How I advertise malicious software on Google Ads
A developer's innocent macOS terminal app, 'RACE,' was inexplicably flagged as 'malicious software' by Google Ads, leading to a Kafkaesque struggle with automated rejection and zero human support. This familiar tale of big tech's opaque policies resonated deeply, especially when the issue was miraculously resolved only after the story gained traction on Hacker News. It starkly illustrates the infuriating power imbalance and the critical role public visibility now plays in seeking redress from corporate giants.
The Lowdown
The author recounts a frustrating ordeal with Google Ads after attempting to promote his legitimate macOS terminal multiplexer, RACE. Despite being a clean, signed, and notarized application with a static website, Google Ads suspended his account, citing "Malicious software" and "Compromised Site" without providing any specific evidence or explanation.
- The author meticulously checked his application and website using various tools, including Google's own Safe Browsing, VirusTotal, and Search Console, all of which confirmed his software and site were clean.
- He theorized the subprocess-management behavior inherent to a terminal multiplexer might have been misinterpreted by Google's automated systems as suspicious activity.
- Repeated attempts to appeal the suspension were met with automated rejections, offering no actionable feedback and creating a "Catch-22" scenario where he couldn't resolve the issue without knowing its cause.
- Crucially, after this story gained significant attention on Hacker News, the author's Google Ads account was suddenly reinstated, though Google still provided no explanation for the original suspension or the subsequent reversal.
This incident highlights the profound difficulties individuals face when dealing with the opaque, automated systems of large corporations, where genuine issues can be trapped in a bureaucratic void and only public exposure seems to prompt a resolution.
The Gossip
Google's Automated Annoyances
Many commenters shared their own 'Kafkaesque' experiences with Google's automated systems, from incorrect Google Maps edits and suspended Instagram accounts to Adsense bans, all characterized by a lack of human contact, opaque decision-making, and no meaningful recourse. The discussion extended to other large corporations like Ryanair and British Airways, suggesting a broader trend of companies hiding behind automated walls, making user support nearly impossible.
The HN Helpdesk Effect
A significant point of discussion was the author's update: his Google Ads account was reinstated shortly after the story gained traction on Hacker News, without any explanation from Google. This phenomenon, dubbed the 'Hacker News Effect' (or similar to 'Twitter as helpdesk'), underscores the unsettling reality that public shaming or viral visibility can often be the only effective 'customer support' channel for individuals facing issues with monolithic tech companies.
Ad Policy Paradoxes
Commenters expressed outrage at Google's apparent hypocrisy: while legitimate software gets flagged, Google Ads is reportedly riddled with actual scam advertisements. Examples included ads impersonating government sites (for passports or TSA PreCheck), online betting for kids, and AI-generated 'incel games.' This led to a broader debate about Google's liability for ads, its profit motives overriding quality control, and the theory that users with ad blockers might be targeted by the cheapest, scamiest ads because no legitimate advertiser bids for them.
Suspected Reasons and Software Specifics
Some users speculated on potential, albeit far-fetched, reasons for the initial 'malicious software' flag. Theories included the product name 'RACE' triggering filters related to racial terms, or the domain being flagged as 'newly registered and observed,' a common heuristic for malicious sites. There was also interest in the author's terminal multiplexer, RACE, with inquiries about its features and potential future support for Linux.