Adblock Plus now sells ads -> Start using uBlock Origin
175 replies, posted
Adblock: Now with ads!
[QUOTE=paul simon;51051470]Adblock: Now with ads![/QUOTE]
they've had their ad-vetting whitelisting program for [I]years[/I]
the only new part is that they're introducing a service where they can pay employees to thoroughly screen ads for the whitelist, and it sounds like website owners may get a greater say in the ads on their sites as well
for years this particular adblocker has aimed to support fair website monitization
apparently that's something worth being upset over
[QUOTE=bitches;51051364]this particular adblocker is providing itself as an alternative
what "most people" want is irrelevant; "most people" have other free options to suit their selfish desires[/QUOTE]
Since when is what most people want irrelevant? It's certainly relevant to Adblock if they want to keep their userbase. Also most people consider ads a nuisance and just don't want to see them; I don't see how that makes them selfish. Am I selfish for skipping through the ads when I DVR something on TV?
Here's the thing, bitches, until web hosts can guarantee that they won't be serving me malicious ads, ads which are intrusive or annoying, ads which track me, or ads which use an unreasonable amount of resources then I'll continue to block ads. You and people like you acts as though the only options for a website are to be rammed up the ass with ads for to be entirely locked behind a paywall when that isn't at all the case.
Firstly, websites can apply for sponsorships. It's a means of advertising which is non-intrusive, quick, and usually relevant to the interests of people who are visiting that website. If that's not an option the website can offer a subscription service for early access to content or higher quality content. And finally, if they're a large company who sell a product, they can fuck off and eat the operating cost.
It's not my responsibility to pay the people who run a website, nor is it my obligation to open my computer up to potential danger so a website can make a fraction of a cent for each page I view. Security is a pro-active measure and I won't be guilted into putting myself at risk.
I stopped watching TV entirely because of how intrusive and annoying the ads are, add on top of that the potential risk to my machine and you can fuck right off with your ads.
[QUOTE=Mattk50;51051147]umatrix is also nice to have if you want something more, but you should know how webpages and frames work to use it.[/QUOTE]
uMatrix is actually not needed since uBlock Origin has an advanced mode that includes it basically.
[img]https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gorhill/uBlock/master/doc/img/df-qg-01.png[/img]
Although there might be small differences, not sure.
[QUOTE=bitches;51051260]"i want everything to be free"
would you prefer to pay to get into all your favorite websites, or for them to shut down for lack of funds?[/QUOTE]
I hate when people bring up this argument. If my favorite websites charged me like $1/mo to use them, fucking right I'd pay. If it wasn't worth the $1 to me, I'd leave and find something better to do.
You're overestimating the value of these ads. If they're CPC, they literally make no money on me. If they're CPM, they make around 1 cent for every 5 ads they show me. So if I visit a page 10 times a day for 30 days, they're making $0.60 on me per month. I'd have to see 500 ads a month for them to make $1/mo on me. That's reasonable, sure. If I had no option but to see those ads (like, it were illegal to block them or something) or I could pay $1/mo, I would probably value my sanity and my computer's safety enough to just toss them the dollar.
But you're making it out like suddenly we're going to be charged $20/mo to have a Facepunch account. That's just not going to happen.
I'm not surprised in the least, ABP is pretty shit compared to UBO.
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;51051526]Here's the thing, bitches, until web hosts can guarantee that they won't be serving me malicious ads, ads which are intrusive or annoying, ads which track me, or ads which use an unreasonable amount of resources then I'll continue to block ads. You and people like you acts as though the only options for a website are to be rammed up the ass with ads for to be entirely locked behind a paywall when that isn't at all the case.
Firstly, websites can apply for sponsorships. It's a means of advertising which is non-intrusive, quick, and usually relevant to the interests of people who are visiting that website. If that's not an option the website can offer a subscription service for early access to content or higher quality content. And finally, if they're a large company who sell a product, they can fuck off and eat the operating cost.
It's not my responsibility to pay the people who run a website, nor is it my obligation to open my computer up to potential danger so a website can make a fraction of a cent for each page I view. Security is a pro-active measure and I won't be guilted into putting myself at risk.
I stopped watching TV entirely because of how intrusive and annoying the ads are, add on top of that the potential risk to my machine and you can fuck right off with your ads.[/QUOTE]
this thread exists because ABP is now providing a service whose sole purpose is to let "web hosts guarantee that they won't be serving me with malicious ads, ads which are intrusive or annoying, ads which track me, or ads which use an unreasonable amount of resources"
so what is upsetting you?
are there any ad blockers that are undetectable from sites that say "HEY YOUR ADBLOCKER IS ON, TURN IT OFF!".
[QUOTE=Snowmew;51051550]I hate when people bring up this argument. If my favorite websites charged me like $1/mo to use them, fucking right I'd pay. If it wasn't worth the $1 to me, I'd leave and find something better to do.
You're overestimating the value of these ads. If they're CPC, they literally make no money on me. If they're CPM, they make around 1 cent for every 5 ads they show me. So if I visit a page 10 times a day for 30 days, they're making $0.60 on me per month. I'd have to see 500 ads a month for them to make $1/mo on me. That's reasonable, sure. If I had no option but to see those ads (like, it were illegal to block them or something) or I could pay $1/mo, I would probably value my sanity and my computer's safety enough to just toss them the dollar.
But you're making it out like suddenly we're going to be charged $20/mo to have a Facepunch account. That's just not going to happen.[/QUOTE]
I don't mean to make such an argument. I really wanted him to answer. I would also be willing to pay, but it would make for a frustrating internet experience to keep being met with pay-gates. I'd rather a service like ABP is introducing here to make ads a safer alternative than they are currently.
[QUOTE=bitches;51051558]this thread exists because ABP is now providing a service whose sole purpose is to let "web hosts guarantee that they won't be serving me with malicious ads, ads which are intrusive or annoying, ads which track me, or ads which use an unreasonable amount of resources"
so what is upsetting you?[/QUOTE]
Gee I don't know, maybe the fact that an Ad-blocker is serving ads? Don't you see the irony in that?
[QUOTE=bitches;51051558]this thread exists because ABP is now providing a service whose sole purpose is to let "web hosts guarantee that they won't be serving me with malicious ads, ads which are intrusive or annoying, ads which track me, or ads which use an unreasonable amount of resources"
so what is upsetting you?[/QUOTE]
They can't guarantee that. Google claim their ads are free of malicious content and youtube has had ads serving viruses multiple times. Just because they say they won't allow that shit through doesn't mean that will be the case.
"Security is a pro-active measure and I won't be guilted into putting myself at risk."
With the wide-awareness that ABP holds, they're in a position to improve website ads for [I]everyone[/I]. If this idea of theirs were to become very successful, it would change the way internet services view advertising for the better.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;51051107]I just got ublock, so when i click the icon, the little 4 things like block popups, which selection means its blocked? The two pages one or the two pages with an x through it one?[/QUOTE]
[img]http://horobox.co.uk/u/reag/2016-09-14_21-11-36.png[/img]
That explain it good enough?
[QUOTE=bitches;51051558]this thread exists because ABP is now providing a service whose sole purpose is to let "web hosts guarantee that they won't be serving me with malicious ads, ads which are intrusive or annoying, ads which track me, or ads which use an unreasonable amount of resources"
so what is upsetting you?[/QUOTE]
Because ABP already did that, except they were the ones who moderated. Now, it's the site owners who moderate, who may or may not give as much of a shit.
[QUOTE=bitches;51051454]what if a service were to literally only allow a phone number to call regarding an advert after a brief bit of product description, like a small newspaper ad? it's an extreme example, but where do you draw the line?
if it's truly zero-tolerance on the concept of advertising, talking about trojans is just an excuse[/QUOTE]
->
[QUOTE=bitches;51051454]what if a service were to literally only allow a phone number to call regarding an advert after a brief bit of product description, like a small newspaper ad? it's an extreme example, but where do you draw the line?[/QUOTE]
[editline]14th September 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Snowmew;51051585]Because ABP already did that, except they were the ones who moderated. Now, it's the site owners who moderate, who may or may not give as much of a shit.[/QUOTE]
My interpretation of the article was that website owners can pick from a list of pre-approved ads.
ok ill use ublock origins
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51051077]I hope their whitelist is thoroughly checked to make sure there's nothing malicious on it.
I can't see ads as anything but windows to viruses. I turned off adblock on two websites I wanted to support and a week later I had malware. Fucking ridiculous, haven't turned it off anywhere since.
[editline]14th September 2016[/editline]
I also don't use Steam's in-game browser for anything but Facepunch and direct image links because the same thing happened there. Went on a few websites and got malware.[/QUOTE]
I'm sorry but I highly doubt the ads gave you viruses. Believe me I hate ads but getting malware on your computer is typically because you downloaded and ran an unsafe program. The only other way would be browser exploits and that's extremely unlikely.
[QUOTE=MistyVermin;51051676]I'm sorry but I highly doubt the ads gave you viruses. Believe me I hate ads but getting malware on your computer is typically because you downloaded and ran an unsafe program. The only other way would be browser exploits and that's extremely unlikely.[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/03/big-name-sites-hit-by-rash-of-malicious-ads-spreading-crypto-ransomware/"]except it's not extremely unlikely and shitty ads routinely do this[/URL]
some people disable javascript for that exact reason
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51051288]Now I'm not an expert on torrants but I don't think using the share option will open you up to viruses. You only get those if you're uncareful and download them yourself, right?
Ads don't work that they, they host malware. You do not have to download it yourself, they can make it install itself without permission.[/QUOTE]
And again that's not possible unless these "advertisers" have exploits for these browsers. Google, Microsoft, and Mozilla are not dumb enough to just allow people to install stuff on other peoples computers without permission and they sure as hell also take security very seriously. The likelyhood of you getting a virus from an ad or any website is near impossible now days unless someone finds something like a zero day exploit.
Intrusive ads should not exist. That is the reason most of us use Adblockers. Ads are also a huge security risk which no one ever talks about.
[QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;51051714]except it's not extremely unlikely and shitty ads routinely do this
some people disable javascript for that exact reason[/QUOTE]
Ummm... Yes it is very unlikely. If that were the case browsing the web in general would not be safe. The only reason you would be getting malware from websites is if you don't keep your software up to date such as your browser or other software like java and flash which are targeted all the time. Honestly if your getting viruses from websites the only one to blame is you when you don't take the basic security measures such as updating.
Also from the source you just sent. [QUOTE=Arstechnica]That means uninstalling things like Adobe Flash, Oracle Java, Microsoft Silverlight, and other third-party browser extensions unless absolutely required.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=MistyVermin;51051734]Ummm... Yes it is very unlikely. If that were the case browsing the web in general would not be safe. The only reason you would be getting malware from websites is if you don't keep your software up to date.[/QUOTE]
Y'know that many exploits only get patched [I]after[/I] people are affected, right? This includes vulnerabilities in javascript, which is included and enabled by default in pretty much every modern web browser, and allowed to be used in ads.
[url]https://www.proofpoint.com/us/threat-insight/post/Microsoft-Patches-Zero-Day-Exploited-By-AdGholas-GooNky-Malvertising[/url]
[url]https://heimdalsecurity.com/blog/javascript-malware-explained/[/url]
[url]http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/03/big-name-sites-hit-by-rash-of-malicious-ads-spreading-crypto-ransomware/[/url]
[url]http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/04/more-big-name-sites-hit-by-rash-of-malicious-ads-that-attack-end-users/[/url]
[url]http://www.cnbc.com/2014/05/20/beware-of-malicious-ads-that-can-harm-computers-without-a-click.html[/url]
[url]https://www.wired.com/insights/2014/11/malvertising-is-cybercriminals-latest-sweet-spot/[/url]
but thanks for your professional opinion anyway
[QUOTE=Mitsuma;51051542]uMatrix is actually not needed since uBlock Origin has an advanced mode that includes it basically.
[img]https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gorhill/uBlock/master/doc/img/df-qg-01.png[/img]
Although there might be small differences, not sure.[/QUOTE]
[img]http://i.imgur.com/LYSLb5q.png[/img]
That's less advanced than what uMatrix has. It's more complicated and can be more of a pain to figure out exactly what part needs to be enabled for a page to work properly but it allows far greater control from the looks of it.
[QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;51051748]Y'know that many exploits only get patched [I]after[/I] people are affected, right?
[url]https://www.proofpoint.com/us/threat-insight/post/Microsoft-Patches-Zero-Day-Exploited-By-AdGholas-GooNky-Malvertising[/url]
[url]https://heimdalsecurity.com/blog/javascript-malware-explained/[/url]
[url]http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/03/big-name-sites-hit-by-rash-of-malicious-ads-spreading-crypto-ransomware/[/url]
[url]http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/04/more-big-name-sites-hit-by-rash-of-malicious-ads-that-attack-end-users/[/url]
[url]http://www.cnbc.com/2014/05/20/beware-of-malicious-ads-that-can-harm-computers-without-a-click.html[/url]
[url]https://www.wired.com/insights/2014/11/malvertising-is-cybercriminals-latest-sweet-spot/[/url]
but thanks for your professional opinion anyway[/QUOTE]
Of course I know that but its definitely not a majority and I edited the post to show that a lot of these viruses are installed because of third party browser extensions.
[QUOTE=MistyVermin;51051734]Ummm... Yes it is very unlikely. If that were the case browsing the web in general would not be safe. The only reason you would be getting malware from websites is if you don't keep your software up to date such as your browser or other software like java and flash which are targeted all the time. Honestly if your getting viruses from websites the only one to blame is you when you don't take the basic security measures such as updating.[/QUOTE]
+1
I happened to use quite a few of those infected sites when that crypto malware scare was going on and I was fine, don't have any script blockers because I find them more annoying than they are worth - all I have is an up to date browser and common sense... If someone wants to disable windows update and keep clicking 'decline' when there's an update available for their programs and then proceeds to wonder why their files have been fucked, it's their own fault.
Come to think of it I've not had any long-term anti-virus or anti-malware running on my computers for around 8 years now, periodically I install the good ones like malwarebytes and bitdefender just to make sure but they never find anything.
[QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;51051748]Y'know that many exploits only get patched [I]after[/I] people are affected, right? This includes vulnerabilities in javascript, which is included and enabled by default in pretty much every modern web browser, and allowed to be used in ads.
[url]https://www.proofpoint.com/us/threat-insight/post/Microsoft-Patches-Zero-Day-Exploited-By-AdGholas-GooNky-Malvertising[/url]
[url]https://heimdalsecurity.com/blog/javascript-malware-explained/[/url]
[url]http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/03/big-name-sites-hit-by-rash-of-malicious-ads-spreading-crypto-ransomware/[/url]
[url]http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/04/more-big-name-sites-hit-by-rash-of-malicious-ads-that-attack-end-users/[/url]
[url]http://www.cnbc.com/2014/05/20/beware-of-malicious-ads-that-can-harm-computers-without-a-click.html[/url]
[url]https://www.wired.com/insights/2014/11/malvertising-is-cybercriminals-latest-sweet-spot/[/url]
but thanks for your professional opinion anyway[/QUOTE]
You my friend are paranoid as fuck.
[QUOTE=MistyVermin;51051771]Of course I know that but its definitely not a majority and I edited the post to show that a lot of these viruses are installed because of third party browser extensions.[/QUOTE]
and javascript, which is included and enabled by default in just about every modern web browser, and allowed in ads (thus making it injectable into reputable sites)
[url]http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/02/ebay-has-no-plans-to-fix-severe-bug-that-allows-malware-distribution/[/url]
[url]https://magento.com/security/news/new-javascript-malware-issue[/url]
[url]https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2013/02/13/malware-javascript/[/url]
[url]http://www.computerworld.com/article/3090146/windows-pcs/blocking-javascript-can-stop-some-windows-malware.html[/url]
[url]https://www.cnet.com/news/javascript-opens-doors-to-browser-based-attacks/[/url]
[url]https://www.cnet.com/news/worm-wriggles-through-yahoo-mail-flaw/[/url]
[url]https://www.cnet.com/news/samy-opens-new-front-in-worm-war/[/url]
[url]http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/3-ways-javascript-can-used-breach-privacy-security/[/url]
[editline]14th September 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=FalloutAddict;51051784]+1
I happened to use quite a few of those infected sites when that crypto malware scare was going on and I was fine, don't have any script blockers because I find them more annoying than they are worth - all I have is an up to date browser and common sense... If someone wants to disable windows update and keep clicking 'decline' when there's an update available for their programs and then proceeds to wonder why their files have been fucked, it's their own fault.
Come to think of it I've not had any long-term anti-virus or anti-malware running on my computers for around 8 years now, periodically I install the good ones like malwarebytes and bitdefender just to make sure but they never find anything.[/quote]
thanks for your useless anecdotal evidence
[QUOTE=FalloutAddict;51051784]You my friend are paranoid as fuck.[/QUOTE]
Er, no. Allowing javascript in advertisements is a legitimate issue and security risk. You not having any issues ([I]that you know of[/I]) doesn't affect the thousands of users who get infected every day thanks to a malicious ad on an otherwise reputable website.
You two are over here advocating for taking "basic security precautions" then closing your ears claiming it "doesn't affect the majority" or "it's never happened to me" when it gets pointed out that ads are a security risk.
Using an adblocker is a basic security precaution, and will continue to be until javascript is disallowed in ads.
[QUOTE=FalloutAddict;51051784]You my friend are paranoid as fuck.[/QUOTE]
*Tons of proof that ads can be malicious and it's worth protecting against*
"Lol you're paranoid"
Better uninstall those antivirus programs while you're at it if you feel like defending against proven attack vectors is "paranoia".
[editline]14th September 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Alice3173;51051770][img]http://i.imgur.com/LYSLb5q.png[/img]
That's less advanced than what uMatrix has. It's more complicated and can be more of a pain to figure out exactly what part needs to be enabled for a page to work properly but it allows far greater control from the looks of it.[/QUOTE]
This is all too advanced for me to be honest :v:.
[QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;51051790]and javascript, which is included and enabled by default in just about every modern web browser, and allowed in ads (thus making it injectable into reputable sites)
[url]http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/02/ebay-has-no-plans-to-fix-severe-bug-that-allows-malware-distribution/[/url]
[url]https://magento.com/security/news/new-javascript-malware-issue[/url]
[url]https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2013/02/13/malware-javascript/[/url]
[url]http://www.computerworld.com/article/3090146/windows-pcs/blocking-javascript-can-stop-some-windows-malware.html[/url]
[url]https://www.cnet.com/news/javascript-opens-doors-to-browser-based-attacks/[/url]
[url]https://www.cnet.com/news/worm-wriggles-through-yahoo-mail-flaw/[/url]
[url]https://www.cnet.com/news/samy-opens-new-front-in-worm-war/[/url]
[url]http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/3-ways-javascript-can-used-breach-privacy-security/[/url]
[editline]14th September 2016[/editline]
thanks for your useless anecdotal evidence
Er, no. Allowing javascript in advertisements is a legitimate issue and security risk. You not having any issues ([I]that you know of[/I]) doesn't affect the thousands of users who get infected every day thanks to a malicious ad on an otherwise reputable website.
You two are over here advocating for taking "basic security precautions" then closing your ears claiming it "doesn't affect the majority" or "it's never happened to me" when it gets pointed out that ads are a security risk.
Using an adblocker is a basic security precaution, and will continue to be until javascript is disallowed in ads.[/QUOTE]
Javascript will never ever straight up infect you unless like i said there is a webkit exploit. Now javascript can steal sessions, can phish you by pretending to be another site, and basically anything client side but will never infect you unless you specifically download and run something.
Also i never said that you shouldnt use an adblocker im just saying its very unlikely youll obtain a virus from just ads.
[QUOTE=MistyVermin;51051846]Javascript will never ever straight up infect you unless like i said there is a webkit exploit. Now javascript can steal sessions, can phish you by pretending to be another site, and basically anything client side but will never infect you unless you specifically download and run something.[/QUOTE]
I've already posted about three links showing cases where an ad using javascript "straight up infect[ed]" people without interaction, but here's [I]another one[/I] just in-case you still aren't getting the memo.
[url]https://www.onthewire.io/cyber-police-android-malware-infects-without-user-interaction/[/url]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.