Slashdot Mirror

Junkbuster! All someone has to do is spend 15 minutes writing a script to feed Junkbuster the links from a few of the bigger adult site directories. It's not perfect and it'll have a higher false negative rate than the commercial stuff, but it'll also have a lower false positive rate and it's free.

Fortunately, the law makes no claims as to how effective the censorware has to be, especially given that the commercial products generally have false negatives, as well.

I don't see ads. I don't see the on /. I don't see them on CNN. I don't see the on Salon. I don't see them on my local newspaper. It's called Internet Junkbuster and I pay nothing for it.

junkbuster

The screen goes on about Techrepublic being 'the IT professional's source for many exciting articles...' and more marketing-drivel, finally trying to coax me into upgrading:

Why not upgrade to a more current Web browser?
You'll be glad you did.

...followed by the usual Download Microsoft Internet Explorer Now! command.

Hm, I'm running a freshly compiled version of Mozilla. Maybe they don't like my Junkbuster proxy?

Anyway, why don't they stop nagging me, and let me decide what browser to use, and let me decide whether their site is 'exciting'? If it is, I'll come again, and I'll spread the word. If it isn't, no matter how often they use those e* words I won't be back.

If anyone doesn't know about junkbuster it not only can filter out all the banner ads, but also the cookies you don't want.

Why not get Junkbuster. It works great for me.

Surely the thread earlier today concerning banner ads made in abundantly clear that most technically savvy net users (ie, the people who might be interested in your open source project) either
(a) Have Junkbuster or Proxomitron or some such filter blocking out banners, or..
(b) Have highly-trained eyes which skip straight over any banner as if it wasn't there.

We don't want to see banner ads for your project on Slashdot. We don't want to see banner ads for Slashdot on your web page. We won't see those ads because Proxomitron doesn't care whether a banner is for BZFlag or Punch-The-Monkey, they all get blocked. I suggest you seek other techniques for getting your project known to people who might be interested in it. Sorry !!

I have known about junkbuster filtering software for quite some time, but didnt think it was worth the effort needed to set it up properly and maintain the block lists. I didnt mind banner adds too much, if they flashed annoyingly I would just scroll down to clear them from view.

But recently zdnet and cnet started to use huge shockwave adds right in the middle of their stories. These adds are large, annoying and hard to ignore... in a word irritating. I thought about boycotting those sites alltogether esp since the quality of their editorials has slipped significantly recently. But Im a nerd and I need my news so I loaded up junkbuster, got myself a block list and modified the ini files to selectivly allow cookies. It wasnt too dificult to configure, but still painful for non techies.

Now I live in a world without banners and it is good.

I used to hate popups. Then I got Junkbuster

(Does this sound like a 50's TV ad yet?)

I put : slashdot.org/banner/ in my sblock.ini file, and POOF, no more slashdot ads.

As for doubleclick, I have a line in my sblock.ini that reads "doubleclick.net" (minus the "'s of course). Any ads/popups/cookies/riffraff from doubleclick simply doesn't get thru. Everything else loads without a hitch.

Life is better now :)
---
nuclear presidential echelon assassination encryption virulent strain

Pardon the sweeping generalizations...

Everybody hates the commercialization of the internet when they have to close popup windows, download banners, and deal with spam. But everybody loves the commercial factor when they need a hard-to-find book and locate it by doing a quick search on Google or Ebay. Personally, I can do most all of my Christmas shopping on Amazon. And I like being able to put in my wish list and just email relatives about it.

I can deal with spam and banner ads. I get maybe one piece of spam a week and I use Junkbuster to filter most banner ads. But take away all commercial entities from the 'net and I might have to - gasp - go to the mall.

Of course, it won't be long before every appliance has built in advertising. You'll have a flat LCD screen attached to your fridge that runs ads 24/7...ugh.


--

Now those lovely little empty spaces that JunkBuster leaves will be a tiny bit bigger. How will I cope?

Browser Error Sorry.You must have cookies enabled to enjoy this site.

Odd. I'm using Netscape proxied through Junkbuster, with all cookies but a select few sites blocked, and the law.com page loaded just fine for me. I just checked the netscape cookies file to double-check, and there's nothing from that domain.

So how many slashdot users use them and care that they are being sold as stats?

I bought one book from amazon about 3 years ago, but after seeing the directions they were going in, have sworn off them ever since. This is for various reasons, including:

• The diversifaction of their services from just books to a million kinds of other crap.
• Rampant reselling of customer data
• They are killing off small, independently-owned specialty bookshops.
• Patent issues
• Aggressive marketing that means I can't surf the web for ten minutes without seeing an amazon logo. ("Spamazon")
• A general uneasy feeling that they are one of the worst offenders in the trend to transform the web into a garish, dumbed-down AOLian pit where things have value only as commodities.

Do I still use amazon? Sure, they're a great source of book reviews, which I frequently consult before heading down to the local used book store or independently owned bookshop. As always, I browse with Junkbuster so my machine remains amazon-cookie-free.

Just pay more attention, or setup Junkbuster, or something.

Free JEFFK!

-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!

Junkbuster exists. Just configure it correctly :)

I have been very fortunate in having had the chance of living in several different countries. So far I can say that, based on experience, privacy is better safeguarded in European countries.

I think the two countries where I lived and where privacy was part of the national agenda were Leichtenstein and Switzerland. I have become very disillusioned with the state of affairs in the US when it comes to this fundamental right. The Americans could learn a lot from the Swiss.

As for privacy on-line, we must all be proactive in protecting it. Some things I routinely do:

• Install JunkBuster and keep your blocking files up to date.
• Use bogus information whenever you are asked to register to a site (the guys from the nyt.com must be wondering why so many Salvadoreans read the Film section on Fridays)
• If you're purchasing something, and have the option to do it on-line or over the phone, go over the phone. Check if the call desk uses a different entry system than the web-based system. If so, chances are better that your payment infos are a bit more protected.
• Sign up with someone like BrightMail to filter all unwanted spam. It's free and it *works*
• In the real world: Refuse to give your social security number or other identifying information unless it's clearly stated by the person asking what they'll use it for. My HMO wanted the infos; I sent them to hell. I still got my medical care.
• If you have the stomach for it, get a or make a good fake ID. There are several titles from the Paladin Press that can guide you on that one. Make sure that you use this for non-official business only.

I think that, bottom line, being street smart about your wanderings on- and off-line is the best protection for your privacy. Don't disclose any information that isn't compulsory.

Cheers!

Just use junkbuster as a proxy for your favorite browser. You can masquerade as whichever browser you want and avoid unwanted cookies/ad banners at the same time.

My, the original link really made my eyes hurt, even with Junkbuster.

If Netzero wins, no one but Netzero will be able to pop up adds.

Horay! Now I no longer need junkbuster!

I am glad that I am running junkbuster... there were a crapload (80% of page real estate) of adds on those pages.

donfede

Agreed, the amount of pages is highly irritating, but you can do something about the ads. On my NT workstation at work I run Proxomitron as a filtering proxy. I can even route it to the corporate firewall without much headache. At home I run CGIProxy on my home web server to get around the corporate firewall when it blocks pages (until they block my home machine). If you're running linux (or WinX, for that matter), you can set up a Junkbuster proxy that will perform pretty much the same function as Proxomitron.

I really hate it because as a cable modem user, the bottlenecks come from moving from page to page- not loading a page (it's usually those Q#$%#$ adservers' fault). However, the reason they do this, I believe, is because of said ads... the more views they get, the more money they get.

For Windows:
Add the following line to \windows\hosts --
adserver.example.com 127.0.0.1

For Linux: (replace iptables with ipchains if that's what you use)
iptables -a OUTPUT -j REJECT -p tcp -d adserver.example.com
Been a while since I've messed with iptables/ipchains, but I think that's the right syntax (or close to it).

Or just download Junkbuster.

---
"Fdisk format reinstall, doo dah doo dah,

It's at junkbuster.com.

-schussat

Here's another handy workaround with Junkbuster which greatly improves the excessive latency of websites which set HTTP headers as Expires: 0(zero), Cache-control: as well as or instead of Pragma: no-cache. Here's a part of my extended patch (rest was cut for brevity) to fix the problem:

• --- parsers.c.new Sun Nov 26 15:11:15 1998
  +++ parsers.c Fri Feb 20 17:40:32 1998
  struct parsers server_patterns[] = {
  
  • { "set-cookie:", 11, server_set_cookie },
    - { "cache-control:", 14, server_set_cache },
    - { "pragma:", 7, server_set_pragma },
    - { "connection:", 11, server_set_connection },
    - { "expires:", 8, server_set_expires },
    
  
  -char *server_set_cache(struct parsers *v, char *s, struct client_state *csp)
  -{
  - return(crumble(v,s,csp));
  -}
  

--

are you some looser sitting in your mom's basement playing on your tandy spending all your money on porno 'cause you coulden't get a girlfreind due to your 5 year plan that starts with getting a job in a PORNO STORE so you can buy cheeper porno?

My junkbuster proxy has been blocking more and more of slashdot ads lately. And I haven't changed its filter rules. So to me, this is a sign that slashdot is moving more and more to "mainstream" web-ads just like any other free website. Good or bad? You decide. Not a problem here, junkbuster prunes them all out anyway.

Junkbuster.

Filtering/blocking based on Domain names is fatally flawed.

That's why there are software like Internet Junkbuster, or Guidescope.
No matter what the domain name is, it's still blocks ads. (Oh, hello /. admin... sorry for blocking your ads :P)

So, the same thing can be used to block porn sites. (Ok, at least Junkbuster will try to block every domain's ads. Don't know about Guidescope...)
---

No, I didn't notice any cookies. Junkbuster filters them out for me.

Write a gratuitously inflammatory story about Linux and submit it to Slashdot. Make sure your servers can take the load, though.

Install JunkBuster. It's very efficient to remove web annoyances (useless cookies and banner adds)

Under Debian, just "apt-get install junkbuster" and tell Mozilla/Netscape to use localhost:5865 as a proxy. :)

I think this would be a good idea but don't know if there's anyone with the resources to undertake the task. If you could make a business out of it, like maybe Enonymous' Privacy Ratings site, then that might work. I'd monitor it if there was such a site. Maybe someone would want to run something like FuckedCompany.Com but concentrate on slippery privacy practices.

I've found that PrivacyDigest and WebVeil do a pretty good job of keeping abreast of the news. Privacy Digest is better because it is more comprehensive, but WebVeil is selective, seeming to focus on privacy for consumers specifically rather than everything that is privacy under the sun. Otherwise, I just pay attention to and filter what the paranoids are saying in alt.privacy or check on the privacy issues section of Yahoo and Wired.

Doubleclick should be forced to use the TLD of .ads. That way, we can block them out at will.

I really don't think you want that to happen. As it is now, it's not too hard to set up a proxy like junkbuster to filter most of the stuff that you don't want to see. That is to say, it's not too hard for the typical /. reader to set up.

Now fast forward to a time when *everybody* can easily block ads like that. One of two things would happen:

1. Companies like DoubleClick would come up with new, sneaky ways of getting their ads to show up.
2. A lot of good sites that depend on advertising for revenue (let's assume for the sake of argument that /. is considered "good") wouldn't be able to continue. While some people might consider this good -- you know, an anti-commercialism of the internet sort of thing -- I think it would be bad as a whole.

revenue???
Seriously, I believe for most /.ers it was easier to look in to source then deactivate junkbuster/webwasher, whatever.

It's not "Stealing from AOL" any more than the UNIX clients are.

Is using Tivo stealing? Is taping a show and fast-forwarding through the commercials stealing? Is changing the channel when a commercial comes on stealing? Is using junkbuster stealing?

AOL created this protocol, along with the TiK TCL/Tk client, so people could create AIM clients for alternative OS's. NONE of these clients have ads. In fact, there is nothing in the protocol to grab/retrieve ads.

Precisely. AOL is welcome to develop a UNIX AIM client. If they put some useful features in it, I can put up with the ads. I think part of the reason AOL allows UNIX clients to get by without ads is the following:

1. UNIX users who use AIM are far, far, far outnumbers by Windows users.
2. It costs money to prevent UNIX AIM users from using a service that doesn't show ads. In all liklihood that costs outweigh the benefits (see number 1 for a reason why).
3. AOL probably doesn't want to alienate UNIX folks. Why? For one they probaby know that UNIX types will develop their own protocols, e.g. Jabber. Secondly, AOL and Netscape are buddies. It's been said that Netscape depends heavily on Mozilla. Who develops Mozilla? Right Virginia, UNIX folks (ok, not exclusively, but you know...). Thirdly, AOL really doesn't want to get people pissed at them with the impending Time-Warner deal.

All of the above reasons boil down to one thing: it's in AOL's best interest to allow UNIX AIM development to continue.

Uh. junkbuster?

1. Post a "linux sucks" article on your web site.
   
   
2. Set up a "comments from our readers" forum.
   
   
3. Get somebody to post the URL of the "linux sucks" article to Slashdot.
   
   
4. Watch the banner ad impressions roll in as all the Linux freaks read the original article, read the comments, and post their own comment, seeing a banner ad every time.

Word will use Internet Explorer to do this, which also means it will use IE's proxy settings. Just another good reason to use Junkbuster. Of course, there's a very small chance the host images are coming off of are actually in your scookie.ini.

If you find banners annoying (as I do), simply filter them out with something like Junkbuster, or my favoured solution, Squid and sleezeball. All those annoying flashing ads get replaced with a nice transparent gif. And so the advertising companies still pay my favourite sites, I occasionally click on those transparent gifs too.

If google wants to add banners, I say good luck to them. I won't be viewing the adverts, but they'll be getting revenue that will keep their service going. As long as the banners don't get in the way of the service, as they have on search engines such as Altavista, then that's fine. It's only when the websites become oriented around products rather than the service that there's a problem. IMO, this is far more likely to happen if they don't display adverts, revenues will no doubt be sapped and may force them into a position where a buyout is necessary. I somehow doubt any company which would buy them out would run the service half as well as the current google owners.

PS I concur with the other poster Re:Proxy, as I consider that to be a highly useful feature as well (especially for ad busting).

Alex Bischoff
Interested in building a roof over your cubicle?
---

( Read More... | 768 comments | Your Rights Online )

Miniskirt-clad girls save universe
Posted by CmdrTaco on Friday August 18, @08:25AM
from the roketto-ga-sugoi dept.
AnimeNewsNetwork.com is reporting that earlier this morning in Tokyo, five girls in color-coded blouses and miniskirts transformed into scantily-clad superheroes. The five girls then screamed, hurled glowing balls of energy, and screamed some more at a thirty-tentacled monster. Still no word on whether this is connected to the large humanoid robots spotted battling last week in Osaka.

( Read More... | 168 comments )

Slashback: Frisson, Sesquipedalianity, Responsitivitiness
Posted by timothy on Tuesday August 08, @10:45AM
from the beware-the-froomious-bandersnatch dept.
It was a dark and stormy night. In a salutiferous octastyle basement, an ultracrepidarian man was hermtically hunched over a piperaceous desk beneath a ornate mazarine, typing furiously away on an obumbrate keyboard. Meanwhile, in a meandrine corner of the world, several setose seeds were being entrenched in the muculent minds of the hoi polloi.

( Read More... | 9235 bytes in body | 214 comments )

Traffic Cops' "Justice" and Napster
Posted by JonKatz on Friday August 18, @11:30AM
from the post-hellmouth-world dept.
Just as Shadowrun predicted, The Corporate Republic took another step in assailing geeks today by handing Shawn Fanning a $L00 speeding ticket. This narcissism is harmful because it shrinks the creative universe of media workers and disconnects them from the new global conversation taking place online. Hubcaps have sparked a cultural and economic revolution that is just beginning to be understood. Will we see an increase in the number of Chickdrivers receiving "closed" traffic tickets as well, or will the Edge power a paradigm shift to "open" community-based traffic laws?

( Read More... | 598235 bytes in body | 657 flames | Features )

Ask Slashdot: Are Corporations Trying To Make Money?
Posted by Cliff on Friday August 18, @1:25PM
from the yet-another-article-from-the-something-to-think-ab out dept.
www.sorehands.com writes: "Today I visited Yahoo and was shocked to see a banner advertisement - I thought I'd managed to block every form of advertisement possible with Junkbusters. After thinking about it some, I realized Yahoo was probably running advertisement in a crass, commercialized attempt to make money off of my web-surfing habits! Could there be any other corporations out there engaged in similarly devious practices?" An interesting question here: Are some companies attempting to turn a profit, and, if so, what can we do to prevent it?

( Read More... | 3082 bytes in body | 345 comments )

Autospy of a Furby
Posted by michael on Friday August 18, @3:43PM
from the deja-vu dept.

Vladinator writes "Ever wonder what it's like to take apart a Furby? I don't, because I saw this on Slashdot two years ago, but I needed some karma so I submitted it anyway. Fawking trolls!" Those of who you started reading Slashdot this week may not have seen this page yet, so I'm re-running this classic for you three newbies.

( Read More... | 1 FIRST POST! )

Interstate Highway Boycott Planned
Posted by emmett on Friday August 18, @6:25PM
from the fight-the-power dept.
Bowie J. Poag writes: "You guys are idiots and VA sucks, but being the nice guy that I am [Update: 08/18 11:11 AM by CT: Further investigation reveals that he isn't ] I thought I'd let you know that know Wired is reporting that a boycott is being proposed against the interstate highway system for its treatment of Shawn Fanning. The interstate highway sucks almost as much as anime! PROPAGANDA RULES!!!!!" It's good to see that some people are taking the battle for free (as in Willy) highways into their own hands.

( Read More... | 218 comments )

Holland Convenience Store Switches To Linux
Posted by Hemos on Friday August 18, @9:33PM
from the key-victory-for-open-source dept.
Today while visiting my local 7-11 in Holland, MI, I noticed that their inventory computer was running Linux! Best of all, a representative from the store assured me, due to complaints from Bruce Perens, that the store may consider GPLing its inventory "sometime in the future." Looks like another business has finally "got it" and adopted the tenets of the free software movement.

( Read More... | 164 comments )

Napster? Napster Napster
Posted by CmdrTaco on Friday August 18, @11:25PM
from the napster dept.
Napster Napster Napster. Napster, Napster Napster Napster! Napster Napster (Napster) Napster Napster Napster, Napster Napster Napster. "Napster Napster Napster," Napster Napster. Napster Napster, Napster Napster Napster.

( Read More... | 304 comments | Napster!! )

Of course, if they see enough 'referrer' notices coming from /. to that URL, they'll either start crediting Slashdot as a channel participant or start blocking referring links from /.

There is software out there that can spoof the referrer string or block it from being transmitted.

=================================

Slashdot doesn't allow the SCRIPT tag but some sites do (perhaps unknowingly) and so someone can write an apparently innocent comment in a chat and include a script that eats your hard disk.

A close friend of mine told me that she's been writing largely in Javascript for a long time now and her company is in fact basing their entire online strategy on Javascript. They're making a huge investment in it and will be selling a product that will be very expensive that will require very highly paid people to leave Javascript on all day long just to do their work.

I was astonished at that idea and said they were doing a disservice to their customers by encouraging them to enable Javascript, let alone requiring it for the basic functions of their product.

She was pretty incredulous about this, even after I recounted the above CERT advisory. She told me Javascript was sandboxed and could not do anything destructive. I told her it was full of holes and highly nonstandardized and bugs were being found in it all the time.

I also advisted her to read the Forum on Risks to the Public in Computers and Related Systems (also available as comp.risks on the Usenet News).

I told her I felt that reading Risks was a very basic requirement for anyone who wrote software for a living, and was doubly important for someone like her who wrote software that would effect people's lives in a substantial way (I can't be too specific - but she's not writing entertainment software). She thought this was all very silly.

Now, slashdotters, what can I say to my friend - what can I say that is of real substance not just flaming? Can you give me literature references or URL's? Pertinent CERT advisories would be good.

BTW - here's a suggestion - while I leave Javascript turned off most of the time, I often find I have to turn it on to use some sites. It really gets me down that some sites don't even function if Javascript is not enabled.

But Junkbuster is a simple proxy that will filter out ads and stop cookies, but allow them in controlled ways. For example, I only allow cookies from Slashdot and my bank, so I don't have to have cookies from any other site and I don't have to keep turning cookies back on to read slashdot.

I think it would be a fairly simple matter to modify the Junkbuster source code to filter out SCRIPT tags for most sites except those that are on an approved list. The source code is GPL'ed so someone with the inclination could just get the source and do it. I'd do it myself but I'm real busy for the next little while.

Go get if from here.

That's why you have to run the junkbuster proxy. Surf their shitty site and never request a single ad image. Fuck Fred Moody..
(Wasn't he the kid on Lost In Space?) :)

Uhm, slightly OT, but uhm, you have to be an idiot to be willing to pay to remove ads from websites when you can visit several places and download software that does this for FREE...

http://www.junkbuster.com/
and
http://www.guidescope.com

Both act as a proxy that allows you to enable or disable ad filtering. Banners, ad boxes, etc, just show up as a little broken image icon on your screen. I use Guidescope, and personally, I think it rocks.

Micropayments are just another way for people to turn the Internet into a more common cash-cow media like selling commercials on TV and radio.

If you really want to get rid of banner ads, use an agent like Junkbuster (http://www.junkbuster.com/) or Webwasher (http://www.webwasher.com/).

eudas

AOL is hardly the only censorware with a flat-out exploitable bug in it. Some X-Stop boxes do also. These are proxy boxes intended to be used at the ISP level by schools and businesses. The one this exploit is known to work on is one of the BSD-based (I think) ones.

Do an nslookup on playboy.com. Get an IP address, say 206.251.29.10. Now, using your favorite calculator (bc in this case), calculate 206 * 256^3 + 251 * 256^2 + 29 * 256 + 10 (watch your order of operations if you have to use a regular calculator or pencil and paper) and come out with the answer 3472563466.

Now, go to http://3472563466/ . Since playboy.com is nice enough to use relative links for most of their content, guess what?

And a tweak to junkbuster to do this automatically as a proxy would take... How long?

This was reported to X-Stop last year. Their response was that it wasn't important enough to fix.

Then why not use my hacked version of Junkbuster - which stops you from having to see popup windows.

Check it out here.