Slashdot Mirror
DoubleClick Hit by DDoS Attack
YetAnotherName writes "The Washington Times is reporting that everyone's most beloved online advertising distributor, DoubleClick, was subject to a DoS attack crippling the company's DNS servers, and preventing up to 75% of advertising from making it to web pages and surfers' eyes."
Oh, wait. It was DoubleClick?
Can I donate some computer time?
It's been so long since I've seen an ad I forgot about them.
They are truly my hero! Double-click can suck it. Twice.
What a crying shame.
and now Tom with the weather...
Although I don't agree with DDoS attacks.. Your not going to get any sympathy from me.
"Consider how lucky you are that life has been good to you so far. Alternatively, if life hasn't been good to you so far
I'm not sure whether the encouragement of DDOS-ing even 'evil' companies should be encouraged.
Oh, my heart bleeds for them.
</sarcasm>
Trying to get rid of traffic they don't want to see... sounds like trying to get rid of adds we don't want to see.
ogg
Black cat, searing pain, flames...? I must be in Heaven! - Homer Simpson
On behalf of the Slashdot community, I would just like to say that this was indeed a terrible thing. I, and I believe I speak for everyone here when I say this, greatly missed the DoubleClick ads. Their intrusive nature, attempted trickery, and bright flashy lights are what make my internet experience what it is.
I hope that whoever did this terrible act is brought to justice, as such a horrible thing cannot go unpunished!
Without ads, whats the point in browsing, I say!
(*grin*)
but THANK YOU! -Over-stimulated ad viewer
This is not the signature you are looking for...
need I say more?
well, actually, according to Slashdot I do. So here:
darn.
- For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat
how many people have the entire double click domain block from displaying on their web browsers anyway?
Oh the humanity of it!
LOL
All those people clikcing links for money must have really gone overboard this time, they will probably make more money than me.
Without this vital source of information into my life, what will I do?
Seriously, I didn't notice. There's so many ads (and I use pop-up blockers and hosts) that they're all just lost in the noise. Which is a really sad commentary on the state of the Internet when you think about it.
Boycott everything - they're all trying to fuck you one way or another
Although it may seem like some sort of poetic justice that Doubleclick was attacked...
The attacks had more far-reaching effects. Pages would take forever to load for me (certain pages, not all), if they used doubleclick ads, simply because the browser was waiting for the final item (the ad) to load.
Whether or not you like doubleclick, their widespread adoption made this a productivity hit for those of us who frequent pages w/ doubleclick content (even if we never notice it).
Help a college student
Seriously, Slashdot needs to shape up, or stop trying to be a news site. This happened yesterday. If you can't get your editors to greenlight stories faster than 24hours in advance, let subscribers do it like Fark does.
occultae nullus est respectus musicae - originally a Greek proverb
_dan
.:UNEASYsilence:.
.. so this is like what? One request for every unwanted ad they've ever forced down someone's throat??
I've had the following in my HOSTS file for a while now
0.0.0.0 ad.doubleclick.com
0.0.0.0 ads.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad2.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad3.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad4.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad5.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad6.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad7.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad8.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad9.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad10.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad11.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad12.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad13.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad14.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad15.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad16.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad17.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad18.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad19.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad20.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad.ch.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad.ca.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad.de.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad.fr.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad.jp.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad.nl.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad.no.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad.uk.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ln.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 m.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 m2.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 iv.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ebay.doubleclick.net
Lameness filter randomness: eed d ed wdwe de ff g v fdovk fok fb f osvi jfvioj asv d vp vv jspavj spav dsv aspdvj ede oijf o greg ewrg
The issue wasn't that Double Click had problems, but that every site that uses them become very slow.
Until the basic routing infrastructure of the net changes, this is going to be a common issue anytime a number of big sites all require another organization to serve up their pages (e.g. Akamai).
I fail to see how this is a bad thing in any way. Might want to change the meaning from attack to justice. Its really about time someone wasted there badwidth instead of them wasting ours.
Thanks, Mike!
I rarely see ads in either IE or Mozilla.
---
ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
Off the record, WOO HOO!!!
On the record, Punch the Monkey and Win $20!
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Double click is still around... damn I thought for sure they would have been killed with all these people using mozilla.... Oh wait nevermind... using mozilla/firefox requires a modicum of a clue! Something 99.8% of the world doesn't have (not news to the /. crowd)
The world called out for a hero and all it got was me...
Marketing mogul DoubleClick was brought to its knees for a second time today after someone posted the story of their first downtime on Slashdot. MOst users reported clicking on the link to DoubleClick's website merely to drive the site to its knees.
So I guess this means people couldn't "double click" on the advertisements, huh? Terrible, I know, please, just kill me now....
About time they hit something worth it. are you guys not tired of the irc,shell providers wars? its getting nuts theses days.
Oh darn, that is such a shame...
I'm with Bill Hicks on this one :)
when I say that slashdot extends our deepest sympathy to doubleclick in their time of trouble.
On a completely unrelated note; does anyone know of a mouth surgeon? I can't seem to pull my tongue out of my cheek....
The Tuesday attack left PC users frustrated when trying to access some of the Internet's most heavily visited sites, the Washington Post said Wednesday.
Heh. I know I always get upset when I'm not being bombarded by advertisements.
There is a downside to such attacks as they harm business trust on the internet and large capital investments to the infrastructure and R&D and all. But it also has an upside, and a important one it is. Little bouts of anarchy like this show The Powers that Be that there is such a thing as an internet community who does not take slimey practices (such as the Verisign search, remember?) lightly.
It keeps commercialism in check. And that is a Good Thing (TM).
No matter how much I hate /ads/, a DDoS should not be tolerated no matter to whom it's directed. Weather it's kernel.org or microsoft.com, let's try to use our knowledge constructivly instead of destructivly. How does that sound? And where does any one person think a DDoS will get for anyone as a whole? If anything, it'll bring a stronger resolve to preventative measures and keep them going strong. They have the $!! so where will it really get those who started this "attack"?
One down. Now if I could just figure out how to get 'ad[s]*\.' into Adblock on my PVR.
and now Tom with the weather...
Are you sure it wasn't a slashdotting? Perhaps Slashdot is serving a bunch of doubleprick adds?
Thought MicroSoft already patented Double Click... What are THEY still doing with the domain? :o
Madcat.
need I say more?
I'm a little disappointed that a group of fairly die-hard anti-doubleclick geeks could only hobble it a few hours at 75%...it may simply have been more effective to introduce a nasty virus into their network, so we'll just call this attack a symbolic way to raise awareness of this historically nasty company. I much rather have heard that a more intrusive and smaller company like CoolWeb was attacked.
Often wrong but never in doubt.
I am Jack9.
Everyone knows me.
Oh yes, encouraging people to take over other computers and swamp the internet with enough garbage packets to bring down a large group of servers. Oh yeah... GREAT way to express your dislike for a particular entity/service/idea. Lets keep encouraging this behavior, the government needs something else to regulate.
preventing up to 75% of advertising from making it to web pages and surfers' eyes
/. It's also the sound you make when hit with a drive-by installer. YAIIEEEHHH!)
That wasn't a DoS attack, it was 75% of the Internet switching to Mozilla and Firefox after the story earlier today about YAIEH. (Yet Another IE Hole. We need more acronyms on
The IT colorscheme still sucks.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
Seriously, I haven't seen much of any of it since I configured adblock on Firefox.
You're saying there's still advertising out there on the web? Whoda thunk it.
scrub:/# host www.doubleclick.net
www.doubleclick.net A 192.168.1.1
scrub:/#
Of course having this in my named.conf helps...
zone "doubleclick.net" {
type master;
file "/etc/bind/db.vermin";
};
....to get the spyware installed so I can help out?
-Valiss
Unfortunately, because of the bastard administrator I'm missing out on all kinds of penis enhancing single meeting offers! And now I don't even know when evil crackers (and by that I mean white people, us afro-netizens only use the net for downloading porn, and p2p) are depriving me of these opportunities.
Thanks Mydoom! =)
I didnt notice though.. those are blocked anyway
Id recommend everyone add this to their hosts file:
127.0.0.1 ad.ca.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.de.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.es.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.fr.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.free6.com
127.0.0.1 ad.it.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.iwin.com
127.0.0.1 ad.jp.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.kr.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.linkexchange.com
127.0.0.1 ad.linksynergy.com
127.0.0.1 ad.nl.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.no.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.preferences.com
127.0.0.1 ad.se.doubleclick.net
I don't understand how DDoS attacks wrok either, but it sure would be funz to haxorz M$ all kinds of up! Their IIS cant hande r leeeeeeet skillzzzes!
See, teh $ means they like teh moneyz!
Pardon me for pointing out the obvious, but Slashdot runs Doubleclick ads, and presumably that helps cover costs.
Now that somebody has (kindly) taken down their DNS server, let us do our part and slashdot their web server :)
Mozilla
Block Popups, Block Images, Flash block
Who's Doubleclick ?
1. Terrorist training servers.
2. Goatzee
3. Doubleclick
Your list ?
All they do is try to sell info to advertisers about everything we do on the internet. The do have their own spyware and this just might deliver more income than the ads they run.
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
Darn?
And here I thought that my ad-blocker was actually working. Silly me.
My heart weeps crimson tears for them.
Truly it does!
I have a large host file that makes sure I don't see many ads. Problem solved
.....because I could not take part in it. :P
PGA
More press bollocks
"One of the things that makes the Internet so survivable is that no one company or technology runs the whole thing," said Lloyd Taylor, Keynote's vice president of technology and operations. "In this case ... the attackers targeted a common infrastructure relied upon by many companies."
Well, what we need is a filter on embedded URL's not from source to be ignored/dropped/NOW in browser code (not > /dev/null type solutions).
IF this isn't a second DDoS, then this happened a couple days ago already.
Help fight continental drift.
what's the matter, Kerry, gone hoarse?
If opportunity came disguised as temptation, one knock would be enough.
3^2 * 67^1 * 977^1
I think we all need to come together in this time of mourning. Maybe we can set up a fund to help these guys? I can see already allot of support and condolence on this thread. Our thoughts should be on DoubleClick and their families, it sickens me as to how a thing like this can happen, and i can only say, i hope the people responsible are caught and punished to the full extent of the law. All DoubleClick wanted to do, is help the world by DoSing millions of users around the world with banner and pop-up ads but now it could take them... minutes to get their systems back to normal.
(My spell checker is down)
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
A DDOS attack the whole family can enjoy. :0)
I did some work going through my own anti-spam tool and found that the vast major of spam has, as its target click-to, a fairly limited number of target domains.
Spamcop works because people report spam.
So, what if people reported spam, and automatically a central server passed via web-service request a "current target" to tens of thousands of pc's running a background client at their workstation. Each PC with the client requests a target, then proceeds to hit that target with http requests at a slow but steady pace for say, 2-3 hours then checks back for its next target.
The target isn't the spammer, they're hard to track and set up to handle it anyway. No, the target is the site paying the spammer. The place you'd go if you click on the ad that got sent to you. My tests of 300,000+ spam messages counted less than 5000 unique domains in there as the target sites once you decoded and stripped the subdomains, machines, and zones out.
The central server could be passing the same site out to say, 10 thousand people at a time then go on to the next one.
A sort of automatic
Forget SETI, think of the background processing power you could utilize.
The problem with quotes on the internet, is that nobody bothers to check their veracity. -- Abraham Lincoln
First they are DDOS'ed and now they are going to be /.'ed.. what a day..
"It would be wrong to refuse to face the fact that everything is fundamentally sick and sad."
... to enter to recieve my free iPod Mini
-K
How about we give a reward to the guy who did this I am not usualy rude but this is a special occasion.
A ruler wears a crown while the rest of us wear hats. But which would you rather have when it's raining?
I click on the WP link to see the article, and what do I see? "Edwards promises victory in Iraq" Watch out Iraq, you're in trouble!
I want to punch the monkey again!!
Should have read:: "preventing up to 75% of advertising from making it to /dev/null"
HOORAY FOR ADBLOCK!
I wrote my own spam filter. One of things it does is decode the message body, isolate those web addresses, then perform a simple blacklist/whitelist check on both the web server name and IP address. It turned out that, on average, every IP address was the home of three or four names.
That may not be a representative sample, though. Most of my spam is rejected by one of the DNSBLs; only mail that makes it over that hurdle actually gets the message body checked. That comes out to (usually) less than 10 web-server-based rejections per day.
But hey, I'm not going to complain. I average about one piece of spam every five days or so.
The Washington Post page that has that article has a popup ad from doubleclick.net. I wonder if they get a discount if their page can't load because its stuck trying to load the ad.
hey lets report about a DDOS on xxx.com site, ew ew that site seems laggy again, could it be the /. DDOS due to the link and the report on the DDOS. Hmm I better read these links a few times, least I can do given they dont give me an official I dont care what popups/banners they have its all of non interest too me *evil grin*. AS they say, never kick a man when he's down, well given my feet are down that low and I have no desire to get a groin-strain, when should I kick em ;o)
The DDoS attack itself is wrong but I have to admit that DoubleClick is a perfect target.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Am I the only one, who after reading the doubleclick DoS article here found that their usage of the term 'hackers' was really rather....stupid? Something to that point? After reading the Great Hackers article, anyways... Surely I can't be the only one who was bugged by this.
I'm no big fan of DoubleClick but think about this for just a moment. All those sites that you go to that have these ads are staying in business because of them. If DoubleClick went away so would a lot of that content.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
Funny, my FireFox adblock DOS against DoubleClick has been going for at least a year...
It's called the Unsolicited Commando. I was auditing the code a few months ago (around January 2004) and it looks good. So far, it looks like he has 28 people participating (the link provided says 28 IPs have taken part in attacks).
Code download is free, and you can just run it as a background process....
I believe the main problem with autotargeting domains that are advertised is what happens when the target server is being hijacked, or it's a server that someone wants offlined? So the guy that runs this site visits each domain advertised in spam, makes sure it's a legit spam site, and then lists the server on his Commando main server. Client programs grab the list, and hit the targeted domains repeatedly.
I feel kind of crappy about it, but I smirked when I read this one.
DoubleClick would have to spend a pile of money and time, repeatedly, to make better and better deterrents and defenses against DDoS attacks, whereas the DDoSers spend no money at all in attacking their defenses.
For a corporation, time is money and money is time; when you have to waste both money and time simultaneously your losses are geometric or even exponential, and I'm just talking about the work they have to do in the aftermath of a DDoS attack. That is on top of the fact that DoubleClick already lost profits and profit potential while they were down.
The object of the DDoS game is to pinch their money pipeline in this fashion, often enough and long enough that it has a real honest to God deleterious effect on their viability.
See: Etoys.com...
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
sucks to be them
doubleclick obviously isn't using the DDOSBlock extension for Firefox.
http://www.privoxy.org/
This sig kills fascists.
Now if only there were some way to legally drive spyware / malware companies out of business. That would be an effort that I could endorse 100%. The problem with this is, well, it's still a DDoS, even if it is against a company that's pretty thoroughly reviled. I doubt that the owners of the participating computers agreed to help with the project. /., but it's likely that the number of late-bloomer techies far outnumbers the ranks of the lifelong geeks. Not everybody discovers their inner geek at the same point in life - but that's another rant.) Aunt Claire, who just wants to upload new photos to the family webpage, doesn't deserve to be pop-upped and spywared to tears, but neither does she - or anyone else - deserve to get caught in the middle of an online piss war. Poetic justice or not, this event is a Bad Thing.
Plus, there are hundreds of thousands of people out there who still haven't figured out that the big blue "e" isn't the Internet. Their day got totally hosed by web pages that refused to load, "server not found" issues, and assorted other garbage. They got hit by the "shrapnel", but were innocent bystanders. And no, using IE doesn't mean that "they got what they deserved." (We tend to be rather elitest here on
Still, it does warm the cockles of my black little heart, thinking of DoubleClick getting served a heaping helping of the kind of crap that they've dished out over the years.
Doing my level best to piss off the religious right wing...
i had my gateway firewall 216.73.80.0/20 a LONG time ago.
from whois
OrgName: Double Click, Inc.
OrgID: DOUBLE-3
Address: 450 West 33rd Street 16th floor
City: New York
StateProv: NY
PostalCode: 10001
Country: US
NetRange: 216.73.80.0 - 216.73.95.255
CIDR: 216.73.80.0/20
Lawyers, MBA's, RIAA? A jedi fears not these things!
My deepest condolences go out to all affected by this heinous act of e-terrorism...
*snicker*
Mod parent down! Make an effort to promote real discussion here, not griping and spamming of favortite sites.
I am surprised that this took so long to happen. According to their ads I was the 9347598723098570928754th person to visit that site today. Does this means I don't get my prize?
*closes command prompt*
I'm... heartbroken. Really.
Not to get all MPAA on you, but when you block the ads, you're hurting the site. Not only that, but you're encouraging "innovation" on the advertisers side to keep you from blocking the ads. This leads to a mixing of advertising and content, so that the web pages start becoming all flash or all pictures so you can't filter out certain images without breaking the whole site for yourself.
Want to keep the subscription sites down and keep the free web up? Leave the banner ads be. Hell, click on them once in a while. If the advertisers and website are satisfied with how their ads are doing, they'll be less aggressive and less likely to piss you off.
http://adzapper.sourceforge.net/
a nifty plugin for squid. does more than just remove ads, it replaces them with a 'this ad zapped' image / swf, so pages don't render weird.
it's written in perl so it's easy to hack and is easily configurable.
No matter how many times I click refresh, the DoubleClick corporate site will not not display any banner ads, nor pop up nor pop under any X10 windows...
Oh, what did you say? "The leader in network advertising" only has tasteful advertisements on their own site?
Isn't that a tad hypocritical?
Shouldn't the people advocating annoying, bouncing, animated, rollover tripe beleive in their own products and techniques enough to use it on their own pages?
Clearly they don't, and they don't.
One could only dream of the day when all the advertisers who patronize DoubleClick ask them selves why DoubleClick doesn't use their own service to advertise their own service...
Perhaps because their customers would realize how much such techniques annoy and drive off potential clients....?
Nah, marketeers (as in mouse, not misspelling 8-) will never get wise to their own lack of wisdom.
Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
--"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
*smile*
As much as everyone hates ads but loves google I suggest that you have a big think about your favourite ad server because lately google is serving more ads to me than anyone else. So go on flame on about how doubleclick are evil and google are good despite both serving ad content. There is no difference between them.
oh right those things you see if you don't have proxomitron.
"It's so convenient to have a system where everyone is a criminal" - A. Hitler
I sent this in last night as a Yahoo cache for the Washington Post but it was rejected..oh well.
The last rule of project meyhem is...
Do you notice a speed up in web surfing when blocking those ads?
On my laptop (2.4ghz), which is wireless to cable modem but far away and a weak link (1mb avg) I can tell a difference because I am not downloading the ads. Some ads are big, some use flash, some use jave, all use some bandwidth. But yea, I notice a moderate difference. Your mileage may vary, but I would image that the slower the connection you have (or if you are p2p or bittorent'ing), the bigger the difference it would make.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
I found the PreferenceBar extension really useful. I just unclick the "JavaScript" checkbox, and the pages speed up again. Now, if only I could create a plugin that does site-specific JavaScript blocking...
Opinions my own, statements of fact may contain errors
a single tear rolls down my cheek
I visit tons of sites and I agree if they are banners I hardly even notice them because I am so used to them. However, I instantly block pop-ups and pop-unders. Some people here block every single ad which I think is wrong. Believe it or not there are people working behind these scenes and they are making money from advertisements for their families. How would you like it if people starting doing something that would block your revenue?
Come on people...be a little more thankful to the great and FREE content you get online.
more resourcefull for someone to use one of the latest IE exploits to make a worm that just makes all the doubleclick urls default to 128.0.0.0, thus eliminating their dead servers :)
Would linking about a hundred ads on popular websites be considered a DDOS? I'd imagine that if you linked enough doublecrap ads on commonly viewed sites (such as slashdot), the resulting flood of "views" would overload doubleclick. It's not a virus-induced flood or anything along those lines, so would it qualify as a DDOS or legit traffic?
That may explain why so many web pages with doubleclick ads have been loading so slowly lately. It has been really annoying; in many cases the rest of the page won't display until the add is finished loading.
Needs a boobies section.
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
*updated his 1179-line hosts file*
spell it correctly?
That's what it comes down to: The product being bought and sold is YOUR attention, you are the product, you are being sold.
It's precisely the same for any form of advertising.
It was a joke! When you give me that look it was a joke.
ah the age old refresher
I still am going to jump up and down screaming "happy happy joy joy" about this since I use NoAdHosts (link: www.everythingisnt.com/hosts.html)
But yes I do understand about the economics of free.
Let them advertise. I just don't want to see any of it.
This was brought to you buy the Department of Redundancy Department
Now THAT is an insightful comment. Too bad I have no mod points today.
...has graphics turned off?
Am I deeply troubling you???
I just heard some sad news on talk radio - ad server Doubleclick.com was found dead in its Maine home this morning. There weren't any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss him - even if you didn't enjoy its work, there's no denying its contributions to popular culture. Truly an American icon.
"Shhhhhh! The commercials are on! If we don't watch these, it's like we're stealing TV!"
I just used up my last mod point about 10 minutes ago. If I had any points left I would mod the parent up. It really puts things into perspective.
We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
-- Anais Nin
25% of DoubleClick's advertising is still getting through.
No wonder my Internet connection was so fast yesterday! I'd wish this happened every day.
Do you consider it unethical to read a newspaper without reading their ads? Record a TV show and then fast forward through the commercials later? Get up and get food/go to the bathroom during commercials? Throw away mail flyers for products? Use a text based browser? Have a visual imparement?
In all these cases, you are ignoring/blocking ads. Sites have a right to try and advertise, but it's your computer, and you have a right to change the presentation to meet your needs.
Also if the advertisers learned a little something form successful advertising, such as Google and newspapers, they would have a much better chance of not getting blocked:
1) Be less obtrusive. The web is a random access media. Interrupting people with full screen or popup ads is annoying and counter the operation of the web. Thus people hate them and want them gone.
2) Be relivant. Do nto slather your ad over ever site on the internet. Target your ad at sites that attract people that care.
3) Be honest. A large number of ads are highly deceptive in their nature.
Double click violates all of these their ads are a pain, they advertise whatever, wherever and most of them are "Punch the monkey and win" or "You have a message" or "Your computer is broadcasting an Internet IP address".
I LIKE Google ads, since they relate to what I search for. Thus, if I want to buy something, I search and then look in the right hand column since the ads are unobtrusive, relivant to what I want, and honestly trying to sell me it.
but doubleclick doesn't give a flying fuck about slashdot.
Ironic, because Slashdot doesn't give a flying fuck about Doubleclick!
I don't understand why Rev. Moon's mouthpiece needs to be our source for this news...?
My new
Let me be the zillionth to say:
HAHA!!!
You liken blocking ads to rude behavior, but the reverse is also true. The majority of ads are extremely rude in the way they are delivered, with bright flashing graphics or other gimmicks that detract from the content we are trying to view.
If a site is rude to me, I'll gladly be rude in return. Going back to your example, would you feel as bad about not ordering two drinks from that bar with the two drink miniumum, if the staff treated you rudely from the moment you walked in?
just like i do, block pop up/under/over/inbetween/whatever ads, and leave the content of the actual page alone? makes sence to me.
cnycompguy
(forgot the password, and couldnt be bothered to go through the retrival annoyance)
From reading the article there seems to be no hard evidence that this was a DDoS. Doubleclick is simply saying this. If you were Doubleclick and you downgraded your bandwidth or had some systems failures, it would be all too convenient to say you're a victim of a DDoS when webmasters complained that their pages weren't loading because your system couldn't respond appropriately. I don't buy the DDoS excuse personally.
Assume I was drunk when I posted this.
OSDN uses doubleclick.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
I'm using the hosts file example from the guy mike, (everythingisnt, I think), and that file uses 127.0.0.1, which is the localhost. What's the difference (ok, I'm a newbie) between 127.0.0.1 and 0.0.0.0 ? Will changing to all zeroes load any faster? Should I change them all to all zeroes instead of what I currently have?
Also, for a windows computer, I've downloaded and installed Mozilla. I also installed the windows version of the hosts file setup from the same web site that I got the hosts file example for my Linux box. It works with Internet Explorer (the hosts file), but with Mozilla, I still have to "block images from this server" to prevent ads from showing up, it doesn't work with the hosts file. Because it doesn't work with the hosts file, I think it is still downloading the ad, it just isn't showing it. Does this sound right? I sometimes see a flash of colors, before the ad "isn't" shown, so I think the ad is downloading.
Now if I could just figure out how to block ads from sites such as www.microsoft.com/games/showadhere.html that automatically load IE and go to the site when the game is played and then ended. The only way of blocking this launching and site loading that I've been able to figure out is to shut off internet access with zonealarm prior to playing the game, but to get other users to remember to do that every time...there has to be a better way. And I'm going to try the tricks with trying to stop doubleclick ads that show up because the doubleclick server is linked through the current server I'm on, instead of directly, so it looks like it's going to the current site, not doubleclick's.
What character is that? I don't remember seeing an "email" character in the Unicode charts before.
Oper on the Nightstar
HOWEVER
Dishing out the same medicine to DoubleClick in one heaping dose that they spread out over the internet is called karma. I've read posts about running a similar routine with modded SETI@home doing the same thing, and I not only support that idea would gladly give up the bandwidth to make my contribution. Distribute it under the same loophole they infect they spyware/adware with and maybe they will think again about their business model. These vermin are paying the spammers and helping bring down the global quality of the internet. Let their site get dropped and send a crystal clear message of the general opinion of their crap.
Doing that will make them unblockable since the ads and the content are being served from the same IP address. However, there is nothing to stop someone with coming up with a clever HTML rewriter plugin/browser to strip out the content (readable text and meaningful binary content files) and make a simplified version of the (likely ad-ridden) original page.
My firewall program cannot detect deliberately broken up 'SCRIPT' tags via the document.write Javascript function--otherwise Google's AdSense advertising would be blocked too. If I didn't need Javascript, I could turn it off at the browser level and kill these ads as well.
Simple, HTML-only, text-based ads for me, thank you very much (works for Google)--I am on 'sessioned', time-limited dailup and cannot waste time downloading an (animated) ad banner image, or an (obnoxious, animated) shockwave ad.
Zestyfind Default Homepage Network GAIN Weatherbug Search 180 And all of the other purveyors of spyware/adware
Ads can be sold by the clickthrough rate or the number of impressions. The thing is, when you watch an ad on TV, no one expects you to run out and buy something. Sometimes you don't need to click through for it to work. As an example, slashdot has ads for Server Beach. I was looking for a host for a client and thought, oh, lemme try server beach, their ad said they had good prices. I'm going to recommend server beach to this client.
In this case ads don't need to be clicked.
Photos.
Either they fake their results, or their staff are incompetent at counting the add hits/clicks.
We had access to their data sets and did our own sums on their data, and got lesser TRUE results than what they 'claimed' to get.
I wasn't blocking ads on Slashdot until they started going "dynamic". If something is moving on the page besides the mouse cursor, it better be a hell of a lot more interesting than Microsoft trying to tell me that using a quad Xeon under Windows 2003 to approximate the work done by a uniprocessor AMD XP2000+ under Linux is an effective way to "lower my TCO"!
For people whose job it is to create or host web-based advertising, you should pay attention to what people here are saying.
Those with the misfortune not not to have a geeky friend install Firefox or lacking the wherewithal to do it themselves get frustrated with animated gifs/flash/overlays. Those who have made the switch never see the ads in the first place.
I, for example, block all flash and gif animation by default, and if one gets through, I just use NukeEverything.
On the other hand, I have quite frequently clicked through google text ad links because they were relevant to my search.
The internet is not TV; the audience is neither captive nor passive. If you drive people to distraction or frustration, you will soon have no visitors.
If I'm looking for information on Product X or News Story Y and the page renders to slowly because of ads, or is distracting becauise of ads, or is frustrating to use because of ads, I simply go elsewhere.
Its not a matter of 'free sites need the revenue' -- there are other ways of earning revenue than distracting your visitors from what they wanted to accomplish.
If I read a nice, clean page with nice, clean ads, I may or may not choose to click through. But if those ads are blinking, blocking, or otherwise bothering my experince, not only will I not follow them, but I may choose not to return to the site.
I am sure I am not alone.
Yes, I saw the BBSpot blurb =P
"Evil will always triumph because good is dumb." -- Dark Helmet
So here's how the so called "FREE" sites (those that are remaining on the net anyway) work. They exist because of advertising. As "evil" as ads may be, they pay the bills for Slashdot, The Onion, IMDb, Yahoo, etc.
Yeah?
Google (with the *sole* exception of the fact that they require cookie usage to disable content filtering, which I view as pushing people towards maintaining permanent cookies on their machine) does not involve huge privacy issues. They even have procedures in place (only occasionally sampling which sites people go to from their pages) to eliminate the potential privacy threat that might be present by monitoring every link on Google that you click. Doubleclick is set up in such a way to tie where you surf to a global profile, and to then link this to your accounts on other websites. From a privacy standpoint, Doubleclick is a monster.
Doubleclick allows animated, disruptive ads.
Take a look at Google. They have text-based, *useful* ads. I don't mind Google's ads. I actually find them quite useful -- I've actually deliberately *clicked* on them, unlike Doubleclick's ads. They do not make for large, slow page downloads, they are convenient, and Google stays profitable.
Doubleclick is the exact opposite. They attack personal privacy, they greatly degrade the web-browsing experience, and they often slow page loading time. Their ads are often ugly, animated, and irritating.
May we never see th
Has anybody seen any evidence this was a DoS attack? Versus, say, a glitch they brought on themselves?
There's been no technical information on NANOG or other ISP channels. Did any reader at a backbone or other big provider get a call to block whatever traffic it was responsible for this?
They haven't reported it to law enforcement; is that because they don't have any evidence and are just blaming a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the mouth on "evil hackers"(TM)? They've already got the bad publicity, so they aren't not reporting to save temselves from that.
Why should be believe them? Because of their long-standing ethical business practices?
I added doubleclick.com to the 127.0.0.1 localhost entry in the hosts file.. I get a few blank ads but it beats the fuck out of the doubleclick shit... kinda wish I would have been invited to the doubleclick ddos party... that would have been gratifying...
the ethics behind a DDoS against a a company like doubleclick are very funny :D
See Sig! See Sig Zig! Zig Sig Zig!!!!!
homestarrunner.com. How the hell did they afford all that bandwidth before the store took off, anyway? OTOH, I know at least 5 people that have bought shirts AND the cd.
next site to be ddos'ed: windows update.
bomb the site so none of the windows users can patch their OS and make them vulnerable
my blog
Comment removed based on user account deletion
How about designing a browser or browser add-on
that blocks adds, but simulates clicks on banner ads at random intervals? Then the user wouldn't have to see ads, the ad company would think that their ads were being viewed, and everyone would be happy.
Good, they need it.
--
Adobe's anti-counterfeiting softw
- bl.spamcop.net - 172 messages blocked
- relays.ordb.org - 2 messages blocked
- dnsbl.njabl.org - 7 messages blocked
- cbl.abuseat.org - 30 messages blocked
- dnsbl.sorbs.net - 31 messages blocked
- Falcon - 5 messages blocked due to virus attachment
- Falcon - 187 messages blocked due to blacklisted email source
- Falcon - 15 messages blocked due to blacklisted web site
- Total messages blocked: 449
The DNSBLs are listed in order of checking (which makes the reject rate interesting). Falcon checks all systems in the email chain against all of the DNSBLs, not just the connecting system. Very useful for detecting known spammers sending through mail lists or previously-unknown relays. I didn't quite cite my stats correctly before: Only one piece of spam (a false negative) every five days actually makes it through my filters. False positives are on the order of one every other week and are usually due to dial-up users sending mail through a DNSBL-tagged MTA.The only reason anyone is likely to care is because it has made surfing very pleasent lately. I'm sorry, its illegal, its wrong, and it hurts networks to deliver the package of shit they are sending dclick's way. Still, advertising is fucking out of control, and it needs to lighten up. Since they don't listen to us, some of us have taken to punishing them for it. I applaud their efforts.
I wanna buy the parties responsable a beer.
--Nuintari
slashdot : where an opinion can be wrong.
If it wasn't for services such as double-click, I wouldn't have the soft sensitive skin I have today! My life was changed when I accidentally clicked on what I thought was a "close" button telling me that my shoes were untied. How was I to know that it would unlock the fountain of youth? Soon after buying a product from some African prince, I found myself turning the hot chicks away....
Wait...
That was a bad dream, never mind. More power to ya
Oh, my. No annoying popup ads encouraging me to "CLICK HERE FOR IMPORTANT INFO ABOUT SOMETHING YOU PROBALY DONT CARE ABOUT!"
It is truly a shame when crackers stop targeting big companies such as Microsoft and go after a company dedicated to PopUp advertising.
Hmm... Perhaps someone saw the "Punch the monkey" ad one time too many?
ISTR in the last few days banner ads that just say something like "URL not found" - I forget if it was on slashdot or where, but I was thinking how bandwidth was saved by not sending me a banner pic I don't care about.
Tag lost or not installed.