The Rise of the Anti-Ad Blockers

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by ronjor, Jun 14, 2016.

  1. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,740
    Location:
    Texas
  2. HAN

    HAN Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Posts:
    2,080
    Location:
    USA
    Thanks for the article Ron. Interesting!

    It's a sad state of affairs. I understand the need to generate revenue (nothing is or can be truly free) but until ads are less invasive and safe from exploits, I don't see much of a choice for anyone wanting to have some privacy and computer safety but to continue blocking ads as best they can.
     
  3. Rmus

    Rmus Exploit Analyst

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2005
    Posts:
    3,943
    Location:
    California
    Very informative, Ron.
    This is a step in the right direction, IMO!

    ----
    rich
     
  4. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    8,026
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Yes, let's hope that these companies will succeed. I hope they are not dumb enough to think that people will put up with annoying ads. For me it's very simple, if a site becomes slow to load and annoying to read, I just stop using the site.
     
  5. wat0114

    wat0114 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Posts:
    1,984
    Location:
    Canada
    First I try to fix the site by utilizing the blocker plugin, and failing that, I do the same as you.
     
  6. hawki

    hawki Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Posts:
    1,955
    Location:
    DC Metro Area
    Rupert Murdoch is on top of this.

    http://nypost.com/content-control.html

    But you can breath a sigh of relief cuz this tactic has not yet been implemented on The National Enquirer,also part of the Murdoch Empire.

    So if you want to read what, is in effect, a printed version of Fox News your in trouble, but if you'd prefer to read salacious gossip about Hollywood and political celebrities your still OK with an ad-blocker.
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2016
  7. hawki

    hawki Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Posts:
    1,955
    Location:
    DC Metro Area
    These anti-adblocker companies are advised to tread lightly or risk violating 18 U.S.C. § 1030 : US Code - Section 1030: Fraud and related activity in connection with computers.

    Under Section a)(5) (A) of The Act it is a crime to "knowingly causes the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer;" [NB: virtually any computer connected to the internet is a "protected computer."]

    Under The Act "the term "damage" means any impairment to the integrity or availability of data, a program, a system, or information;"

    I guess if the ad is inherently safe and thus can not be detected by the ad blocker its ok. But if code is first sent to deteremine if the initially intended ad is blockable then The Act could come into play since code was transmitted that impaired the integrity or availability of a program.

    Best to focus on preventing ads containing malicious/data mining scripts from being included in an ad network.

    Ad Blockers don't kill revenue, malicious ads that force the visitor to use an ad blocker to protect themselves do.
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2016
  8. Windows_Security

    Windows_Security Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2013
    Posts:
    3,072
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Simple using ScriptBlocker for Chrome to block third party (allow same domain). Not for security, but because blocking third party effectively blocks most advertisements and trackers. When a site does not function properly I simply whitelist it. When it has anti-adblock scripts running I simply put it on the blacklist. This prevents same domain (first party) scrypts to run, including the ad-block detection script :)

    upload_2016-6-20_8-35-34.png
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2016
  9. Sampei Nihira

    Sampei Nihira Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2013
    Posts:
    658
    Location:
    Italy
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2016
  10. wat0114

    wat0114 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Posts:
    1,984
    Location:
    Canada
    yes, the element picker is one of uBlockO's best features :thumb:
     
  11. Sampei Nihira

    Sampei Nihira Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2013
    Posts:
    658
    Location:
    Italy
    You need to check the website the next day.
    If there is a malfunction best to use Script Inline function:

    Immagine.jpg

     
  12. Windows_Security

    Windows_Security Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2013
    Posts:
    3,072
    Location:
    Netherlands
    uBlock is ------- for some fun to play with, for others (like me) way to much effort, but every man to his own preference.

    EDIT ----- text removed
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2016
  13. TairikuOkami

    TairikuOkami Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Posts:
    2,509
    Location:
    Slovakia

    Attached Files:

  14. harsha_mic

    harsha_mic Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    Posts:
    791
    Location:
    India
    With uBlock you can tweak it how deep you want to go with it.
    That doesn't mean, its can't be used with minute effort. :doubt: It just provides more granularity! ;)

    I agree it is up-to every ones preference!! (And u doesn't stand for micro-management, and i dont think the name says it ;) )

    For example, like script blocker for chrome, this particular detection script (inline actually), can be blocked with a single click in uBlock too;)
    uBlock NY Post.png
    However, doing so, will break web-site functionality in both Script-blocker and uBlock. And uBlock can circumvent it (At-least in Firefox easily) by blocking only the offending inline script, not just blanket blocking all inline scripts :)
    Code:
    nypost.com##script:contains(_sp)
    Edit: It looks like, this anti-adblock comes into play only, iff the user is blocking scripts from wp.com :). So, i don't think any users with default blocking in uBlock Origin would ever encounter this anti-adblock thing! Might explain why ghostery has no problem. Its not blocking wp.com :)
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2016
  15. Nightwalker

    Nightwalker Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2008
    Posts:
    784
    I use Anti Adblocker Killer (Reek) along with Ublock Origin and it blocks those paywalls and anti adblockers.

    If it doesnt work in a specify site, I just dont bother and dont visit it anymore. For me it is simple, I wont disable Ublock, I prefer to stop using some sites.
     
  16. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    8,026
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Thanks, will check it out.
     
  17. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    8,028
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    I just stop using sites that take all day to load even with an adblocker. If a site won't let me use it because I have an adblocker, I just don't use the site. I understand the need for advertising, but until the intrusive 'in yer face' adverts that block entire pages cease they will lose me. Which kind of defeats their own object in the first place.
     
  18. mantra

    mantra Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Posts:
    5,136
    hi
    this is for chrome , under firefox i haven't the left panel , i can click on "vai al registro delle richieste" but i don't get the left panel
    why?
    i use the last version of firefox and ublock origin 1.7.0
    thanks
     
  19. Nightwalker

    Nightwalker Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2008
    Posts:
    784
  20. Sampei Nihira

    Sampei Nihira Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2013
    Posts:
    658
    Location:
    Italy

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Jun 19, 2016
  21. Windows_Security

    Windows_Security Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2013
    Posts:
    3,072
    Location:
    Netherlands
    uBlock was originally μBlock

    Micro
    - (symbol μ) is a unit prefix in the metric system denoting a factor of 10−6 (one millionth). Confirmed in 1960, the prefix comes from the Greek μικρός (mikrós), meaning "small". The symbol for the prefix comes from the Greek letter μ (mu).
     
  22. gorhill

    gorhill Developer

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    747
    Location:
    Canada
    It's misleading. The default settings, which you get at first install, there is nothing to micro-manage. The micro-management is entirely opt-in.
     
  23. Windows_Security

    Windows_Security Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2013
    Posts:
    3,072
    Location:
    Netherlands
    You are the author, so I take your word for it and won't dispute your answer: uBlock was originally μBlock, the μ did not stand for mikros?
     
  24. Nightwalker

    Nightwalker Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2008
    Posts:
    784
    Yes, I think the reason for this name is that uBlock is very light, consuming few resources than other ad blockers.

    uMatrix is the extension that needs micro management.
     
  25. Windows_Security

    Windows_Security Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2013
    Posts:
    3,072
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Well let's ask the one who knows: Raaaaaaaaaaaaaaymmmmmmmmooooond Hillllllll AKA @gorhill

    Micro- (symbol μ) is a unit prefix in the metric system denoting a factor of 10−6 (one millionth). Confirmed in 1960, the prefix comes from the Greek μικρός (mikrós), meaning "small". The symbol for the prefix comes from the Greek letter μ (mu).
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2016
Loading...