A new report on “Which Anti-Spyware Programs Delete Which Cookies?” has been released.  Underwritten in part by Incubeta and executed by leading spyware/adware expert Ben Edelman, the research attempts to zero in on which advertising (pay-per-click, cost-per-acquisition/"affiliate") networks are being targeted by which anti-virus (AV) and anti-spyware/adware application providers. 

Why Another Cookie Study? 
In the case of cost-per-acquisition (CPA) networks like Commission Junction, Performics and Linkshare (the full list of networks studied appears at right) affiliates and publishers want to know if privacy-concerned users (shoppers) are using AV or anti-spyware/adware software to zap cookies that control their commissions.  No cookies, no dinero amigo!

Obviously networks (who’s compensation is tied to the affiliates’/publishers’) want to know too.  They appear to get a freebie on this one given how Incubeta and Edelman are making the study public. 

What’s New?
I asked Edelman to give Thoughtshapers readers the skinny. 

“Affiliate networks’ tracking systems—and hence their abilities to add value and to get paid—rely directly on cooperation by users and their PCs,” Edelman says. 

“With a factory-fresh computer and a cooperative user, tracking will work as affiliate networks intended.  But if a user becomes suspicious of tracking that’s perceived as privacy-invasive, the user can delete the cookies by which tracking occurs. And if a user installs security software cookies can be blocked or removed.  Either way, the affiliate and affiliate network don’t get paid.  This research indicates that such blocking remains widespread—that such blocking is performed by mainstream, widely-used anti-spyware programs. 

Consumers In Control
All of these cookie-zappers indicate that their customers are in firm control of who gets targeted for deletion and who does not.  Relating to Edelman’s above statement… in my viewpoint the affiliate networks are targeted by widely-used anti-spyware/adware programs; however, these applications are used among a relatively smaller, more “privacy-concerned” user group that differ from a wider set of consumers using AV software.  How?  Those who uncrate their shiny new PC and Macs (having pre-installed AV software loaded on them) are using a more blunt instrument against affiliate network cookies (they’re more concerned with virus protection).  How blunt?  According to this research AV software (the big players) doesn’t much damage affiliate network cookies at all.

The AV and security software vendors are absolutely rushing into the market to protect users against spyware and adware but it’s not an overnight process and today they offer less sophisticated detection and deletion capabilities on the spyware/adware front (as compared to more specialized tools like AdAware, Webroot, Xblock and Zonealarm).

In short, McAfee and Symantec’s Norton have larger user bases that are less sophisticated and less hyper-focused on Web privacy tools.  The affiliate networks have, with them, been let off the hook.

As I mentioned to ClickZ’s Kate Kay recently, I do think that if privacy concerns continue to escalate, and users respond by choosing (currently lesser-used) applications over the larger anti-virus players, the affiliate networks will need to figure out a way to get ‘un-targeted’ by the smaller, niche anti-spyware and adware firms.”

Edelman’s research also yielded an interesting and related fact. 

“It seems big ad networks and affiliate networks are disproportionately targeted by anti-spyware programs, while smaller networks are allowed to operate unimpeded,” said Edelman.

His research also indicated that Google’s cookie distribution methodology may have earned them a pass (among anti-spyware/adware applications) as well.  Edelman noted that Yahoo! Search is not as lucky and is being targeted.