LONDON, June 27, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Pixalate, the market-leading fraud protection, privacy, and compliance analytics platform for Connected TV (CTV) and Mobile Advertising, today released the May 2024 Connected TV (CTV) App Spoofing Reports for Amazon Fire TV, Samsung Smart TV, Apple TV, and Roku.
The reports reveal which CTV apps are most at risk of app spoofing. Malicious actors can use invalid traffic (IVT) techniques, such as app spoofing, to disguise the CTV app traffic source. In this scheme, an app, like a ‘fireplace screensaver,’ might be misrepresented as a popular app, such as “ESPN,” to attract advertisers. (See Pixalate’s ‘Monarch’ CTV ad fraud scheme discovery for an example.)
Pixalate’s data science team analyzed over 2.3 billion global open programmatic advertising impressions across over 5k CTV apps (including delisted) across the Roku, Amazon Fire TV, Samsung Smart TV, and Apple TV app stores in May 2024 to compile this research.
Global Open Programmatic CTV App Spoofing Data: May 2024
- Apple TV: 16%
- Amazon Fire TV: 9%
- Roku: 7%
- Samsung Smart TV: 6%
The following are the top five CTV apps from each app store that were most impacted by global app spoofing risk in May 2024, according to Pixalate’s data and methodology.
Roku CTV apps at risk of spoofing in May 2024
1. Fubu: Watch Live TV & Sports 17%
2. Watch TNT 19%
3. Fox News: US, World, & Election Headlines 10%
4. Fandango at Home 17%
5. USA Network 50%+
Top Amazon Fire TV CTV apps at risk of spoofing in May 2024
1. WSFL News 50%+
2. KGWN News 50%+
3. Lifetime 11%
4. Mega Streamz 50%+
5. HISTORY 12%
Top Samsung Smart TV CTV apps at risk of spoofing in May 2024
1. Pluto TV 12%
2. NBC 13%
3. Cooking Channel 21%
4. MEGOGO TV & Movies 13%
5. Travel Channel 35%
Top Apple TV CTV apps at risk of spoofing in May 2024
1. USA Network 34%
2. ESPN: Live Sports & Scores 35%
3. Scripps News 50%+
4. AMC: Stream TV Shows & Movies 30%
5. WBTV News 35%
Download Pixalate’s CTV App Spoofing Reports
Download to see more apps - the top 15 per platform - at risk of spoofing in May 2024, as measured by Pixalate.
Pixalate’s Mobile App Spoofing Reports
Pixalate’s CTV App Spoofing Reports:
Methodology
For additional background information, including methodology and definitions related to CTV App Spoofing, visit Pixalate’s inaugural CTV App Spoofing Report and view the FAQs there.
Pixalate's data science team compiled this research through the following steps:
- Identify “Highly Impacted” CTV apps: On each respective platform, Pixalate identified apps with the highest rate of spoofed traffic (e.g., the percentage of all traffic purporting to come from the app that does not actually come from the app). In the context of this research, “Highly Impacted” apps are those that have an app spoofing rate of 10%+ or those that have an app spoofing rate in excess of 90% of other apps on a given platform, whichever rate is lower.
- The “Highly Impacted” apps are then ranked by volume of spoofed impressions.
About Pixalate
Pixalate is a global platform specializing in privacy compliance, ad fraud prevention, and digital ad supply chain data intelligence. Founded in 2012, Pixalate is trusted by regulators, data researchers, advertisers, publishers, ad tech platforms, and financial analysts across the Connected TV (CTV), mobile app, and website ecosystems. Pixalate is accredited by the MRC for the detection and filtration of Sophisticated Invalid Traffic (SIVT). pixalate.com
Disclaimer
The content of this post, and the App Spoofing Report (the “Report”), reflect Pixalate’s opinions with respect to the factors that Pixalate believes can be useful to the digital media industry. Pixalate’s opinions are just that, opinions, which means that they are neither facts nor guarantees; and neither this post nor the Report are intended to impugn the standing or reputation of any entity, person or app, but instead, to report findings and apparent trends in the time period studied. Per the MRC, “'Fraud' is not intended to represent fraud as defined in various laws, statutes and ordinances or as conventionally used in U.S. Court or other legal proceedings, but rather a custom definition strictly for advertising measurement purposes. Also per the MRC, “‘Invalid Traffic’ is defined generally as traffic that does not meet certain ad serving quality or completeness criteria, or otherwise does not represent legitimate ad traffic that should be included in measurement counts. Among the reasons why ad traffic may be deemed invalid is it is a result of non-human traffic (spiders, bots, etc.), or activity designed to produce fraudulent traffic.”
Contact: Nina Talcott
ntalcott@pixalate.com
Director of Research Communications & Media Engagement
