor arrives.
[…] Silent Push found a bunch of UK and US government websites with [the ads.txt] file listing various advertising exchanges and resellers ranging from Google (like what El Reg uses) to one in China.
[…]
One of the ad-tech vendors used by the .gov.uk sites, and highlighted by Silent Push, is Yeahmobi. This Chinese entity reportedly had its mobile ad SDK removed from the Google Play Store in 2018 for alleged ad fraud. Yeahmobi did not respond to requests for comment.
[…]
Silent Push’s report identifies four .gov sites that, in our experience, do not display adverts though do ping web ad platforms, do list various exchanges in their ads.txt files, and may break US government CISA rules. In the UK, it’s a different story, as 18 sites identified by Silent Push use Yeahmobi among others to display ads somewhere on pages.
First of all, why would government websites have ads?
Because Tory cuts mean the money to run these websites has to be found elsewhere.
I haven’t seen any ads on them but then I’m using UBO. Seems plausible that they’re using visitor data as a revenue stream though. Sort of like how the BBC does not show us ads but sells its content internationally.
deleted by creator
Sounds bad. I haven’t used websites on a bare browser for a few years but I hear peoples inferences about it. It’s good to boycott bad websites too.
Seems plausible that they’re using visitor data as a revenue stream though.
That’s even more concerning.
Yep. Government dont give a shit about anything.
Military and intelligence services are bothered by China. The government not so much. The conservatives are happy to sell our nuclear and communication infrastructure to China. It was the backlash in the media that made them change course.
The British government agreed to allow China to work on nuclear power stations in the UK, it was the intelligence service that made them reduce Chinas access to its design and operation.
This is the same government that stopped the EU from restricting cheap Chinese steel into the EU (prior to Brexit). Recently the UK closed one of its major steel manufacturers. We can only recycle steel in the UK now.
Steels needed for boats and tanks. Especially if a land war in Europe broke out, or a naval war in the Pacific.
The conservatives are weak on all advertising. The shear amount of gambling adverts in the UK are abysmal. As well as direct marketing to children for high strength vapes. We nearly got rid of nicotine addiction in young people, it’s was falling significantly prior to vapes being allowed to advertise to children. They don’t care, they’ll sell anything to the highest bidder.
“The government” is a diverse thing look at the examples given in the article
- Transport for London
- Derbyshire Dales District Council
- Walsall Council
- The Met Office
I rather doubt Chinese banner ad brokers are at the top of Derbyshire council’s agenda
I rather doubt Chinese banner ad brokers are at the top of Derbyshire council’s agenda
We can’t let them take the high ground!
including an ad-tech biz in China involved in past privacy controversies
various advertising exchanges and resellers ranging from Google (like what El Reg uses) to one in China.
Do they think google hasn’t been involved in privacy controversies?
Governments are often made up of more than one person, and the people often have thoughts and priorities that don’t completely line up all in a row.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Exclusive At least 18 public-sector websites in the UK and US send visitor data in some form to various web advertising brokers – including an ad-tech biz in China involved in past privacy controversies, a security firm claims.
Silent Push’s report identifies four .gov sites that, in our experience, do not display adverts though do ping web ad platforms, do list various exchanges in their ads.txt files, and may break US government CISA rules.
"So these organizations don’t all immediately get JavaScript access to drop on the page but they do get payloads from the bid stream – and by default it includes sensitive fields, like the device IP address.
There are settings that publishers can toggle on to limit some of the personal data from being shared via the bid stream, but there’s no indication this is on for these UK sites – especially based on the significant number of vendors that are authorized by the domains."
“The JavaScript of [tracking] pixels captures similar data that the JavaScript of real-time bidding endpoints collects, with the core difference being that pixels can set a cookie on your browser immediately, whereas in ad tech the thousands or tens of thousands of entities with opportunities to bid don’t get an opportunity to put a cookie on your computer unless they win an auction – and then only through approved attribution vendors,” he explained.
"We take these matters very seriously, and after looking into this in some detail with the team, we have never had any ad quality issues with Yeahmobi in the past, nor are we aware of any Chinese links, but as a precaution we are in the process of removing them from all our publisher ads.txt files until further notice.
The original article contains 1,311 words, the summary contains 290 words. Saved 78%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
