I have been tuning the algorithm for nearly 10 years now and have watched how quickly bad guys adapt and optimize. I also constantly tune the detections built into FouAnalytics so we can keep up with the innovations the bad guys deploy to make more money and to better evade detection. I added the title of "ad fraud researcher," built my own tools to collect and analyze data, and teach others how to use the tools to monitor their own campaigns and reduce the fraud they can see. To avoid this counter-incentive to actually solving fraud, I chose to remain a digital marketer. I realized that those companies would rely on fraud to continue so they could keep making money. I decided not to become a fraud detection company when I started investigating this issue and building my own tools (now called FouAnalytics) ten years ago in 2012. "oh, THEY said it was low in fraud so we kept buying it." That purpose was NOT to detect fraud correctly they purpose was to provide "cover your ass" services to ad buyers so they had someone to blame if their CFOs or CEOs started asking harder questions - e.g. The commercial fraud detection tech companies served a purpose. sold to a large acquirer or gone public), bot activity and ad fraud are worse than ever, and involve more money than ever. While a few of the commercial entities have indeed made a lot of money from selling IVT detection services (e.g. From commercial entities trying to profit from it to academic and non-profit efforts focused on large-scale data analysis. Over the last 10 years, I have witnessed many efforts to detect bots and ad fraud.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |