# Is there any threat on adult sites ?



## Juan_Tico (Jan 1, 2015)

Hi all, once in a while I surf a specific adult site and I've been wondering to what extend it might compromise the system's security. 
I know, many people say: Just don't do it! 
But that's no satisfactory answer. I want to understand the exact threat that might be there. 
Maybe somebody has even tested this. 
I have browser extensions for firefox: 
adblock plus, 
better privacy, 
no script (however, you have to enable the site and another thing called phnc or something in order to be able to use it) 
Operating system Linux Mint 17 

Please note: This is a serious question. 

Many thanks in advance!

Have a happy New Year!


----------



## LMiller7 (Jun 21, 2010)

Adult websites must be considered high risk. Using Linux much reduces that risk but does not eliminate it. There is no way of knowing what the specific risks might be and that could change from one day to the next.

Forum rules do not permit specific reference to the site.


----------



## Corday (Mar 3, 2010)

Juan: You've taken the usual precautions. What I tell people is to watch the screen rather than being "Mouse Happy". What's brought into a computer is most often not what snuck in, but what was invited in.


----------



## Masterchiefxx17 (Feb 27, 2010)

As long as you avoid the advertisements and popups, you should be safe. Although the some websites may have code designed in them that could attach to your browser, but its rare.


----------



## Babbzzz (Jul 14, 2011)

How does the idea of using a Sandbox while visiting adult sites sound?


----------



## sobeit (Nov 11, 2007)

One of the biggest concern is the fbi ransomware which will lock up your system and demand payment to unlock it. IMO, use linux if you are going to spend time in the red light district.


----------



## Juan_Tico (Jan 1, 2015)

Thanks for all your replies! 
@Babbzzz: Thanks for your PM.
The sandbox idea does sound nice to me.
I just installed Sandfox and it looks nice to me. 
However, I wasn't able to run Firefox in safe mode. 

Any clue on how to do this in conjuction with Sandfox? 

I would assume that once I run a new "safe" window from the "sandfoxed" window, the sandfox effect is gone... 
Is there a way to see if Sandfox is active?


----------



## Corday (Mar 3, 2010)

Naturally Safe Mode disables all FF add-ons.


----------



## Juan_Tico (Jan 1, 2015)

Corday:

Uuups!

That was a good hint. I somehow mixed up safe mode with "private window".

However, the Sandfox application is run in a terminal window and almost invisible.
The command is 


> sudo sandfox firefox -private-window


Still, the following question remains:
Is there a way to see if Sandfox is active for the current firefox window? 
Additional question:
How come my desktop (only the desktop Cinnamon) crashes, when I run the Sandfox twice?


----------



## sobeit (Nov 11, 2007)

oops, just reread your original post. you are using linux...let me redo my original answer.

IMO, there are no specific threats when you visit porn sites or any sites for that matter if you are using linux. you should not have to do anything special. The other day, I was looking for information on specific tv show that came out in the 70's. and ran across a ransomware screen. If I would have been on a windows computer, I would have been upset but on linux, it is as simple as closing the tab. based on everything said, I see absolutely no need for sandbox.


----------



## Juan_Tico (Jan 1, 2015)

The general question is interesting indeed.
Some argue that adult sites are safer than normal sites, as these people allegedly have a reputation to lose. (especially if it's a pay site)

They say that free sites tend to be more funky and fishy, as they need to generate money in some way.

This site Adult websites less of a malware threat than 'normal' sites | IT PRO cites a survey by avast where they found that actually adult sites are much safer in average than normal sites. :O


----------



## sobeit (Nov 11, 2007)

they are perceived to be safer because users who have issues after visiting adult sites will not admit to where they been. also look at the date of that article, the nature of threats change yearly. 

you have to remember one thing, free vs paid is the same no matter what you are accessing. free sites generally have more ads, more links to third party sites and more. paid sites tend to have fewer ads and links. more ads and such you have, the more likely you are going to have issues by clicking on the wrong link.


----------



## Juan_Tico (Jan 1, 2015)

Hi all,

as I found our exchange here really instructive, I'd like to share some other things I learned.

There's a tool that's called McAfee site advisor.
For Windows it's available as extension for Firefox. For Linux I haven't found it.
So what Linux users could do is simply type in the site that you want to have checked:
McAfee SiteAdvisor Software â€“ Website Safety Ratings and Secure Search

@sobeit:
Thanks for your opinion on the topic.
Regarding your last comment, I'm not so sure if one is always able to detect fishy links. Certainly, advanced users wouldn't click on a variety of links and this already helps. But there are many threats that can't be "foreseen" and that install silently without leaving any trace.

This article brings up some interesting points:
Mythbusters: Dangerous Security Advice You Shouldn't Follow


> *Just Going To A Website Can’t Infect You*
> 
> *Is it true?* Mostly.
> 48% of internet users polled believed that simply visiting a site cannot infect you. This both is, and isn’t true. If you use a secure browser – like Chrome – which uses a technique called “sandboxing” to place each tab into it’s own virtual playground with no access to system resources, then yes, this statement generally holds true. *Java* is the exception to this however, and so is *Flash*;>>>> if you have these kind of third party plugins enabled, then they can be used to infect your PC regardless of the browser. The latest version of Firefox sandboxes Flash too, I should note.<<<<<
> Best advice? *Uninstall Java*, and *disable Flash* by default. You can enable it for certain sites then, or approve the plugin only when needed. If you’re using an older version of Internet Explorer – stop it – and go download something more secure immediately.


I also marked a part of this comment in which they talk about sandboxing.
It's true that with the extension Priv8 it's possible get sandboxes running.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/priv8/

I'm gonna test it.

Now still the question remains: Does sandboxing tabs help against Flash attacks? Or is the above cited article right and it doesn't?


----------



## Babbzzz (Jul 14, 2011)

WOT is generally considered better than McAfee Site Advisor and is used by most members here. Better mostly in regard to more number of users using WOT, hence more accurate ratings. 

It is also a good idea to use Adblock Plus that blocks only the intrusive ads and lets a few harmless ones stay. So, lesser nasties to accidentally click on.

I'm sorry I was a little late to realize you were on Linux, the chances of getting your system infected are very less, even without most of these security measures. But, you can never be too careful these days.

*EDIT:* It is generally a good idea to keep flash disabled and enable it only when you need it. There are cases where you don't need to click on an Ad to get infected, if flash is enabled, the infected ad can automatically infect your PC. Use FlashDisable to enable/disable flash in a single click. Again, Linux systems are generally safe.


----------



## Shelly_Johnson (Jan 31, 2015)

The highest risk. Too numerous to detail. Basically "everything" could be there, and probably is.

The economics of porn relates to Security. It's the largest component of the internet economy. Demand for porn is very high, but also supply is very high. Net result is that there is a lot of people looking for it, and a lot of places providing it. It's widely known in the industry that while porn sites generate the most traffic, they also generate the least amount of income (per visitor). The reason is that porn is so common that, if a website owner starts making them fill-out surveys, or give an email address, or harasses their visitors with pop-ups, the visitors will quickly and easily move elsewhere, and find what they want there, it's so common and easy to do.

So porn is high-traffic, but low profit. Except in one niche, which is malware. Malware takes many forms and has many uses. It's not always JUST about stealing credit card numbers. Some malwares infect a machine and that machine can be used as a "repeater" or "proxy" so that (example) email spammers can connect to the infected machine and use that machine's IP Address to send spam email, comment spam forums, do Denial of Service Attacks, or anything else. Some malware generates income by altering search results increasing the number of clicks to websites that they wouldn't otherwise get.

In short, some malware makes people money. And since porn sites are high volume (high demand) and low profit (high supply), they are the perfect way to get as many people to possibly infect their computers and generate income for someone. So, porn site operators don't earn their money directly by pop-ups, ad-sense ads, or other standard, legal, traditional methods, instead they surreptitiously infect their visitors computers and make their money THAT way.

So, when looking comprehensively at risk regarding malware, porn site vs. "everything else", porn sites are going to be the HIGHEST risk. And these operators are sophisticated. They don't infect every single computer that visits them, otherwise they'd get shut down, lose their rank in Google, etc... Instead, they infect every "nth" computer. Most, maybe, can visit a porn site and get out uninfected. But it's a numbers game. Eventually, your number comes up and you get something. Sometimes (FYI) the malware doesn't become active for a day or two, so you don't have a clear connection between the malware and what site did it to you.

Anyways, the overall point here is that it's about money, and the more sophisticated the method of infecting the computers is, the more money the malware authors & distributors are going to make.

Personally, I can appreciate your desire to "dig in" and find out in detail "what's out there" unfortunately, the most effective way to find out the answer to that question is to get infected, as nothing can narrow the focus and increase the awareness of the technical details of malware better than having it prevent you from using your computer. As a theoretical proposition, it's just words and symbols on a computer screen, ideas and opinions. As a right-there-in-front-of-you reality, it's red-faced rage and the uncontrollable desire to repeatedly smash your computer with a hammer.

Finally point (waste of time here, I'm sure, but...) DON'T BE LIKE ME AND LEARN THE HARD WAY. They call it "the hard way" for a reason. Those words mean something. Nothing wrong with taking the good advice of a knowledgeable person and doing what they say, just because they say so. No one will question your masculinity, or make comments about how well your socks coordinate with your shirt. So take the advice, and stay away from "adult sites". There's nothing but bad there, and there's no advice, preparation or anti-virus software that is going to protect you. Porn sites harbor the most advanced-level malware the entire human race can create. They're about 60 days ahead of the anti-virus software companies (typical lag between when a virus is released "into the wild" and the major AV software companies identity it and write definitions for it into their updates). You might hit an adult site and get infected with a malware that was written and released JUST YESTERDAY and it might be 2 months before an automated way is found to find and delete it from your computer. Meaning, it could run unimpeded for 2 months before you even have a chance of getting rid of it, without having a trained professional manually find and remove it for you.

So. These are professionals here. They do this stuff all day long and every day. No one looks at the Brain Surgeon and thinks: "Hey, that doesn't look too difficult. I could figure out how to do that.", and they certainly DON'T teach themselves brain surgery while WORKING ON THEIR OWN BRAIN. That's REALLY stupid. If you want to learn malware removal, practice on someone else's computer, and stay away from adult websites.


----------



## Shelly_Johnson (Jan 31, 2015)

sobeit said:


> One of the biggest concern is the fbi ransomware which will lock up your system and demand payment to unlock it. IMO, use linux if you are going to spend time in the red light district.


It gets worse. Last article I read said that now, instead of "locking" the computer, the malware runs an encryption routine and encrypts all your documents and other files with a password, and then demands payment for the password in order to unlock your data.

As of right now, the encryption level was very basic, and crackable, but the prediction is that at some point, the malware is going to encrypt the data at such a level of "hardness" that the only choice the User will have is to either restore from backup or pay the ransom.

@OP
I read some more of your posts and you are playing with fire. I discount the source of your "mythbuster" article, as you can find just about any opinion you want online. It's never about what is being said, and it's always about who is saying it.

Here's an example, just today:
Huge Security Flaw Leaks VPN Users' Real IP-Addresses | TorrentFreak



> VPN users are facing a massive security flaw as websites can easily see their home IP-addresses through WebRTC. The vulnerability is limited to supporting browsers such as Firefox and Chrome, and appears to affect Windows users only. Luckily the security hole is relatively easy to fix.
> 
> The Snowden revelations have made it clear that online privacy is certainly not a given.
> 
> ...



Longer story short, in direct contradiction to a years-long belief, a VPN does NOT isolate a User's "real" IP Address from a site they are visiting. This article was published by torrentfreak just yesterday, and this vulnerability has been around since WebRTC has been around.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebRTC



> *History*
> In *May 2011*, Google released an open source project for browser-based real-time communication known as WebRTC.[2] This has been followed by ongoing work to standardise the relevant protocols in the IETF[3] and browser APIs in the W3C.[4]


This security vulnerability has been around since May, 2011, and it wasn't until JUST YESTERDAY that a major publication made it known to the public. That's 32 months people have been browsing around the internet falsely believing that their VPN's have been keeping their "real" IP Addresses a secret. I bet I could post 50 articles and other references from reliable sources, all published within the last 3 months, all making the clear and unequivocal statement that a VPN will protect your anonymity by shielding the sites you visit from knowing your real IP Address, and EVERY SINGLE ONE of those 50 online references would be WRONG.

So posting some vague and general "Top 10 ways to Loose Belly Fat" made-for-Google-Search-results article from "Fred & Wilma's online komputer and potpouri extravaganza" doesn't persuade me of anything other than people that want to believe in something will always find a way to do it, and usually they care more about validating their desire to believe in a particularly reality than in learning what that reality really is. So again, I reiterate, these are professionals; it's what they do. Fred & Wilma don't know Jack. TorrentFreak didn't know Jack until just yesterday.

In another aspect, I went round & round & round on another website with some idiot that was absolutely certain that Java would not, could not transmit or otherwise convey a User's MAC Address via a web browser, to the extent that I used abusive language (he fully deserved it) and was "warned" by an Admin. Then, a week later, there was a news story that yes in fact Java WILL send your MAC Address via a browser connection, on demand, and that all those folks that thought they were safe were not. (The whole thing started because I was advocating that everyone should spoof their MAC Address as a standard measure of internet security, and was dismissed by Mr. Big Shot Forum Know-It-All as being a tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nut.

Turns out, I was right.

Finally, there's one other thing I'll throw into your mix, which is that THEY'LL FIND YOU. There's some Computer Tech statistic or other that says that an unprotected machine will become infected within "x" minutes after being connected to the internet, due to the fact that the malware distributors regularly ping IP Addresses and once they find a computer that answers them, they start automated routines that try to hack those computers. I have personally had the experience of a internet-facing business server getting hack attempts every 60 seconds for several weeks, due to an outdated copy of Symantec PCAnywhere that responded every single time it was pinged. The solution in that case was to change the default port from whatever it was to something else. Point here is that you (or I) can possibly know all the various ways in which they will find you, just by blindly pinging random (or sequential) IP Addresses. So, it's not just about visiting a website and "clicking something", and it's not just about visiting an adult site and only reading the articles, it's also about that same site, aware that you are there, browsing, pinging YOU. No click required; the site (and it's malware) finds you.

Finally, I leave you with this. Since it seems you want to know "all about it", then I think a good, basic starting point is to consider all of the various types of information that your browser will (and will not, maybe) hand over to a website when you visit one. Not just MAC Address. Not just browser type (IE, FF, Chrome, Opera, etc...), not just version, not just java yes/no, java version, activeX, etc... but ALL of it.

Here, think about this:

https://panopticlick.eff.org/


----------



## Shelly_Johnson (Jan 31, 2015)

This is what I was referring to earlier.

Eventually, I think this malware is going to evolve into "Strike 1, and you are OUT!" and the only response (failing to prevent it's encryption routine from running) is to have constant back-ups, and then protect those back-ups from being infected. The more I do this stuff, the more I believe that off-site back-up is the only way to go.


----------



## Juan_Tico (Jan 1, 2015)

Hi Shelly,

you got a good point there.
Thanks for sharing. I have to admit that the source I found wasn't the best.
Then again, the way you put it it must almost be impossible to surf safe. That is, also normal sites could sent you a virus or whatever.

I also believe that nowadays it's not easy to notice wheather you have a virus on your machine or not.

Still, I believe there should be safe XXX sites around, but you'd need an antivirus provider or a good IT magazine to have them test them.
And who would want to risk their reputation with something like this?


----------



## MPR (Aug 28, 2010)

Any site can give you a virus. A couple of years ago ImageShack was infected. Go a couple of links down from most news websites and you will oftentimes get some pretty fishy popups too. Other seemingly innocuous sites have several trackers on them, including this one, which Ghostery shows has no fewer than 19 on the main page that has all the ads.


----------



## Wand3r3r (Sep 17, 2010)

Malware/virus's are all about hacking you to steal from you. Just being malicious went away over 10 years ago when the organized crime cybercriminals figured out it was easier to steal from you then rob a bank, deal drugs or run a prostitute ring. They continue to do those things but they are making Billions now through cybercrime.

There are no safe sites on the internet. All the hackers have to do is compromise the site that is putting up the advertisement to infect you. It gets even better when folks run torrents or engage in similar activities.

As an example I had a person in Accounts Payable that liked to scrapbook on company time and their manager allow them to do so. Unfortunately they were downloading zip files of scrapbook frames and pretty doodads. This bypassed our dual firewalls [we were not allowed to block zip file then] and installed a keyboard logger on their system. This captured the bank accounts [yes two of them] secure logon information. The hackers then entered 6 new employees into each at $10k per. If it hadn't been for the banks noticing and preventing this it would have cost my company $120K. Boom gone with no recovery and not fault of the bank.

Don't think backups are a true safety net. Hackers are know to both compromise you immediately as well as leave back doors into your system. Only a complete wipe and reinstall corrects this. For businesses the hacker can wait until the end of your backup cycle before hitting you and at that point you can never get rid of them because they are on your backups. There is recovery but its messy and very time consuming.


----------

