Why not show advertisers click fraud data?

If Google is really using anti-click fraud program ...

[StupidScript]

Can anyone think of a downside (for any party) to the idea that Google should tell advertisers which clicks they didn't charge for due to click fraud detection on Google's end?

To me, this looks like a win-win situation. The advertiser can easily reconcile their own accounting and Google gets to be the 'good guy' in the fight against click fraud, and boost the impression that they are being transparent in their billing process at the same time.

I mean ... why not?

[DamonHD]

Hi,

Because the "bad guys" would use the feedback to work out what G can and cannot detect, and go on to defraud the system without being detected.

While security cannot be entirely through security, in this case there has to be some obscurity to keep the crooks guessing.

Rgds

Damon

[aleksl]

StupidScipt, I think I've answered your question in another thread; considering that the only number we have is "27% of all clicks are fraud" we are talking about potentially more than $1 Billion dollars of Google's revenue. Who knows what percentage of these 27% Google detects, and what blocks - half? a quarter? 3 quarters? In either case it could potentially be half a billion dollars at stake - and no executive will make that call and risk that much money.

"Getting to be a good guy" lately've been costing Google dearly :-) with their "scan copyrighted books and put ads on them" and "click fraud is done by bad people" initiatives.