Mobile ads play an important role in modern marketing strategies, giving companies the ability to reach billions of customers worldwide. As consumers spend more time on mobile devices, brands gain unprecedented opportunities serve their messaging at what they hope is the right place at the right time.
But with the increased investment in mobile ads comes an enlarged attack surface for fraudsters and bad actors. Mobile ad fraud is a broad term that refers to fraudulent ad activity targeting ad platforms and advertisers alike by inflating impressions and serving fake ads, and otherwise manipulating mobile advertisements and users.
Mobile ad fraud can take various forms, with some of the most common types being:
Mobile ad fraud dilutes important customer data and leads to wasted ad spend. When a bot loads an advertisement, it generates false view data, wasting budget that could be spent on genuine user views. In some cases, this happens through hidden ads that load repeatedly in the background, often draining user battery or data in the process. Mobile ad fraud can also create reputational damage by serving malicious ads to prospects, further eroding trust.
A bot detection tool can prevent mobile ad fraud by using machine learning to scan user activity and clicks at a granular level. They can work by preventing bots from accessing ad platforms and by filtering data so that it displays only information about real human audiences.
HUMAN applies its commitment to protecting against a wide range of ad fraud threats through Ad Fraud Sensor and Ad Fraud Defense. By analyzing trillions of unique interactions across billions of devices in real time, HUMAN achieves unmatched visibility, allowing it to differentiate between bots and humans across multiple channels, including mobile. This visibility helps HUMAN make data-informed decisions at various stages in the ad journey to optimize ad spend and ensure authentic engagement.
What is malvertising? | Impact & protection against it
Anti-malvertising solutions: creative wrapping vs. page-level protection