Open-Source Ad Fraud IOC Databases Signal New Era For Invalid Traffic Defense

A new open-source threat intelligence feed focused on ad fraud indicators is the latest sign that invalid traffic is being treated more like a cybersecurity problem than a simple media quality issue. For PPC advertisers, this shift matters: the same actors that poison programmatic impressions also drive fake clicks in Google Ads, Meta and Microsoft Ads, distorting performance data and draining budgets.

From our perspective at ClickPatrol, broader access to shared indicators of compromise (IOCs) is positive, but it also underlines a key reality for performance marketers. Static lists and public feeds are one piece of the defense. To really protect ad spend, you still need continuous, behavior-based detection that reacts in real time to how each click behaves on your site.

What an ad fraud IOC database is and why it matters for PPC

An ad fraud IOC database aggregates technical signals that are commonly associated with invalid traffic. These indicators are familiar to security teams, but many PPC teams rarely see them directly in their day-to-day work.

Typical IOCs in an ad fraud feed include:

• IP addresses and IP ranges frequently tied to bots or data center traffic
• Autonomous System Numbers (ASNs) connected to large-scale non-human activity
• Device IDs and user agents that point to automation tools
• Domains and apps flagged as high-risk or fraudulent inventory sources

In the source announcement, the new feed is positioned as a resource for fraud researchers, developers and system administrators who want to integrate ad fraud intelligence into their own security stacks. That same data, when applied correctly, can also help PPC teams tighten exclusion lists, refine geo targeting and improve their rules for suspicious clicks.

Key elements of the newly announced ad fraud IOC feed

The announcement outlines a number of structural features designed to make the data practical for technical teams and researchers working on invalid traffic. While the focus is broader than PPC alone, many of the core elements are directly relevant to paid media environments.

• Indicators modeled on cybersecurity practice: The database is framed as an IOC resource, mirroring how security teams share known-bad IPs, ASNs and other identifiers to block attacks before they hit production systems.
• Coverage specifically tied to invalid traffic (IVT): The provider links the feed to its broader IVT monitoring capabilities, drawing on datasets that span connected TV, mobile apps and web inventory where fraudulent impressions and non-human traffic are detected.
• Open-source and freely accessible structure: The data is positioned as open and community-oriented, allowing researchers and engineers to download, query and integrate it into their own filters and analytics tools.
• Support for multiple use cases: The intended audience ranges from security engineers and ad tech developers to analysts who need to enrich their logs with ad fraud indicators for investigations and monitoring.

For PPC professionals, the main takeaway is that ad fraud and invalid traffic are being treated with the same rigor that information security teams apply to intrusion detection. That is a positive shift, but the practical implementation on the advertiser side still needs dedicated tools that are built for campaign-level decisions and budget protection.

How IOC-style ad fraud feeds intersect with click fraud in PPC

Open indicators are especially helpful for filtering out the most obvious bad actors, such as known data center IPs or high-risk ASNs. In our audits at ClickPatrol, we often see a first layer of invalid traffic that can be tied to these kinds of infrastructure-based signals.

However, sophisticated click fraud rarely relies only on obvious data center blocks. Fraudsters mix tactics to avoid simple IP-based rules, for example:

• Rotating through residential proxy networks that change IPs frequently
• Using real devices or infected browsers that mimic genuine user behavior at first glance
• Triggering repeated clicks from the same user agent with small timing variations to bypass basic frequency checks in Google Ads or Meta Ads
• Switching devices and networks to keep below standard platform thresholds for suspicious activity

An IOC database can help identify and block known-bad infrastructure, but it does not replace the need to evaluate each click using behavioral data. When we analyze traffic for advertisers, we look at factors such as rapid-fire clicking patterns, abnormal session depth, scroll and interaction behavior, conversion paths and the relationship between campaigns, placements and outcomes. That is what allows us to automatically block repeat offenders and adjust protection rules as fraud tactics change.

Why PPC advertisers should care about invalid traffic research feeds

Even if you never directly download an IOC feed, its existence affects the wider ecosystem that supplies your PPC traffic. Exchanges, SSPs, DSPs and verification vendors all rely on threat intelligence to keep the worst traffic out of the pipes before it reaches your campaigns.

From an advertiser standpoint, this has several implications:

• Cleaner upstream inventory is not enough: Platform-level filters reduce risk, but they do not catch targeted attacks on high-value keywords or competitive local niches where a small group of bad actors can cause significant wasted spend.
• Click-level protection is still essential: You need visibility and control at the point where spend occurs. That means monitoring traffic after the ad click, not just at the impression level.
• Reliable analytics depends on filtering IVT: If bots and fake users are left in your data, your cost per acquisition, conversion rates and audience insights are all skewed. This leads to poor optimization decisions even when overall spend remains constant.
• Regulators and industry bodies are paying attention: Growing focus on ad quality and transparency, combined with industry efforts to share threat intelligence, puts more pressure on everyone in the chain to show how they handle invalid traffic.

As IVT research becomes more accessible through open feeds, advertisers should expect questions from finance teams and clients about what they are doing to protect budgets and make sure performance reports are trustworthy.

What this means for your Google Ads, Meta and Microsoft Ads budgets

Open ad fraud intelligence mainly influences the supply side and broader security community, but there are concrete steps PPC teams can take to benefit from this shift.

1. Tighten exclusion lists using credible indicators

If your development or analytics team consumes IOC data, you can collaborate with them to translate high-risk IP ranges, ASNs and domains into exclusion lists in your ad accounts. Used carefully, this can shrink obvious waste without harming reach.

You should review:

• IP exclusion lists in Google Ads and Microsoft Ads
• Geo targeting rules where certain regions are repeatedly associated with suspicious patterns
• Placement and app exclusions on display and app campaigns when specific domains or bundles appear in IVT reports

2. Combine threat feeds with behavior-based click fraud protection

The strongest approach is to treat open-source ad fraud intelligence as one of several inputs, not a standalone solution. At ClickPatrol, we use many behavioral data points to decide whether a click is genuine. We look at:

• Frequency and timing of clicks per user or device
• On-site engagement signals, including whether users behave like real prospects or abandon instantly
• Conversion patterns and anomalies at ad group, keyword and placement levels
• Technical fingerprints, such as user agent consistency and device patterns

We then automatically block fake, bot or repeated clicks in platforms like Google Ads, Meta and Microsoft Ads as soon as we detect them. This combination of behavior-based rules and infrastructure-level intelligence keeps your exclusions fresh and strongly aligned with real performance outcomes.

3. Use cleaner data to scale winning campaigns with confidence

Once invalid traffic is filtered out more effectively, your analytics become a more reliable guide for decision making. That means:

• More accurate view of true cost per lead or cost per sale
• Better identification of profitable keywords, audiences and placements
• Reduced risk when increasing budgets on high-performing campaigns
• Clearer evidence when you need to justify spend or reallocate budgets across channels

In practice, advertisers who cut a meaningful portion of invalid traffic often discover that some campaigns they thought were underperforming are viable once fake clicks are removed from the data.

How ClickPatrol fits into a world of open ad fraud intelligence

The emergence of open-source ad fraud IOC databases is encouraging. It validates what many of us working on traffic quality have seen for years: invalid traffic is a serious threat that deserves rigorous, data-driven defenses.

At ClickPatrol, we see our role as complementary to these shared research efforts. Our technology focuses on:

• Real-time analysis of every click that lands on your site or landing page
• Automatic blocking of suspicious or repeated click sources in Google Ads, Meta and Microsoft Ads
• Continuous learning from campaign performance so protection improves over time
• Delivering cleaner data so your optimization decisions are based on real users, not bots or accidental clicks

If you are concerned about how much of your spend may be going to invalid traffic, this is a good moment to review your defenses. You can start a free trial of ClickPatrol or speak with our team to understand how our detection methods work and how they integrate with your existing PPC setup.

Open ad fraud research and community feeds will keep improving the baseline. Advertisers that pair these developments with precise, click-level protection will be in the strongest position to protect budgets, trust their analytics and scale what works.

Abisola

Meet Abisola! As the content manager at ClickPatrol, she’s the go-to expert on all things fake traffic. From bot clicks to ad fraud, Abisola knows how to spot, stop, and educate others about the sneaky tactics that inflate numbers but don’t bring real results.

View all posts by Abisola (Abisola)

Twitter LinkedIn

Related Articles

Global Digital Ad Fraud Costs Forecast to Soar by 2028, Heightening Risk for PPC Budgets

Open-Source Ad Fraud IOC Databases Signal New Era in Invalid Traffic Detection for PPC Teams

Open-Source Ad Fraud Intelligence Feed Raises the Bar for Invalid Traffic Detection