Again, Reiner, any site owner can all do that what ads are doing.
The risk potential is identical because the used technologies are identical.
You may argue that serious sites would never do that. However, just enter photozone.com or .net and you are already visiting sites that are not quality controlled in any serious way (at some stage photozone.com showed porn images for instance). Thus it can happen accidentally at any time. The secondary sites that are piggybacking on typos for the real targets are all over the place. Very simple example. Hacked sites, DNS highjacking - there are a gazillion ways to turn websites into potentially evil places.
At the end of the day you have to trust the security mechanisms in your browser and operating system or stop surfing altogether.
I can understand that readers are using ad blockers - who loves ads after all - but the security argument is a weak one really. If security was the primary concern, you would run a security plugin but not an ad blocker.
It's not as if security plugins don't exist (Avast Security Online, 360 internet protection, security plus). These plugins are much more efficient than an ad blocker.
FWIW, the company that I am working for in the other life is using network scanners. Thus all webtraffic is analysed for viruses and trojans. THIS is the serious way to do it at scale.
The risk potential is identical because the used technologies are identical.
You may argue that serious sites would never do that. However, just enter photozone.com or .net and you are already visiting sites that are not quality controlled in any serious way (at some stage photozone.com showed porn images for instance). Thus it can happen accidentally at any time. The secondary sites that are piggybacking on typos for the real targets are all over the place. Very simple example. Hacked sites, DNS highjacking - there are a gazillion ways to turn websites into potentially evil places.
At the end of the day you have to trust the security mechanisms in your browser and operating system or stop surfing altogether.
I can understand that readers are using ad blockers - who loves ads after all - but the security argument is a weak one really. If security was the primary concern, you would run a security plugin but not an ad blocker.
It's not as if security plugins don't exist (Avast Security Online, 360 internet protection, security plus). These plugins are much more efficient than an ad blocker.
FWIW, the company that I am working for in the other life is using network scanners. Thus all webtraffic is analysed for viruses and trojans. THIS is the serious way to do it at scale.