Slashdot Mirror
Are Ad Servers Bogging Down the Web?
blackbearnh writes "The work of making high-volume web sites perform well is an ongoing challenge, and one that continues to evolve as the nature of web content changes. According to Google Performance Guru Steve Souders, fat JavaScript libraries and rich content are creating new problems for web site tuning, but one of the biggest problems lies outside the control of web site administrators — ad servers. In an interview previewing the upcoming Velocity Online conference run by O'Reilly, Souders talks at length about the real causes of poor web performance today, and in particular, the effect that poorly performing ad servers are creating. 'We adopted a framework of inserting ads, of creating ads, that's pretty simple. And because it's pretty simple, it's not highly tuned. That's one reason why we shouldn't be too surprised that we see performance issues in third party ads. The other reason is that ad services are not focused on technology. Certainly companies like Yahoo and Google and Microsoft, we're technology companies. We focus on technology. So it's not surprising that our web developers are on the leading edge of adopting these performance best practices. And it's also not surprising that ad services might lag two, three or four years behind where these web technology companies are.'"
That I should read about this story with an AT&T advertisement next to it done up in Adobe Flash 10 when the exact same thing can be achieved in a few lines of HTML. Seriously, it's an all black background with four lines of white text at h2 and h3 ... then an AT&T logo in the bottom and maybe an icon for the button to "learn more." And the article is wondering if advertisers are slowing down the web?
Give the UI back to the user and leave the flashing marquee tags in Las Vegas. The only reason you would use a swf is to achieve some display interaction/functionality not suitable for HTML+CSS+Javascript. This is common sense yet you willing host ads that urinate on common sense. If you want me to read an article on your site, you don't want moving flashing things annoying my eyes while I try to read text so why serve up only a technology (as all ads on Slashdot seem to be) that is designed just for that? Ah, of course, it's your biggest revenue stream. Well then, I guess I'll just dig in and prepare for the cycle to perpetuate ad infinitum. And these two guys can chat all they want about it but there's no solution; it's never going to end because it's Just the Way Things Are.
My work here is dung.
Having worked for an ad-serving company, I'm pretty confident that the reason they don't care is that they're not measured on the speed at which they serve up ads.
If high-value websites started rejecting ad networks that served ads in less then x milliseconds after the rest of the page was downloaded, you'd see ad servers speed up, quick.
Quite often you will be loading a website, and be staring at a blank screen with "making connection to ads.blablabla" at the bottom.... The page itself has loaded, but won't display until the browser has managed to retrieve the ads.
Also you will see ad servers in completely different locations to the site you're viewing, and therefore much slower.
Also, some ads are especially large, especially animated flash ones, and can add a noticeable delay to a page load even if the ad server isn't slow or lagged.
My pet hate btw, are ads which have sound... I find that EXTREMELY annoying and quickly block access to any ad provider which serves such things.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
This is the main reason I use Adblock Plus. If the advertisements weren't so annoying then I wouldn't mind them, there are a few text ads I don't block because they aren't intrusive at all. But when I see flash based ads that yes could have been done with HTML or JavaScript then I block those immediately.
Technology: Are Ad Servers Bogging Down the Web?
Yes. Period.
Yes.
I realize that most websites run some version or another of "adverts", but generally speaking, most of those sites are marginal value to start. The sites I frequent usually use text ads, and not the flash (pun intended) graphical ads on some of the more questionable sites.
In fact, I dare say, that if I see lots of flashy or ads that are obtrusive in nature, I discount the nature of the site and tend to leave quicker.
One of the things that pisses me off to no end, are third party ads that are spewing crap/malware to driveby web browsing.
I don't personally get infecgted by them, because I run all the latest anti-malware defenses (adblock, noscript, firefox etc). But I'm in IT, and I see way too many machines compromized by the lastest "Antivirus 2010" styple crap/malware all the time.
Websites that house such malware should be blacklisted. Screw them if they can't make a living without using dubious adverts.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
The way most pages are written, the ad sites are hit multiple times before the page fully renders. So, even though a place can have immense bandwidth, but their pages are limited to what the ad slingers can do, and since bandwidth is a cost center for them, serving up 10 meg Flash ads will be done through as poor a connection as possible.
Solution? Either firefox/adblock/noscript/Ghostery, Privoxy, some descendent of the Proxomitron (R. I. P. Scott), and the like. Of course, some advertisers try to start an arms race, but unless they put their complete site in a Flash app (which web schools are training people to do), this can be manually dealt with.
Google is not on the leading edge of adopting performance best practices, at least not for their ad and statistics services. The ad scripts are designed to be in the middle of the document and they load uncacheable scripts, which stops page rendering completely on a network interaction with a far away server. If this is supposed to be "best practices", I shudder to see what they think is bad practices.
So, who's choosing to put these slow third-party ads on their websites again?
no-script for the win, yet again.
Don't kid yourself. It's the size of the regexp AND how you use it that counts.
Surely the ads are in iframes, and so load entirely asynchronously. If they're not, then you're giving third-party content access to your site's security zone, which is a terrible idea.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Nothing bogs down a site like Flash.
Case in point: Boing Boing.
Several months ago, Boing Boing got a new layout. The old layout worked fine, was easy to read, easy to scroll. The new Boing Boing stutters when scrolled ... it's annoyingly easy to lose your place and scroll way down or way up by mistake. Grrr ....
-kgj
But ads are useful.
There are lots of possible solutions. One that comes it mine is to let the site with the ads server the ads along with the regular content.
Also its an unfair race. You enter http://example.com/ in the browser and example.com starts loading then it asks for its ads. So, of course, the ads arrive after the example.com content.
We, as ./ users, have the ability to disable advertising on ./ forums, etc. Not that this is relevant, but the rest of the world (fark, anyone?) does have serious lag time. Be thankful, guys! Back to the subject matter, though. Is this a "new" revelation?
--Stak
Holy happy hippy crap!
...let God sort 'em out. At least that's my policy.
Every single time I end up thinking "Geez, this website is taking forever to load", I glance down at the status bar and see "Waiting for adserver3.adcompany.com". Then, I hit refresh and get another ad from another round robin'ed server, and the page loads sucessfully. It's very frustrating to know that the only reason the page is still blank or half-rendered is because of a third party ad.
In this regard, AdBlock makes a significant difference if you tell it to not download ads at all, but I am not comfortable with denying revenue streams to the websites I visit, after all, they are providing me with a service I enjoy, for free.
I just wish that all ads could be loaded last in a manner that doesn't affect the rendering of the website you're trying to view...
On a related note, the same applies to external javascript. Two transactional websites I maintain are sometimes slowed down to a crawl because of the crappy external Javascript marketing made us insert in the page header to track stuff. It's always very frustrating when things end up being slow because of third parties. I wish there was a simple way to cache these things.
Most of the time I see a page taking a long time to load, my status bar tells me it's trying to contact some ad server or another.
Slows things down for me most of the time. I'll be loading a page and see that at the bottom of the browser.
[John]
Shit better not happen!
Even Slashdot is falling prey to slow ad servers. And to answer TheRaven64's presumption -- no, it used to be the case that ads loaded asynchronously, but today it seems that many, if not most sites delay loading the content you actually came to see until the ads load. I am guessing this is part of the contract between sites and advertisers. (Would any admin for Slashdot care to comment?)
-Coward
The issue is that the browser is only allowed to use a handful of requests at a time, and with a 3rd-party server some fraction of those requests are going to someone else's server. Therefore the goal should be to make sure that your content gets loaded first. This can be done in the browser--and may already be done; I'm not in the mood to parse FireFox's sourececode--using a simple prioritization algorithm:
And of course, there are HTML tricks that can be used to boost render time, like using absolute hight/width attributes on every image and avoiding the use of relative metrics against dynamic portions of the page. In other words, don't define the width of your main body element as a percentage of your advertising banner's width!
Still, I can't help but think this just 1998 again, "Now with more JavaScript!"
I've mentioned the ad bottleneck before. Slashdot is an especially bad offender. Pages use several ad servers, and they use "document.write" to stall the page load until the ad comes up. Even if you have the ad images blocked, some of the junk JavaScript still needs to run.
Some sites are just slow at serving pages. Behind my SiteTruth system there is a specialized web crawler which looks for a business name and address on each web site. It never looks at more than 20 pages, and it's looking for pages like "About", "Contact", and about 40 other words which might plausibly lead to contact info. This process runs about 5-15 seconds for a well-implemented site. I log sites where it takes more than 45 seconds. About 5-10% of sites run overtime. In the last hour, the slowest site is "www.airsmaxkey.com", at 159 seconds to read 10 pages. (Yes, they're a bottom-feeder. Not only is there no business address on the site (a criminal offense in the European Union), they have logos from Verisign, PayPay, Verified by Visa, and MasterCard SecureCode, none of which are actually clickable to do the claimed verification. Nor does their shopping cart checkout use SSL. The whole site may be a scam. SiteTruth gives them a "Do Not Enter" rating.)
Some of the social networking sites have so much Javascript that Firefox will time out. (Facebook had that problem for a while. They fixed it.)
Dilbert.com
The entire site screams PHB. It takes five minutes to load a single gif comic with all the extra crap and flash and popups that go along with it.
Seriously - it's like an act of self parody. I just picture Scott Adams sitting in a cube somewhere trying to draw comics while tearing his hair out and a PHB over his shoulder saying "We'll call it Dilbert.com BETA! And we'll have MASHUPS! OooooOOOooo!!"
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
I propose a change of term for this sort of stuff. Instead of "rich" content call it "obese" content or "overloaded" content or "bloated" content. That "rich" term sounds desirable while often the opposite is true. Call the real useful stuff "enhanced" content or something similar...
--frank[at]unternet.org
I personally use adblock in addition to the hosts file from http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts2.htm It just redirects known bad/ad domains to loopback. Some affiliate sites (like bing cashback) are affected, but its easy to find them and comment out those entries. Quite often Ill find an ad that adblock misses and it just loads up a blank window because it was blocked by the host file.
"One of the things that pisses me off to no end, are third party ads that are spewing crap/malware to driveby web browsing. I don't personally get infecgted by them, because I run all the latest anti-malware defenses (adblock, noscript, firefox etc). But I'm in IT, and I see way too many machines compromized by the lastest "Antivirus 2010" styple crap/malware all the time. Websites that house such malware should be blacklisted. Screw them if they can't make a living without using dubious adverts - by Archangel Michael (180766) on Monday November 30, @12:33PM (#30271632)
Archangel Michael, meet "the LORD OF HOSTS" (just in keeping with your nick/handle here, AND the fact that much of what you note is covered by another tool you omitted mentioning that is easily edited, everyone has one (if their OS IP stack is BSD based, most all are iirc), & eats no CPU cycles like a local DNS server can (& are not as security vulnerable either if you protect write access to a HOSTS file also):
I use a custom HOSTS file, in addition to the tools you noted (which only really function for FireFox/Mozilla products, but don't extend globally to all other webbound applications, & that is part of what HOSTS files give you above the methods you extoll + utilize: "GLOBAL COVERAGE", & of ALL webbound apps, not just FireFox/Mozilla ones via the addons you noted + use yourself...).
HOSTS files can be used to blockout KNOWN "bad" adserves, maliciously coded sites or adbanners, and "botnet C&C servers" too!
You can obtain reliable HOSTS files from reputable lists for more security online, but also for speed!
(More on that later & WHY/HOW (I use reliable lists for that, such as these HOSTS @ Wikipedia.com -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts_file or those from mvps.org (a good one this one))
I also further populate & keep current my custom HOSTS file with up to date information in regards to all of those threats, via:
----
A.) Spybot "Search & Destroy" updates (populates HOSTS and browser block lists)
B.) Sites like ZDNet's Mr. Dancho Danchev's blog -> http://ddanchev.blogspot.com/
C.) Sites like FireEye -> http://blog.fireeye.com/
D.) SRI -> http://mtc.sri.com/
----
My HOSTS file incorporates ALL of the entries from the HOSTS files shown @ wikipedia as well... gaining me speed online (by blocking adbanners, which have been compromised many times the past few years now by malscripted exploits (examples below)).
(I combined ALL reputable HOSTS files with one of my own (30,000 entries), & I removed duplicates removed via a Borland Delphi app I wrote to do so called "APK HOSTS File Grinder 4.0++". That program also functions to change the default larger & SLOWER 127.0.0.1 blocking 'loopback adapter' IP address to either 0.0.0.0 (for VISTA/Windows Server 2008/Windows 7, smaller & thus faster than 127.0.0.1 default) or the smallest & fastest 0 "blocking 'IP ADDRESS'" (for Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 which can STILL use it (& it was added in a service pack on Windows 2000, only on 12/09/2008 MS patch tuesday was it removed for VISTA onwards (& now all these "phunny little bugs" are showing up as FLAWS in this new NDIS6 approach via WFP as well in the firewall, which ROOTKIT.COM has stated (with code too no less on how it is done) -> http://www.rootkit.com/newsread.php?newsid=952 [rootkit.com] that it is EASIER TO UNHOOK (than was the design used in Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003))
Another EXCELLENT benefit of HOSTS file usage? More speed online, & also more security + reliability (especially in the case of DNS servers today, per folks like Dan Kaminsky &/or Moxie Marlinspike finding various security vuln
add Adblock Plus to Firefox. Works wonders :-)
I don't understand how an ad server can make a site slow, even if the ad server is slow in serving up an ad. So you have one externally loaded element (the ad) that is an image or a flash element. The browser allocates the space for the image or flash element in the location where it'll be rendered. When it finishes loading your browser draws it in the appropriate place. So it takes a little longer for one or two images to appear in the already displayed page. I don't see what the problem is for the end-user.
Cory Doctorow talking about cloud computing makes as much sense as George W Bush talking about electrical engineering.
Seriously.. what ads? I'm amazed whenever I have to fire up a default browser and i'm like "There are ads on this page?".. not to mention every now and again /. says "Hey you've been nice.. we can turn off ads for you".. "um.. there are ads?"
Adblock.. I love you.
(unfortunately it makes FF start up slower :/ )
----- The internet has given everyone the ability to have their voice heard equally as loud.. even if they shouldn't be
On my little Sony VAIO with a Pentium M 1.2GHz processor some websites are incredibly slow on Windows 7 and XP. The only thing that makes it run quick is Firefox with noscript and adblockplus installed.
i think you'll find that most of the flash on boing boing is inline video. what makes web pages stutter and scroll badly is css.
Thanks, this is useful info.
-kgj
Firefox + ABP = No ads.
Ads are part of the problem, but a more general description of the issue is that, for various reasons (most of them contrary to users' interests), web sites often embed crap from other websites. Sometimes they're ads, sometimes they're "follow us on facebook/twitter" widgets, etc (the thinking is that once someone follows you on twitter, and if they ever stop visiting your site, then maybe some day they'll see your spew on twitter and then come back to you). And then there's even the fairly benevolent stuff, like Google Maps.
Once you start doing this, page load times start to leave your control. And you'll start to have weird problems that don't come up in your test environment, like maybe you're embedding something that a lot of WebSense users can't load, but it doesn't degrade gracefully.
Two good approaches seem to be: 1) load it after the page, using javascript 2) load it in an iframe. Actually, I'm starting to really like the idea of using iframes, since I sometimes have ads that do horrible things (sometimes modifying the DOM outside of their container), and iframes tend to more compartmentalize misbehavior.
I'm on a pretty pathetic DSL line, so I've tried to optimize things on my end. First, I've setup my "hosts" file to loopback on about 16,000 websites. And I also use a plugin that blocks Flash (unless you click on it). My browsing experience has never been smoother.
The real Sig captains the Northwestern. This one captains
I use a click-to-flash plugin so I never actually see flash objects unless I click on them.
This is useful info -- thanks!
-kgj
Nonsense! I for one have chosen to keep my websites ad-free, hence no ad servers and no slowdown. The same goes for untold thousands of other webmasters.
If you've chosen differently then ... well, I suppose it's your website and your decision — but please don't come whining to us about the consequences.
caps, bold, wall of text!
There are quite a few webmasters who run their ads inside of iframes, as that usually avoids a slow ad holding up the rest of the page loading. The bad thing about that is that expandable ads (even polite, user-initiated) do not work. There are also some other tricks webmasters use, such as creating division tags and then using a bit of javascript trickery to move the ad loading to a point after the content loads.
Webmasters do hate slow ads (not to mention bad ads). I love direct sale campaigns on my site, because they almost always are run from my ad server. If that is slow, my whole site is slow anyway - and that happens very, very rarely (it has been months).
Andrew Borntreger
Champion of cinematic disasters
I for one, am shocked, astounded, flabbergasted...surprised? er Not Surprised.
I still don't get the continuing obsession with the idea that everything on the internet should be free. There's no free lunch. It costs money to run the servers, write the software, create the information that is being served and on and on. Yet all this should be free. So everything ends up being supported by ads. If customers would be willing to pay a reasonable free for the services rendered, everybody wins. The folks who run the service can stay in business and customers can get a quality product without being bombarded by ads.
When I was running a (now defunct) website, I noted that the ads were the slowest part of my site to load. My solution was to take all the static images and, with a little help of some additional PHP into my existing image system, I cached them. This sped up the loading of the page dramatically and allowed me to refresh my ad-cache when my site traffic was low.
I don't know whether or not every /. user gets the option to disable ads, but one thing that is apparent to me is that Slashdot page-loads seem to take a VERY much longer time than they used to. Given that I'm not seeing any ads (I would have filtered them anyway), and I view the content in "classic" mode, it is tempting to speculate that unless slashcode itself is somehow responsible, a speed-bump might be a simple ratio of server power to number of users.
/. page-load times as a breakdown on a per-country basis. Here's a starter: mine is just over 5 seconds for a thread with just over 100 posts. (Yikes.) I'm in Australia.
It might be interesting to see statistics for average
Just wait for someone to realize that they are missing a huge advertising market by not advertising on mobile (phone) browsers. Lots of sites these days are making their "mobile" page as a "watered down" version of their main pages, and as far as I can tell that primarily means removing lots of ads. There are some sites that I actually like better in their mobile versions than the real versions and change my User Agent in FireFox to a mobile browser to get that page. I'm not a trendsetter so I know that if I'm doing this there are others doing this as well, and once the developers catch on it is only a matter of time before we start seeing more ads on our mobile phones when we're browsing. Better hope you have an unlimited data plan when this happens.
Remember when there never was any question about what was bogging down the net?
Unless you didn't know what /. was?
FTW!
But then I have blacklisted every damn site that loads up a blinking, flashing, animated images. May that has something to do with it. And no script blocks flash on whitelisted sites too!
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Why not just go to Adobe's site and block them at the source?
Reply to That ||
i believe the market needs to be highly regulated to prevent bubbles and pops and to prevent manipulation of smaller players by entrenched powers
having said that, i also understand that the market is the engine that drives innovation. the market needs to be controlled... but there needs to be a market
so when i see
"Yes. Another example of the free market working its wonders."
i see only an idiot who bites the hand that feeds it
dear genius: what is your alternative to making your favorite website run?
all of the slashdot smug in this thread proudly trumpeting their ad blocking methods need to shut up, frankly, because with more widespread use of ad blocking, more websites go under. and yes, dear elitist snob, this includes some sites you like, not just myspace
so what's the solution? more seamless ad delivery, less intrusive ads, faster ads. yes, yes, and yes. but never, ever is a valid answer no ads or less ads
oh, you don't like ads? wow, you're a unique snowflake aren't you? who the fuck does?
the ads are too intrusive to your poor delicate sensibilities about proper screen real estate usage?
ok, that's fine
then pay for your content, moron. because that's the alternative. or is it that you don't understand the fucking obvious?
please, dear slashdot effete: you go ahead and continue block ads, be my guest
just show a little fucking DISCRETION and shut up about it, if you know what is fucking good for you
sheesh
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
With AJAX, caching, and sensible timeouts, this is a non-issue. The problem lies in the fact that instead of optimizing performance, they've focused on simplicity, allowing you the webmaster to embed their advertisements into your site by copy/pasting a few short lines of code vs. implementing something more robust that doesn't bog down the rendering of your pages.
body massage!
holy shit man, im too high to read all that
"Technology: Are Ad Servers Bogging Down the Web? Yes. Period." - by Monkeedude1212 (1560403) on Monday November 30, @12:32PM (#30271618)
Here is a GOOD SOLID WORK-AROUND, CALLED A HOSTS FILE!
(It works for more speed online, AND SECURITY ESPECIALLY... Also, it works for your money, because you pay for your linetime out of pocket most likely as I do, you can get back your speed, AND, gain security easily, & from a single easily edited file & a file eats no CPU cycles like a local DNS server can (& are not as security vulnerable either if you protect write access to a HOSTS file also)... Anyhow/anyways - Here goes:
SO - "that all said & aside"? Well, per your reply??
Hey - NO PROBLEM, 110% agreement here on that account... & more (like more speed online AND more security, via a SINGLE EASILY EDITED + POPULATED FILE, called a HOSTS file):
I use a custom HOSTS file, in addition to the tools others here in this thread have noted (which MANY like FF addons only really function for FireFox/Mozilla products, but don't extend globally to all other webbound applications, & that is part of what HOSTS files give you above the methods you extoll + utilize: "GLOBAL COVERAGE", & of ALL webbound apps, not just FireFox/Mozilla ones via the addons you noted + use yourself...).
HOSTS files can be used to blockout KNOWN "bad" adserves, maliciously coded sites or adbanners, and "botnet C&C servers" too!
You can obtain reliable HOSTS files from reputable lists for more security online, but also for speed!
(More on that later & WHY/HOW (I use reliable lists for that, such as these HOSTS @ Wikipedia.com -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts_file or those from mvps.org (a good one this one))
I also further populate & keep current my custom HOSTS file with up to date information in regards to all of those threats, via:
----
A.) Spybot "Search & Destroy" updates (populates HOSTS and browser block lists)
B.) Sites like ZDNet's Mr. Dancho Danchev's blog -> http://ddanchev.blogspot.com/
C.) Sites like FireEye -> http://blog.fireeye.com/
D.) SRI -> http://mtc.sri.com/
----
My HOSTS file incorporates ALL of the entries from the HOSTS files shown @ wikipedia as well... gaining me speed online (by blocking adbanners, which have been compromised many times the past few years now by malscripted exploits (examples below)).
(I combined ALL reputable HOSTS files with one of my own (30,000 entries), & I removed duplicates removed via a Borland Delphi app I wrote to do so called "APK HOSTS File Grinder 4.0++". That program also functions to change the default larger & SLOWER 127.0.0.1 blocking 'loopback adapter' IP address to either 0.0.0.0 (for VISTA/Windows Server 2008/Windows 7, smaller & thus faster than 127.0.0.1 default) or the smallest & fastest 0 "blocking 'IP ADDRESS'" (for Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 which can STILL use it (& it was added in a service pack on Windows 2000, only on 12/09/2008 MS patch tuesday was it removed for VISTA onwards (& now all these "phunny little bugs" are showing up as FLAWS in this new NDIS6 approach via WFP as well in the firewall, which ROOTKIT.COM has stated (with code too no less on how it is done) -> http://www.rootkit.com/newsread.php?newsid=952 [rootkit.com] that it is EASIER TO UNHOOK (than was the design used in Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003))
Another EXCELLENT benefit of HOSTS file usage? More speed online, & also more security + reliability (especially in the case of DNS servers today, per folks like Dan Kaminsky &/or Moxie Marlinspike finding various security vulnerabilities in them the past couple years now)...
When you hit a web site that loads slow because an ad-server or its DNS is slow to respond, report it to the content-owner web site.
They will be annoyed on multiple counts:
*Their advertisers aren't getting eyeballs they want
*Their own content is being devalued due to their site appearing "sluggish"
*They are getting complaints
By the way, a well-run ad network can give better performance than a poorly-run in-house network.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
In 1995, columnist and Ethernet-inventor Bob Metcalfe was again going on about a topic that eventually had him literally eating his words (he had to chop up a column in a blender with water and chug it) - that the Internet was going to collapse from all the heavy bandwidth demands of its exponentially-expanding clientele.
So I did a "View Source" on the Infoworld page with his column on it. I've lost the E-mail now, but the stats were something like his column being 2000 bytes and the sum of all the advertising around it, mostly GIF images at the time, was over 20,000 bytes. The Ad/Content ratio even then was over 10:1.
Metcalfe, who'd been railing against irresponsible bandwidth consumption in the column, could only plead that he had no control over the magazine's decisions on what went around it.
The web has always been the reverse of TV, where the ad/content bandwidth is about 1:4 or even 1:5. It's not far different from some magazines, though, where I swear there are 3 pages of ads for every page of content. And if you digitized the magazine, the ads would mostly be images, the content mostly text, and the ratio would be at least 10:1.
This is all prologue to new web content where you are slowed down not so much by download times as the start-up times for various Flash and JavaScript programs that make the ads so much more intrusive, zipping back and forth over the text you're trying to read, or just dancing in the corner of the page.
This is all necessary: they do what they MUST to get response from the ads. If the stats don't show a response, they stop buying them and the business model fails.
Everybody says "Nobody will pay for content on the Internet". Yes, they will. The put up with all that crap rather than pull out a credit card. They just pay with their time and attention instead of actual cash.
Rod Serling, one of the great TV writers of all time, once commented that it is hard to tell a story when you must work it around being interrupted every ten minutes by dancing rolls of toilet paper. I wonder what he'd think of writing for a medium where the toilet paper literally dances all over your words until you click on it to make it go back to the lower right frame.
No kidding. Who didn't notice this, oh, at least three or four years ago?
add fsdn on there. Really.
And why not make the content load and THEN load the ads????
Comment removed based on user account deletion
...and a more in-depth analysis: f**k yes.
I've had to disable the ads on /., because they were stalling and crashing my browser.
Yes, and when your karma gets really really high, you are allowed to disable /. 2.0
Reply to That ||
I wouldn't know
Please tell me more about Time Cube.
I think we'll find that web surfers are the real cause of web slowdown.
My internet services costs me per megabit (yes, in this modern day and age, in a modern western country, there are people who have NO OPTION but to use an internet service with either *direct* per-megabit cost or, at a minimum, a download limit of some kind), so forcing me to view HIGH BANDWIDTH multimedia ads is stealing from me.
And I have *no choice* because there's no way to tell whether a website is covered witth 100MB of ads to download, or text-only google ads (or even none).
Seriously folks, and these mental retards in the advertising industry imagine that we're not "clicking-thru" on their ads because somehow we *did not notice* the ads.
I'd like to suggest alternate possibilities:
(never never never never never I HATE YOU)
Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
I haven't seen any for years. AdBlock Plus is your friend.
AdBlock increases my "productivity"* while surfing by substabtially increasing the speed with which web pages load, and by removing the unwanted and distracting content, allowing me to read those pages more quickly.
* In quotes as not everyone would consider surfing productive :-)
Ian Ameline
Dude - you just gave me eye cancer.
A good education is a bit like a STD - it makes you unsuitable for a lot of jobs and gives you a desire to spread it.
"Top 3 addins for privacy: Better Privacy, AdBlock Plus, and NoScript, hands down imo." - by MollyB (162595) on Monday November 30, @01:37PM (#30272526)
Per my subject line above? How about a GLOBAL solution, instead, & one that extends to ALL of your "webbound apps", instead, AND acts as "layered security" in combination with the FF/Mozilla only methods you use (which slow your browser down, use CPU cycles & more... where this solution does not & covers ALL webbound apps, globally)??
Ok, well then - Here we go, & on that note, specifically:
Here is a GOOD SOLID & GLOBAL WORK-AROUND, CALLED A HOSTS FILE!
(It works for more speed online, AND SECURITY ESPECIALLY... Also, it works for your money, because you pay for your linetime out of pocket most likely as I do, you can get back your speed, AND, gain security easily, & from a single easily edited file & a file eats no CPU cycles like a local DNS server can (& are not as security vulnerable either if you protect write access to a HOSTS file also)... Anyhow/anyways - Here goes:
SO - "that all said & aside"? Well, per your reply??
Hey - NO PROBLEM, 110% agreement here on that account... & more (like more speed online AND more security, via a SINGLE EASILY EDITED + POPULATED FILE, called a HOSTS file that extends to EVERY WEBBOUND APP YOU HAVE):
I use a custom HOSTS file, in addition to the tools others here in this thread have noted (which MANY like FF addons only really function for FireFox/Mozilla products, but don't extend globally to all other webbound applications, & that is part of what HOSTS files give you above the methods you extoll + utilize: "GLOBAL COVERAGE", & of ALL webbound apps, not just FireFox/Mozilla ones via the addons you noted + use yourself...).
HOSTS files can be used to blockout KNOWN "bad" adserves, maliciously coded sites or adbanners, and "botnet C&C servers" too!
You can obtain reliable HOSTS files from reputable lists for more security online, but also for speed!
(More on that later & WHY/HOW (I use reliable lists for that, such as these HOSTS @ Wikipedia.com -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts_file or those from mvps.org (a good one this one))
I also further populate & keep current my custom HOSTS file with up to date information in regards to all of those threats, via:
----
A.) Spybot "Search & Destroy" updates (populates HOSTS and browser block lists)
B.) Sites like ZDNet's Mr. Dancho Danchev's blog -> http://ddanchev.blogspot.com/
C.) Sites like FireEye -> http://blog.fireeye.com/
D.) SRI -> http://mtc.sri.com/
----
My HOSTS file incorporates ALL of the entries from the HOSTS files shown @ wikipedia as well... gaining me speed online (by blocking adbanners, which have been compromised many times the past few years now by malscripted exploits (examples below)).
(I combined ALL reputable HOSTS files with one of my own (30,000 entries), & I removed duplicates removed via a Borland Delphi app I wrote to do so called "APK HOSTS File Grinder 4.0++". That program also functions to change the default larger & SLOWER 127.0.0.1 blocking 'loopback adapter' IP address to either 0.0.0.0 (for VISTA/Windows Server 2008/Windows 7, smaller & thus faster than 127.0.0.1 default) or the smallest & fastest 0 "blocking 'IP ADDRESS'" (for Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 which can STILL use it (& it was added in a service pack on Windows 2000, only on 12/09/2008 MS patch tuesday was it removed for VISTA onwards (& now all these "phunny little bugs" are showing up as FLAWS in this new NDIS6 approach via WFP as well in the firewall, which ROOTKIT.COM has stated (with code too no less on how it is done) ->
MODDED: -1, Dude Needs to Chill
So Adblock plus helps to solve the technical problem, or am I wrong?
I've noticed that with Slashdot.
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
If you're using Firefox, this bug is/will be fixed in Firefox 3.6, so that it will report the correct website when things are slow.
See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=487638 for the details: "status bar blames wrong resource when downloading slow responding resource" is the title of that bug.
Dude, it's been done: Proxomitron (or privoxy on the *nix side). You could of course use NoScript, but reading between your lines I'm guessing you're a conscientious objector to that. One of Proxomitron's default HTTP filters in fact selectively blocks JavaScript per site (maybe even per page, can't recall). Even though I now rely on Firefox extensions for a lot of what Proxomitron used to do for me, I still use it for some custom site filters. And the fact that it's independent of the browser is still one of its strongest points.
huh? what? there are ads on the intertubes?
i knew there was a reason i ran adblock and noscript.
That's why I'm blocking ads right here on Slashdot, amongst many other places. If they ever fix it, I'll be more than happy to let them through.
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
"This is the main reason I use Adblock Plus. If the advertisements weren't so annoying then I wouldn't mind them, there are a few text ads I don't block because they aren't intrusive at all. But when I see flash based ads that yes could have been done with HTML or JavaScript then I block those immediately." - by anglico (1232406) on Monday November 30, @12:31PM (#30271614)
Per my subject line above? How about a GLOBAL solution, instead, & one that extends to ALL of your "webbound apps", instead, AND acts as "layered security" in combination with the FF/Mozilla only methods you use (which slow your browser down, use CPU cycles & more... where this solution does not & covers ALL webbound apps, globally)??
Ok, well then - Here we go, & on that note, specifically:
Here is a GOOD SOLID WORK-AROUND, CALLED A HOSTS FILE!
(It works for more speed online, AND SECURITY ESPECIALLY... Also, it works for your money, because you pay for your linetime out of pocket most likely as I do, you can get back your speed, AND, gain security easily, & from a single easily edited file & a file eats no CPU cycles like a local DNS server can (& are not as security vulnerable either if you protect write access to a HOSTS file also)... Anyhow/anyways - Here goes:
SO - "that all said & aside"? Well, per your reply??
Hey - NO PROBLEM, 110% agreement here on that account... & more (like more speed online AND more security, via a SINGLE EASILY EDITED + POPULATED FILE, called a HOSTS file):
I use a custom HOSTS file, in addition to the tools others here in this thread have noted (which MANY like FF addons only really function for FireFox/Mozilla products, but don't extend globally to all other webbound applications, & that is part of what HOSTS files give you above the methods you extoll + utilize: "GLOBAL COVERAGE", & of ALL webbound apps, not just FireFox/Mozilla ones via the addons you noted + use yourself...).
HOSTS files can be used to blockout KNOWN "bad" adserves, maliciously coded sites or adbanners, and "botnet C&C servers" too!
You can obtain reliable HOSTS files from reputable lists for more security online, but also for speed!
(More on that later & WHY/HOW (I use reliable lists for that, such as these HOSTS @ Wikipedia.com -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts_file or those from mvps.org (a good one this one))
I also further populate & keep current my custom HOSTS file with up to date information in regards to all of those threats, via:
----
A.) Spybot "Search & Destroy" updates (populates HOSTS and browser block lists)
B.) Sites like ZDNet's Mr. Dancho Danchev's blog -> http://ddanchev.blogspot.com/
C.) Sites like FireEye -> http://blog.fireeye.com/
D.) SRI -> http://mtc.sri.com/
----
My HOSTS file incorporates ALL of the entries from the HOSTS files shown @ wikipedia as well... gaining me speed online (by blocking adbanners, which have been compromised many times the past few years now by malscripted exploits (examples below)).
(I combined ALL reputable HOSTS files with one of my own (30,000 entries), & I removed duplicates removed via a Borland Delphi app I wrote to do so called "APK HOSTS File Grinder 4.0++". That program also functions to change the default larger & SLOWER 127.0.0.1 blocking 'loopback adapter' IP address to either 0.0.0.0 (for VISTA/Windows Server 2008/Windows 7, smaller & thus faster than 127.0.0.1 default) or the smallest & fastest 0 "blocking 'IP ADDRESS'" (for Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 which can STILL use it (& it was added in a service pack on Windows 2000, only on 12/09/2008 MS patch tuesday was it removed for VISTA onwards (& now all these "phunny little bugs" a
there are a few threads in these comments that are completely nonsensical. In the interest of full disclosure (as much as possible as an AC), I work for an ad serving company. One at a time:
1. I just block ads: This is theft, even moreso than pirating music. Bandwidth costs money. Content costs money. Servers cost money. If there are no ads, there is no revenue. If there is no revenue there are no servers, bandwidth, or content. Either put up with ads, come up with a completely new economic model whereby you can get money in return for a bit of the attention of your users, or understand you are a thief. If you're smart enough to know how ad block works you're smart enough to understand while it's theft. That applies WAAAAY more for video sites, because it costs them a LOT more for the bandwidth.
2. Ads don't run in iframes: Wake up and smell 2009 everyone. Any ad server of note serves ads in an iframe by default, even if the primary asset that is delivered to the page is javascript. The javascript checks the page and browser for capabilities, then depending on those capabilities writes a new iframe in the page. In fact, you NEED to run most modern display ads in an iframe, because otherwise a document.write can completely destroy the page it is being rendered in.
3. Ad Servers are slow because we don't care: Any ad server that will run on a marquee site has an SLA. Part of these SLA's include the maximum response time from the ad server. Gomez exists to test just this kind of thing. All manner of alarms go off if the average response time for Gomez goes up my 100 milliseconds. Ad Serving companies are technology companies (they generally do not sell ads, they only make the technology to enable them). The companies that the poster cites are not pure technology companies. There is a reason why Google acquires new technologies; they take ideas that have been incubated then turn them into a more polished commercial offering. The idea that the big technology companies are "leading the way" is a bit of self-promotion that doesn't bear scrutiny.
4. I see "waiting for xxx" on the bottom of my browser: This is an artifact of browsers. One of the more important (and misunderstood) parts of adserving is that getting the ads on the page is just the beginning. we need to report back all types of data (think along the lines of "did the user mouse over the ad?" not "what size underwear did you buy from an online merchant last year"), but in order to be polite there is no data response from the adserver. So you get a request from the browser, a 200 OK back from the server, but 0 bytes of data. Until the next HTTP connection is initiated, it's going to say "waiting for xxx" because it's already gotten the 200 OK, but doesn't realize no bytes will be returned. Something else is hanging the page in those scenarios.
This is why so many people use plug-ins like noscript and adblock plus. If your ads are annoying in any way, people will find ways to block them.
Why can't the serving of ads be done from the primary website's server?
Control.
The ad server outfit wants to control the ad content and the ad count from their end to avoid fraud by the content site owner.
If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
I am surprised that so many Slashdot users are actually waiting on ads. Why bother with them at all when you can run AdBlock, NoScript, and Flashblock to remove them? I have absolutely no qualms about doing this; the advertisers don't respect us so why should we respect them? Internet ads are for neophytes and chumps, not those with the knowledge and skill to evade them.
I run an ad blocker. My browser doesn't even do GETs on any URL that contains /ad. or doubleclick or tribalfusion or any of a whole bunch of other crap, and yours shouldn't either.
Ads are not necessary for anything, and the sooner that companies that rely on them to exist dry up and blow away, the better. Remember, the Internet existed as a superb medium for people to share information with each other BEFORE the advertising slimeballs discovered it and started exploiting it and degrading it, so as soon as you hear someone start to bleat the hypothesis that a medium needs ads to exist, or that ads are necessary to fund content, open the door, turn them to face it, and plant your foot squarely in their ass. A medium that works well to exchange information will be used for that purpose with or without ads - and the experience is always better without.
There is a very specific reason why. An ad server has a lot of decisions to make in order to serve an ad. Most importantly is deals directly with how ads are sold. ads are sold per 1000 views, and these views are coordinated over many different sites. if all these ads are cached on local servers, the publisher would be running a huge risk of serving ads that he won't be paid for (because the advertiser will only pay for the amount promised, not any extras that are served). The server that makes the decision needs to have an accurate, realtime counter in order to prevent the overdelivery problem.
Wanna post this once again?
Turn off Java, JavaScript, Plugins, etc or run programs like PithHelmet (Safari) that can even kill these selectively per web site. This greatly speeds up browsing and gets rid of all that ugly, flashing, moving junk.
Steve Gibson, is that you?
So you are saying that using a hosts file is supposed to be faster?
it lets the server deliver you content you didn't know you needed. In parallel with the content you did ask for.
Google are clearly innovating in the advert experience department.
Deleted
some of them are just impossible to get into, and there is now periodically on multiple sites from the NYT to the star tribune an IE failure when the news is fully loaded, but the ads are not... "IE cannot load the website."
folks, if these here ads are going to save the news business, we better bring back the telegraph.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
(Reposting, logged in this time.)
If you're using Firefox then this bug is/will be fixed in Firefox 3.6, so that it will report the correct website when things are slow instead of saying "Waiting for *.google-analytics.com. See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=487638 for the details; "status bar blames wrong resource when downloading slow responding resource" is the title of that bug.
If you're using other browser(s), let me know which.
Full disclosure: Google is my employer (and I care about making sure Google Analytics isn't slow).
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"no-script for the win, yet again." - by rgviza (1303161) on Monday November 30, @12:36PM (#30271676)
Per my subject line above? How about a GLOBAL solution, instead, & one that extends to ALL of your "webbound apps", instead, & NOT just to Mozilla softwares which is all your solution works for... (think IE, Outlook & other email programs even, + more), AND, the solution I propose also acts as "layered security" in combination with the FF/Mozilla only methods you use (which sadly, your methods are KNOWN to slow your browser down, use CPU cycles & more (like having bugs & security flaws in themselves too)... where this solution does not & covers ALL webbound apps, globally)??
Here is a GOOD SOLID WORK-AROUND, CALLED A HOSTS FILE!
(It works for more speed online, AND SECURITY ESPECIALLY... Also, it works for your money, because you pay for your linetime out of pocket most likely as I do, you can get back your speed, AND, gain security easily, & from a single easily edited file & a file eats no CPU cycles like a local DNS server can (& are not as security vulnerable either if you protect write access to a HOSTS file also)... Anyhow/anyways - Here goes:
SO - "that all said & aside"? Well, per your reply?? You're solutions cost CPU cycles & are KNOWN to slow down FF/Mozilla variants (as browser addons do), but... Hey - NO PROBLEM, because HOSTS files work alongside those addons too, & offer you more speed online AND more security, via a SINGLE EASILY EDITED + POPULATED FILE (called a HOSTS file):
I use a custom HOSTS file, in addition to the tools others here in this thread have noted (which MANY like FF addons only really function for FireFox/Mozilla products, but don't extend globally to all other webbound applications, & that is part of what HOSTS files give you above the methods you extoll + utilize: "GLOBAL COVERAGE", & of ALL webbound apps, not just FireFox/Mozilla ones via the addons you noted + use yourself...).
HOSTS files can be used to blockout KNOWN "bad" adserves, maliciously coded sites or adbanners, and "botnet C&C servers" too!
You can obtain reliable HOSTS files from reputable lists for more security online, but also for speed!
(More on that later & WHY/HOW (I use reliable lists for that, such as these HOSTS @ Wikipedia.com -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts_file or those from mvps.org (a good one this one))
I also further populate & keep current my custom HOSTS file with up to date information in regards to all of those threats, via:
----
A.) Spybot "Search & Destroy" updates (populates HOSTS and browser block lists)
B.) Sites like ZDNet's Mr. Dancho Danchev's blog -> http://ddanchev.blogspot.com/
C.) Sites like FireEye -> http://blog.fireeye.com/
D.) SRI -> http://mtc.sri.com/
----
My HOSTS file incorporates ALL of the entries from the HOSTS files shown @ wikipedia as well... gaining me speed online (by blocking adbanners, which have been compromised many times the past few years now by malscripted exploits (examples below)).
(I combined ALL reputable HOSTS files with one of my own (30,000 entries), & I removed duplicates removed via a Borland Delphi app I wrote to do so called "APK HOSTS File Grinder 4.0++". That program also functions to change the default larger & SLOWER 127.0.0.1 blocking 'loopback adapter' IP address to either 0.0.0.0 (for VISTA/Windows Server 2008/Windows 7, smaller & thus faster than 127.0.0.1 default) or the smallest & fastest 0 "blocking 'IP ADDRESS'" (for Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 which can STILL use it (& it was added in a service pack on Windows 2000, only on 12/09/2008 MS patch tuesday was it removed for VISTA onwards (& n
"But ads are useful." - by hey (83763) on Monday November 30, @12:40PM (#30271716)
Per my subject line above? Who are they useful to?? Webmasters leeching off users, or malware makers as well (see my p.s. below) but... I have the solution to that, & the speed that adbanners/banner ads take away from you (as well as proof of their infecting others too many times the past few years now also).
So - How about a GLOBAL solution, instead, & one that extends to ALL of your "webbound apps", instead, & NOT just to Mozilla softwares which is all browser addons soluations works for, in INDIVIDUAL BROWSERS ONLY... (Beyond FF/Mozilla stuff, or, even Opera? Think IE, Outlook & other email programs even, + more), AND, the solution I propose also acts as "layered security" in combination with the FF/Mozilla only methods many here, use (which sadly, your methods are KNOWN to slow your browser down, use CPU cycles & more (like having bugs & security flaws in themselves too)... where this solution does not & covers ALL webbound apps, globally)??
Here is a GOOD SOLID WORK-AROUND, CALLED A HOSTS FILE!
(It works for more speed online, AND SECURITY ESPECIALLY... Also, it works for your money, because you pay for your linetime out of pocket most likely as I do, you can get back your speed, AND, gain security easily, & from a single easily edited file & a file eats no CPU cycles like a local DNS server can (& are not as security vulnerable either if you protect write access to a HOSTS file also)... Anyhow/anyways - Here goes:
SO - "that all said & aside"? Well, per your reply?? You're solutions cost CPU cycles & are KNOWN to slow down FF/Mozilla variants (as browser addons do), but... Hey - NO PROBLEM, because HOSTS files work alongside those addons too, & offer you more speed online AND more security, via a SINGLE EASILY EDITED + POPULATED FILE (called a HOSTS file):
I use a custom HOSTS file, in addition to the tools others here in this thread have noted (which MANY like FF addons only really function for FireFox/Mozilla products, but don't extend globally to all other webbound applications, & that is part of what HOSTS files give you above the methods you extoll + utilize: "GLOBAL COVERAGE", & of ALL webbound apps, not just FireFox/Mozilla ones via the addons you noted + use yourself...).
HOSTS files can be used to blockout KNOWN "bad" adserves, maliciously coded sites or adbanners, and "botnet C&C servers" too!
You can obtain reliable HOSTS files from reputable lists for more security online, but also for speed!
(More on that later & WHY/HOW (I use reliable lists for that, such as these HOSTS @ Wikipedia.com -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts_file or those from mvps.org (a good one this one))
I also further populate & keep current my custom HOSTS file with up to date information in regards to all of those threats, via:
----
A.) Spybot "Search & Destroy" updates (populates HOSTS and browser block lists)
B.) Sites like ZDNet's Mr. Dancho Danchev's blog -> http://ddanchev.blogspot.com/
C.) Sites like FireEye -> http://blog.fireeye.com/
D.) SRI -> http://mtc.sri.com/
----
My HOSTS file incorporates ALL of the entries from the HOSTS files shown @ wikipedia as well... gaining me speed online (by blocking adbanners, which have been compromised many times the past few years now by malscripted exploits (examples below)).
(I combined ALL reputable HOSTS files with one of my own (30,000 entries), & I removed duplicates removed via a Borland Delphi app I wrote to do so called "APK HOSTS File Grinder 4.0++". That program also functions to change the default larger & SLOWER 127.0.0.1 blocking 'loopback adapt
All along they've been telling us that is was the porn that was dragging the Net to a halt. And now they're saying that it's all because of dumb old ads? C'mon, now, were they lying to us all along about the porn? I mean; the advertisers are all honest, upstanding businessmen (and women), aren't they? They wouldn't drag it all down with their spam^Wattractive advertising, would they?
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
I'm a little worried about that guy. It's quite possible he may give us habitual caffeine users a bad name. Host files are cool, yes, I local out most of the annoying ads myself. But with three rather long repeat posts on the subject, I kind of wish he'd stop?
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
Dear internet, I know me looking at a webpage makes no money for the host or the content provider, I don't care.
I will block ads until the following issues are fixed.
1. ads animate
1. ads play sound
2. ads take up more than 20% of the screen
3. ads scroll with the content
4. ads break up the content
5. content is split on multiple pages for the purpose of generating more ad impressions
6. ads are disguised as content
7. ads insult me by reminding me useless scammy products exist (ax body spray, mlm, get rich quick, diet pills, horoscopes, etc)
8. ads are irrelevant to the context in which they are displayed
"In this regard, AdBlock makes a significant difference if you tell it to not download ads at all, but I am not comfortable with denying revenue streams to the websites I visit, after all, they are providing me with a service I enjoy, for free." - by mr_da3m0n (887821) on Monday November 30, @12:41PM (#30271744) Homepage
Banner Ads slow you down massively, &, adbanners have been shown as infection by malware vectors too many times over the past few years now (see my p.s. below for evidence of that), &, they also cut into my linespeed I PAY FOR... that is a "no no", sorry webmaster, just a fact, that.
SO - Per my subject line above?
How about a GLOBAL solution, instead, & one that extends to ALL of your "webbound apps", instead, & NOT just to Mozilla softwares which is all your solution works for... (think IE, Outlook & other email programs even, + more), AND, the solution I propose also acts as "layered security" in combination with the FF/Mozilla only methods you use (which sadly, your methods are KNOWN to slow your browser down, use CPU cycles & more (like having bugs & security flaws in themselves too)... where this solution does not & covers ALL webbound apps, globally)??
Here is a GOOD SOLID WORK-AROUND, CALLED A HOSTS FILE!
(It works for more speed online, AND SECURITY ESPECIALLY... Also, it works for your money, because you pay for your linetime out of pocket most likely as I do, you can get back your speed, AND, gain security easily, & from a single easily edited file & a file eats no CPU cycles like a local DNS server can (& are not as security vulnerable either if you protect write access to a HOSTS file also)... Anyhow/anyways - Here goes:
SO - "that all said & aside"? Well, per your reply?? You're solutions cost CPU cycles & are KNOWN to slow down FF/Mozilla variants (as browser addons do), but... Hey - NO PROBLEM, because HOSTS files work alongside those addons too, & offer you more speed online AND more security, via a SINGLE EASILY EDITED + POPULATED FILE (called a HOSTS file):
I use a custom HOSTS file, in addition to the tools others here in this thread have noted (which MANY like FF addons only really function for FireFox/Mozilla products, but don't extend globally to all other webbound applications, & that is part of what HOSTS files give you above the methods you extoll + utilize: "GLOBAL COVERAGE", & of ALL webbound apps, not just FireFox/Mozilla ones via the addons you noted + use yourself...).
HOSTS files can be used to blockout KNOWN "bad" adserves, maliciously coded sites or adbanners, and "botnet C&C servers" too!
You can obtain reliable HOSTS files from reputable lists for more security online, but also for speed!
(More on that later & WHY/HOW (I use reliable lists for that, such as these HOSTS @ Wikipedia.com -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts_file or those from mvps.org (a good one this one))
I also further populate & keep current my custom HOSTS file with up to date information in regards to all of those threats, via:
----
A.) Spybot "Search & Destroy" updates (populates HOSTS and browser block lists)
B.) Sites like ZDNet's Mr. Dancho Danchev's blog -> http://ddanchev.blogspot.com/
C.) Sites like FireEye -> http://blog.fireeye.com/
D.) SRI -> http://mtc.sri.com/
----
My HOSTS file incorporates ALL of the entries from the HOSTS files shown @ wikipedia as well... gaining me speed online (by blocking adbanners, which have been compromised many times the past few years now by malscripted exploits (examples below)).
(I combined ALL reputable HOSTS files with one of my own (30,000 entries), & I removed duplicates removed via a Borland Delphi ap
And it's also not surprising that ad services might lag two, three or four years behind where these web technology companies are.
more like 10 years behind. Asking an Ad Vendor to provide me and my fellow developers with valid xhtml code got the response: "We only have iframe and javascript as our current available ad tags."
Brilliant people, these Ad Vendors.
"We, as ./ users, have the ability to disable advertising on ./ forums, etc. Not that this is relevant, but the rest of the world (fark, anyone?) does have serious lag time. Be thankful, guys! Back to the subject matter, though. Is this a "new" revelation? --Stak - by stakovahflow (1660677) on Monday November 30, @12:40PM (#30271720)
Untrue, & I'll show you folks here (and folks from other forums too), on how to do that, GLOBALLY (for all webbound apps you have), & easily in a simple easily edited text file called a HOSTS file...
HOSTS files yield not only more speed (in a couple ways no less), but, also FAR MORE SECURITY ONLINE too, as a bonus (& works perfectly with all browser addons, firewalls, ip security policies, you-name-it)... here goes:
Per my subject line above? How about a GLOBAL solution, instead, & one that extends to ALL of your "webbound apps", instead, & NOT just to Mozilla softwares which is all your solution works for... (think IE, Outlook & other email programs even, + more), AND, the solution I propose also acts as "layered security" in combination with the FF/Mozilla only methods many here use, & those, ONLY (which sadly, your methods are KNOWN to slow your browser down, use CPU cycles & more (like having bugs & security flaws in themselves too)... where this solution does not & covers ALL webbound apps, globally)??
Here is a GOOD SOLID WORK-AROUND, CALLED A HOSTS FILE!
(It works for more speed online, AND SECURITY ESPECIALLY... Also, it works for your money, because you pay for your linetime out of pocket most likely as I do, you can get back your speed, AND, gain security easily, & from a single easily edited file & a file eats no CPU cycles like a local DNS server can (& are not as security vulnerable either if you protect write access to a HOSTS file also)... Anyhow/anyways - Here goes:
SO - "that all said & aside"? Well, per your reply?? You're solutions cost CPU cycles & are KNOWN to slow down FF/Mozilla variants (as browser addons do), but... Hey - NO PROBLEM, because HOSTS files work alongside those addons too, & offer you more speed online AND more security, via a SINGLE EASILY EDITED + POPULATED FILE (called a HOSTS file):
I use a custom HOSTS file, in addition to the tools others here in this thread have noted (which MANY like FF addons only really function for FireFox/Mozilla products, but don't extend globally to all other webbound applications, & that is part of what HOSTS files give you above the methods you extoll + utilize: "GLOBAL COVERAGE", & of ALL webbound apps, not just FireFox/Mozilla ones via the addons you noted + use yourself...).
HOSTS files can be used to blockout KNOWN "bad" adserves, maliciously coded sites or adbanners, and "botnet C&C servers" too!
You can obtain reliable HOSTS files from reputable lists for more security online, but also for speed!
(More on that later & WHY/HOW (I use reliable lists for that, such as these HOSTS @ Wikipedia.com -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts_file or those from mvps.org (a good one this one))
I also further populate & keep current my custom HOSTS file with up to date information in regards to all of those threats, via:
----
A.) Spybot "Search & Destroy" updates (populates HOSTS and browser block lists)
B.) Sites like ZDNet's Mr. Dancho Danchev's blog -> http://ddanchev.blogspot.com/
C.) Sites like FireEye -> http://blog.fireeye.com/
D.) SRI -> http://mtc.sri.com/
----
My HOSTS file incorporates ALL of the entries from the HOSTS files shown @ wikipedia as well... gaining me speed online (by blocking adbanners, which have been compromised many ti
Considering advertising is what keeps many (most??) sites in business, if ads go away there would be a lot fewer sites to choose from. And consequently a lot less traffic. I'm all for the fast, empty Internet!
The Proxomitron runs perfectly under Wine.
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
"curl http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.txt | sudo tee -a /etc/hosts" and you're golden.
That's not what a hosts file is for. Loading it up will slow down your DNS. Also, regarding your writing, please do not EMPHASIZE certain WORDS so much, it looks like you are trying to sell people Chinese weight loss berries. We are all capable of following the cadence of what you have written without being talked down to.
"This is all necessary: they do what they MUST to get response from the ads." - by rbrander (73222) on Monday November 30, @01:52PM (#30272670) Homepage
It's NOT "necessary" @ all, & here is how you get a faster + SAFER, almost "HBO Style internet" (no commercials & slowdowns + adbanner malware infestation (yes, that happens a lot too, proof's in my "p.s." below in fact, more than just a few times)), easily, & from a SINGLE EASILY EDITED FILE!
Per my subject line above? How about a GLOBAL solution, instead, & one that extends to ALL of your "webbound apps", instead, & NOT just to Mozilla softwares which is all MOST folks' suggested solutions here today work for... (think IE, Outlook & other email programs even, + more), AND, the solution I propose also acts as "layered security" in combination with the FF/Mozilla only methods you use (which sadly, your methods are KNOWN to slow your browser down, use CPU cycles & more (like having bugs & security flaws in themselves too)... where this solution does not & covers ALL webbound apps, globally)??
Here is a GOOD SOLID WORK-AROUND, CALLED A HOSTS FILE!
(It works for more speed online, AND SECURITY ESPECIALLY...)
HOSTS files also work to YOUR ADVANTAGE, for your money, because you pay for your linetime out of pocket most likely as I do, you can get back your speed, AND, gain security easily, & from a single easily edited file & a file eats no CPU cycles like a local DNS server can (& are not as security vulnerable either if you protect write access to a HOSTS file also)... Anyhow/anyways - Here goes:
SO - "that all said & aside"? Well, per your reply?? You're solutions cost CPU cycles & are KNOWN to slow down FF/Mozilla variants (as browser addons do), but... Hey - NO PROBLEM, because HOSTS files work alongside those addons too, & offer you more speed online AND more security, via a SINGLE EASILY EDITED + POPULATED FILE (called a HOSTS file):
I use a custom HOSTS file, in addition to the tools others here in this thread have noted (which MANY like FF addons only really function for FireFox/Mozilla products, but don't extend globally to all other webbound applications, & that is part of what HOSTS files give you above the methods you extoll + utilize: "GLOBAL COVERAGE", & of ALL webbound apps, not just FireFox/Mozilla ones via the addons you noted + use yourself...).
HOSTS files can be used to blockout KNOWN "bad" adserves, maliciously coded sites or adbanners, and "botnet C&C servers" too!
You can obtain reliable HOSTS files from reputable lists for more security online, but also for speed!
(More on that later & WHY/HOW (I use reliable lists for that, such as these HOSTS @ Wikipedia.com -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts_file or those from mvps.org (a good one this one))
I also further populate & keep current my custom HOSTS file with up to date information in regards to all of those threats, via:
----
A.) Spybot "Search & Destroy" updates (populates HOSTS and browser block lists)
B.) Sites like ZDNet's Mr. Dancho Danchev's blog -> http://ddanchev.blogspot.com/
C.) Sites like FireEye -> http://blog.fireeye.com/
D.) SRI -> http://mtc.sri.com/
----
My HOSTS file incorporates ALL of the entries from the HOSTS files shown @ wikipedia as well... gaining me speed online (by blocking adbanners, which have been compromised many times the past few years now by malscripted exploits (examples below)).
(I combined ALL reputable HOSTS files with one of my own (30,000 entries), & I removed duplicates removed via a Borland Delphi app I wrote to do so called "APK HOSTS File Grinder 4.0++". That program also functions to change the
When i get attacked like that from an ad, i do my best to never do business with that company again.
Sure, my dime wont bankrupt them, but it makes me feel better, and I'm sure I'm not alone.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20021223_05_mistake.gif
This is your second wall-o-text... maybe take a hint?
Fifty watts per channel, baby cakes.
rd /s /q "%AppData%\Adobe" /s /q "%AppData%\Macromedia" /y NUL "%AppData%\Adobe\Flash Player" /y NUL "%AppData%\Macromedia\Flash Player" /y NUL "%UserProfile%\..\Default User\Application Data\Adobe\Flash Player" /y NUL "%UserProfile%\..\Default User\Application Data\Macromedia\Flash Player"
rd
md "%AppData%\Adobe"
md "%AppData%\Macromedia"
copy
copy
md "%UserProfile%\..\Default User\Application Data\Adobe"
md "%UserProfile%\..\Default User\Application Data\Macromedia"
copy
copy
I've used this for almost a year now without problem. :P
And any problem that might surface is far less then the
privacy loss from cookies
I know... I'm doing that, too! I imported my entire Firefox profile from Windows into Ubuntu, including the proxy setting, and then ran Proxomitron in Wine to finish the migration. I keep thinking about switching to privoxy and converting my filters, but why mess with what still works?
I'm quite willing to custom-hosts blacklist CSS-servers, too.
FWIW.
"My opinions are my own, and I've got *lots* of them!"
"That's not what a hosts file is for. Loading it up will slow down your DNS." - by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30, @06:22PM (#30276852)
Really? Funny, that's not what people from SECURITYFOCUS.COM said:
====
RESURRECTING THE KILLFILE:
(by Mr. Oliver Day)
http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491
PERTINENT EXCERPTS/QUOTES:
"The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long. Accessing the Internet particularly browsing the Web is actually faster now."
"From what I have seen in my research, major efforts to share lists of unwanted hosts began gaining serious momentum earlier this decade. The most popular appear to have started as a means to block advertising and as a way to avoid being tracked by sites that use cookies to gather data on the user across Web properties. More recently, projects like Spybot Search and Destroy offer lists of known malicious servers to add a layer of defense against trojans and other forms of malware."
====
Also, the folks from "SPYBOT 'Search & Destroy'" would tend to disagree with you as well, considering they have kept people safer online for YEARS (if not a decade++ by now), via populating HOSTS files, vs. KNOWN bad sites &/or servers. Top that off, with the entire mvps.org forums? I think you are NOW, "put in your place" (in the refuse heap).
APK
P.S.=> And, as far as DNS clientside caches, in Windows @ least? They're FLAWED, & I pointed this out to MS people here, + how/why as well as how to stop it occurring:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1452248&cid=30184734
AS WELL AS HOW TO GET AROUND IT (with a larger HOSTS file), easily, by cutting off the local DNS clientcache service (which is flawed because it "flakes out" with larger HOSTS files, but not once you turn it off, no longer wasting CPU cycles, RAM, or other forms of I/O running a service you clearly do NOT need, and one that IS indeed, flawed, because of its failure with larger hosts files? That goes away too, AND YOU GO FASTER ONLINE (as well as much, Much, MUCH safer today, especially today/nowadays in "the era of the poisoned adbanner & webpage")...
NOW, as far as DNS servers? Well, this ought to prove "what is what", on that note:
====
DNS PROBLEMS:
Number of Rogue DNS Servers on the Rise:
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?no_d2=1&sid=08/02/15/2118212
----
Security Researcher Kaminsky Pushes DNS Patching:
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/02/19/2322231
----
Ten Percent of DNS Servers Still Vulnerable:
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?no_d2=1&sid=05/08/04/1525235
----
TimeWarner DNS Hijacking:
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/23/2140208
----
Another DNS Flaw Found:
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/01/09/2348240
----
Attack Code Published For DNS Vulnerability:
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?no_d2=1&sid=08/07/23/231254
----
BIND Still Susceptible To DNS Cache Poisoning:
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?no_d2=1&sid=08/08/09/123222
----
DDoS Attacks Via DNS Recursion:
See subject-line above, & "rinse, lather, + repeat" (until you gain possession of some semblage of literacy, troll) - drink THAT in, & 'digest it'...
Please don't encourage him. His regular posts are bad enough w/o having to scroll over his bizarre, rambling replies.
Celebrity worship is a poor substitute for Deity worship and costs more to boot.
See subject-line above, troll. "Rinse, lather, & repeat"... too bad this "get your goat" so badly.
See - I suspect you're just another "malware maker" or "botmaster" (script kiddie wannabes is all they are) who cannot STAND that HOSTS files put miscreants like you clear out of the game, easily, & from a single file, lol... "too, Too, TOO easy".
After the evidences I put out that absolutely "trashed" your misinformed pal's rather dim-witted reply, seeing yours only makes me laugh harder... again: "too, Too, TOO EASY!"... facts & backing documentations + evidences from others DO tend to do that now, especially vs. trolls like yourselves, QUITE easily, everytime.
LOL!
APK
P.S.=> It's that, or you're just another "greedy webmaster" that doesn't like his adbanners blocked (get rid of the banner hosters that foist malwares on us via adbanners (per my original post where I had plenty of evidence to that much)? Maybe you wouldn't be in such "bad shape" then, eh?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
LOL indeed. I'm just sick of your brain-sick rambling. Don't you have some Delphi boards to troll or something?
Celebrity worship is a poor substitute for Deity worship and costs more to boot.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Is it too much to ask for CmdrTaco to take kdawson's cock out of his mouth for ONE FUCKING MINUTE to ban this tard?
ENOUGH ALREADY YOU JACKASS! WE FRIGGIN GET IT! HOSTS FILES ARE AWESOME. VISTA SUCKS.
Oh and I hope your "APK HOSTS File Grider 4.0++" wasn't much longer than "sort hosts | uniq"
See subject-line above, and if you have difficulty with reading, a suggestion might be to take some "remedial reading" courses, you know - like "hooked on phonics" (it's that, or just don't read it on your part (not that you can, because if that reply of yours is the 'best you've got' then, you're not putting on a very good showing now, are you? Nope)).
"Is it too much to ask for CmdrTaco to take kdawson's cock out of his mouth for ONE FUCKING MINUTE to ban this tard?
ENOUGH ALREADY YOU JACKASS!" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30, @08:06PM (#30277970)
They can't "ban me"... lol: I'd be back in within 2 minutes time, & the SAME WAY I beat the "10 posts per 24 hour limit" on us "Anonymous Cowards".
NOW, above all else, mind you:
I really haven't done a damned thing wrong, unless you consider spreading a good technique around a "bad thing" (which IS what a "botmaster" or "malware maker" would do in fact).
By the by - you sound like a *NIX person: That command doesn't typically exist on Windows rigs, natively, nor does it have the same parameter set... so you know. Then again though, you're apparently just another 'script kiddie botmaster' @ his 'best', lol...
APK
P.S.=> Poor little botmaster/malware maker is having a fit up there, hilarious... lol! apk
See subject-line above, troll. Can't you stay on topic, or @ least for once, get ON TOPIC?
Right alongside your pal who also replied here, & he was SO damned technically inaccurate & intentionally misleading of others, that it's NOT even FUNNY!...
(I can see that though on your part, in going "off topic", & simply because being technically accurate for a truly logically sound rebuttal on these puny "trolls'" part is beyond their lack of skills or personal knowledgebase in this art & science)
So, in parting? Well:
Hey - Thanks for making me look good, too easily, by making it SO DAMNED EASY to 'dispatch you', & with documented facts no less (as per usual, this leaves you in a typical "troll loop", in going "off topic" & attempting "ad hominem" attacks, vs. attacking the points I put out).
APK
P.S.=> Why don't you try to dispute any technical points I made? The answer??
Simple: You CAN'T (& you know it, as does anyone else here reading, because your fellow (doubtless) malware maker or botmaster tried to mislead others above & got "shot down", very fast, & is now left 'speechless'... funny that, eh?)
Man - Again, gotta say it: "too, Too, TOO EASY"... apk
Is it my fault you are "literacy challenged", & that you have nothing better to do than attempt to troll me, or, adhominem attack ME?
(The lattermost point of mine especially there @ the end, as regards ad-hominem attacks directed my way on YOUR part, clearly being in lieu of your blatant INABILITY to dispute &/or disprove ANY technical points I have made or stated above)
So, that "all said & aside"? Well, please - give up already, troll... & puh-LEEZ - DO learn to stay "on topic", m'kay??
Thank-you.
APK
P.S.=> Per my subject-line above: Yes, /., this place wouldn't be "the same", w/out the typical off-topic troll trying to 'get my goat', but instead, only making me LAUGH, & large @ that! apk
So, if you believe in this idea so strongly, create it yourself.
Just remember that you have to take into account little things like:
- fraud prevention
- interfacing with wildly varying ad servers with wildly different features and wildly different conventions for ad calls
- the need to pull inappropriate ads from the cached ad queue asynchronously
- proper reporting of ads actually delivered
- proper ad rotation, which will depend on ads have actually been delivered
- handling rotation limited ad deliveries
- different webserver environments (IIS, apache, yadda, yadda, yadda.)
- and many, many more...
Can most of this be done? Actually it is possible, although I suspect that the resulting adserver would be feature limited (remember, it needs to work across all kinds of different webservers) and there are some features that cannot be implemented without a central adserver to coordinate the data.) The end result might be something that is too complex for websites to actually implement.
One of the biggest barriers would be the website owners. They don't want to mess with their servers just so they can deliver ads. Contrast installing something to manage the cached delivery of ads pulled from some ad providers adserver vs doing something like adding two lines of javascript (one to load the ad delivery library and one to make an actual ad call.
It all seems simple until you actually have to implement it.
A tinfoil hat is fine too.
Better Privacy for Fx cleans all the flash cookies for ALL browsers, not just only for Fx.
FWIW, I use Better Privacy + TACO (http://taco.dubfire.net/) + a 2-layered, Napoleon-style tinfoil hat.
Poor ad servers and also those providing counters can kill sites. I tried to log into the flybe site to check in on line. They use another site to track traffic and this seemed to be down. As a result I could not log in. Fortunately I was able to block the site with adblock and check in.
Stupidity like this will kill some sites as many users will be on ie and will just go elsewhere.
"So you are saying that using a hosts file is supposed to be faster?" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30, @04:39PM (#30275160)
I am, but, don't just take MY word for it - take a read:
====
RESURRECTING THE KILLFILE:
(by Mr. Oliver Day)
http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491
PERTINENT EXCERPTS/QUOTES:
"The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long. Accessing the Internet particularly browsing the Web is actually faster now."
"From what I have seen in my research, major efforts to share lists of unwanted hosts began gaining serious momentum earlier this decade. The most popular appear to have started as a means to block advertising and as a way to avoid being tracked by sites that use cookies to gather data on the user across Web properties. More recently, projects like Spybot Search and Destroy offer lists of known malicious servers to add a layer of defense against trojans and other forms of malware."
====
"nuff said..."
APK
P.S.=> If my word's not "good enough", then read what others have stated (from a respected security forums no less)... &, if THAT's not enough? Take a trip to mvps.org (they produce a widely used HOSTS file) & see what their forums members have to say... & if THAT's not enough, go visit bluetack's forums, they'll do the same as I have, alongside Mr. Oliver Day of SECURITYFOCUS.COM, quoted above! apk
The fix is SIMPLE! Stop using javascript, ad servers, flash video and tons of graphics! DUH!!!!
Why are you wasting our time with your poor humor idiot? Trolls like you are what drive people away from this website.
I am not sure what those tools are but I strongly wager they entail using more cpu time than a hosts file does since it is nothing more than an easily edited textfile filter for the ip stack, and, that they also have possibilities for security vulnerabilities themselves just like dns servers were shown to have. You are wasting cpu cycles that could be used for something else. If those tools you mention are browser addons or even separate programs, since they may have security vulnerabilities themselves, then you have the option of using them in combination with hosts also for layered security.
"Dude": It's a SOMEWHAT complex topic, & I just tried to offer detail is all, along with supporting evidences + testimonials.
(That's all...)
APK
"MODDED: -1, Dude Needs to Chill" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30, @03:01PM (#30273636)
"Dude" is only telling the truth about:
----
1.) A GREAT low cost (free) technique that speeds you up & secures you @ the same time AND covers ALL webbound apps, including email & all browsers + more (let's see ANY OTHER security solution prove that theirs can do THAT)
2.) A solution for speed AND SECURITY that uses NO CPU cycles (unlike browser addons, OR, local DNS servers too, both of which have been found as security vulnerable & buggy before no less also)
3.) A solution for security & SPEED, which totally gives the USER control of this function of URL to IP address resolutions, 30-N times F A S T E R than calling out to a potentially buggy or possibly compromised remote OR local DNS server (plus, without the bugs that DNS servers have, & plenty of evidences of THAT in my 1st post here), & you will still get to sites you need to via "hardcoding in" your favorites into a HOSTS file IF dns servers "go down" or are hijacked!
4.) A solution for both security & speed that protects you online vs. threats like poisoned adbanners &/or websites, easily, from an easily edited text file (HOSTS via notepad.exe for instance, easy as pie to edit), AND, one that can speed you up too (by using hardcoded favs & blocking out adbanners for an "HBO Style"/No commercials internet)...
----
You act the troll, all you like... but, your b.s. doesn't stand up to hard evidences I supplied - period.
(SO - Beat that with a stick, troll...)
Why won't you attack my points, instead of trying "Ad-hominem attacks" upon myself (which you have)? ANSWER: Because, it's IMPOSSIBLE to attack my points, period.
(That only because EVERYTHING I said has been all thought out, & argued over with the trolls here on /. -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&cid=28672163 (with trolls like yourself, who all ended up running like the rats they are), + my points are also backed by many others of good repute, & they're just not subject to puny attacks from trolls, especially ones that clearly either do NOT know what they are talking about, OR, Trolls that are botmasters &/or malware makers, themselves..., which is what I suspect is what you & your lot, are & that YOU KNOW that HOSTS files are your doom, pal)...
APK
P.S.=> I'd like to also end this, on a little quote from a fav. film of mine:
"My name is Dr. Robert Neville. I am a survivor living in New York City. I am broadcasting on all a.m. frequencies. I will be in the south street seaport everyday at midday when the sun is highest in the sky. If you are out there, if anyone is out there, I can provide food; I can provide shelter; I can provide security -> http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=44b7ce1c3ee460d32e68cb97f2597368&showtopic=2662 . If there's anybody out there, anybody, please... you are not alone." - Dr. Robert Neville, I AM LEGEND
& that film inspired me to write that guide for securing Windows NT-based OS variants, @ the end of 2007, + for my "New Year's Resolution" for 2008, of "Do the right thing & 'pay it forward'"... &, it works.
Here though?
Well, I only suggested a SMALL part of that guide here, but a crucial & EFFECTIVE ONE, & mainly because it fits the bill here QUITE specifically & functions globally, instead of just being good for 1 set of apps only (like FF addons are only, unfortunately), & it doesn't eat CPU like those do either OR slow you down (if anything? They speed you up HUGELY, in addition to securing you too as a bonus)...apk
No Sir,
It's only "Lil' Ole ME", APK -> http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=f0aefa8221c644d6df9c0fc5595cd27a&showtopic=2662
APK
"I'm a little worried about that guy. It's quite possible he may give us habitual caffeine users a bad name. Host files are cool, yes, I local out most of the annoying ads myself. But with three rather long repeat posts on the subject, I kind of wish he'd stop? - by Nefarious Wheel (628136) on Monday November 30, @05:36PM (#30276128)
Sorry to have "annoyed you" my man, but... Well - I just felt it's IMPORTANT to let others know about a GREAT THING, in HOSTS files!
HOSTS file usage has been overlooked, AND, in lieu of what I DEFINITELY feel ARE INFERIOR SOLUTIONS, in:
----
1.) Ones that are buggy, or have been shown to be (browser addons, DNS servers, etc.)
2.) Ones that only work for SOME browsers, instead of ALL webbound apps (as HOSTS do)
3.) Ones that are harder to work with than HOSTS are (edited with any texteditor, like notepad.exe for example)
4.) Ones that are more difficult to maintain & not everyone has, like DNS servers (OR, even something like IPTables in Linux. Even THAT, another form of filter, isn't as easy or simple to manage as HOSTS files are, & IPTables doesn't exist on non *NIX boxes, so... there you go).
----
HOSTS file work, globally (across ALL of your webbound apps), & they work for better SPEED online, but more importantly, for BETTER SECURITY!
(I'd like to see ANY OTHER SECURITY SOLUTION OUT THERE STATE THAT THEY CAN DO BOTH, & from a single text file/single moving part, only...)
HOSTS files usage has been largely overlooked (& for what I consider pretty "nefarious reasons", especially in academia - if you'd like to hear my theory on this, just respond, I'll put it out) this decade is all, &, like Mr. Oliver Day (whom I cite in my 1st post you replied to) of SECURITYFOCUS.COM said?
It's "Time to Resurrect the KILL FILE"...
APK
P.S.=> In any event? You'll have to pardon my "zealotry", because it's NOT "ill-intentioned" on my part - FAR from it, in fact... apk
See subject-line, & "play it again Sam"...
":)"
APK
P.S.=> Reading, while "non-sober"? NOT "recommended for 'the masses'"... apk
See subject-line, & "rinse, lather, + repeat"... & please: DO "drink that in, & digest it"
(Gracias)
APK
"Oh and I hope your "APK HOSTS File Grider 4.0++" wasn't much longer than "sort hosts | uniq"" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30, @08:06PM (#30277970)
Besides the fact that the native version of SORT commands on Win32 platforms isn't the same syntax as those on *NIX's, as I stated earlier? My APK Hosts File Grinder 4.0++ also goes FAR beyond that command's abilities alone, in that it:
----
A.) Sorts the results & resmoves duplicates
B.) It can also change the default 127.0.0.1 to a 0.0.0.0 (next smallest + fastest & most efficient) OR, to the smallest & fastest + MOST EFFICIENT blocking address of 0 (any are optional for the user, depending on the OS he runs the HOSTS file on, & since the apps is Delphi a Linux model is available too via a quick port, thru Kylix).
C.) My program will also perform "pings" of individual sites, OR, entire LISTS of them so the user has the advantage of bypassing possibly downed or potentially compromised DNS servers, AND, getting to his/her FAV SITES, FASTER...!
(& on DNS problems? Man - I posted plenty of evidence of that going on rampantly & how/when/where/why, in my 1st post, from VERY reputable sources no less, which you replied to).
D.) My APK HOSTS File Grinder 4.0++ allows a user to go faster by not only blocking out adbanners, but also by speeding up hostname/dommainname resolutions by 30-N orders of magnitude (and, makes the user "invisible" to various means of tracking by ISP/BSP's, on their DNS request logs as well).
----
So, vs. what you said, in using the sort command on *NIX variants alone?
HEY - To do ALL of your attempts @ "adhominem attacking me", & lol, comparing your primitive commandline app (vs. a nice "point-N-click" GUI like my app has)?
Buddy - You're @ LEAST talking 2-3 programs, in PING, SORT (only *NIX sort, unless you can get ahold of a DIRECT PORT & that may mean replacing or overwriting the native sort.exe on Win32 OS, or %PATH% work etc. et al, too) & more commands!
(Vs. where I offer a nice easy to use "1 stop shopping" method from a small, fast, single moving part .exe program)
APK
P.S.=> So, so much for your "thoughts" on my program... that ought to "enlighten you" a bit, before you shoot your mouth off again, eh? apk
"Well, try to present your information in a different fashion then. I'm not saying your post isn't informative (and I certainly mean no offense against you)" - by Nathrael (1251426) on Wednesday December 02, @04:09PM (#30302580)
None taken. Believe-you-me - & heh, trust me: I wish I could make it shorter, it's just that it's NOT easy to, because there is SO much information to put out around it in citing others & more etc. et al... & more and more comes ALL THE TIME (things are pretty 'bad' out here on the 'security front' in other words, especially since around, oh, 2004 or so imo @ least).
Again though - Trust me: NO offense taken. I don't treat it like "my last will & testament", nor a "legal correspondence". I only treat it as information that fellow human beings, on forums that share similar interests (e.g.-> in "things technical" on PC's) might appreciate, & especially IF they're unaware of it is all.
I.E.-> "The more the merrier" on HOSTS files I figure, because they are easily obtained (everyone has one basically but its unused like a human appendix sort of, lol), and they're easily edited & maintained, & they are TRULY effective for both speed gains, bu more importantly today (especially nowadays & for the past few years now), for SECURITY ONLINE.
See, a few years back (professionally things have gotten bad, & usually I am in a network admin or programming role typically for the past 16++ yrs. on the job, not lately though due to offshoring + where I live (lol, the WORST CITY in the nation for IT jobs, literally, or in the top 3 iirc)) & because of that? Well, I spent the better part of a year a few years back figthing malware makers & their machinations, & saw how furious it made customers (regular joe types usually) & yes, I felt for they. I had been hit, ONCE, in the year 1994-1995 on IRC, & that made me understand them clearly enough. I am actually GLAD of the experience, because this guide;
----
HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003/VISTA/Windows Server 2008 & even Windows 7, via CIS Tool Guidance (& beyond, + make it 'fun-to-do'):
http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=4faefcdbf75ce17d619668dd005213f7&showtopic=2662
----
That guide was my "New Year's Resolution" in 2008, to "do the right thing & 'pay it forward'" basically... & because of that job experience, that guide came of it - it's currently the 'owner' of nearly the TOP 50 spots consecutively online on GOOGLE & other search engines when you search for:
"HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP"
etc., & it has currently topped 250,000++ views worldwide across 15/20 forums its on where it was usually made an "Essential Guide", or "Sticky/Pinned Thread" or rated "5/5 stars" etc. et al to GOOD reviews (mostly, except for the occasional trolls, lol)... the nicest part is testimonials like this one though about it, once others have applied its points, to their own rigs, to their families + friends & even PAYING customers, such as this fellow had:
----
http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28430
PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:
"...recently, months ago when you finally got this guide done, had authorization to try this on simple work station for kids. My client, who paid me an ungodly amount of money to do this, has been PROBLEM FREE FOR MONTHS! I haven't even had a follow up call which is unusual. Now I don't recommend this for the average joe, but it if can work for a kids PC it can work for anything! Now, i substituted OpenDNS and activated the Adult Content filter with them for this kids computer. I know its not perfect, but will catch over 99.5% of said sites."
and
offtopic, offtopic, offtopic!
You're off topic... maybe take a hint (and try the "english grammar critic forums section" here (Oh that's right: There isn't one of those here, now is there)?