# A suggestion for dealing with malware: compensation

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-suggestion-for-dealing-with-malware-compensation/566598>\
**Category:** About This Message Board\
**Created:** [January 6, 2011, 10:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-suggestion-for-dealing-with-malware-compensation/566598 "2011-01-06T10:43:21Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\
**Post date:** [January 6, 2011, 10:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-suggestion-for-dealing-with-malware-compensation/566598/1 "2011-01-06T10:43:21Z")

</div>

Why not make the ad provider pay compensation? After all, providing malware damages the reputation of the SDMB, doesn’t it? And it puts the staff to a lot of work, and time is money, isn’t it?

So when the ad contract comes up for renewal, how about adding to the contract a compensation clause? Say $10K per instance.

That should provide a strong incentive for the ad provider to check the ads they provide more thoroughly.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\
**Post date:** [January 6, 2011, 10:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-suggestion-for-dealing-with-malware-compensation/566598/2 "2011-01-06T10:55:17Z")

</div>

> [@Quartz](#):
>
> Why not make the ad provider pay compensation? After all, providing malware damages the reputation of the SDMB, doesn’t it? And it puts the staff to a lot of work, and time is money, isn’t it?
> 
> So when the ad contract comes up for renewal, how about adding to the contract a compensation clause? Say $10K per instance.
> 
> That should provide a strong incentive for the ad provider to check the ads they provide more thoroughly.

Because they would never sign it.  
Taking them to court for damages would be possible but insanely expensive with no guarantee of success.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\
**Post date:** [January 6, 2011, 12:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-suggestion-for-dealing-with-malware-compensation/566598/3 "2011-01-06T12:13:18Z")

</div>

I think you misunderstand the problem. The ad providers already have a pretty strong incentive to not let this stuff happen. The problem is, most are so large, and Flash is so complicated and vulnerable, that it is impossible to properly police everything.  
We need a more secure advertising system with much more restricted access to the system. Making it open source would really help with that.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\
**Post date:** [January 6, 2011, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-suggestion-for-dealing-with-malware-compensation/566598/4 "2011-01-06T12:43:24Z")

</div>

> [@runner pat](#):
>
> Because they would never sign it.

Why not? Penalty clauses are standard business practice. Sounds like an opportunity for someone if they won’t.