Adblock Plus Can Now Be Rolled Out To Every Single Employee In a Company

New submitter Mickeycaskill writes: Adblock Plus adds large scale deployment (LSD) to version 1.9 of its software, allowing IT managers to block adverts on thousands of computers in one go, months after a German court ruled the practice was legal. The move is likely to concern online publishers who rely on advertising to generate revenue.

Comments

It's not the adverts in themselves

[Anonymous Coward]

but the fact that you smear them all over my face, and that I can't connect to just YOUR website, but I effectively connect to fifteen OTHER sites to download scripts, just to make YOUR website run correctly. I use Ghostery and Ad-Block not because I am against advertising, but because I want a leaner and more tolerable web.

I understand the web is more complex today than a decade ago, but there MUST be a way to make today's websites better in these regards.

Re:It's not the adverts in themselves

[Anonymous Coward]

You think keeping identical copies of the same scripts on thousands of different web servers rather than centrally located them for ease of maintenance and storage is an IMPROVEMENT?

Re:It's not the adverts in themselves

[Anonymous Coward]

Structure them in a way that they cannot be used as an attack vector and only then will I think about removing AdBlock. No Flash, no Java, and if you assault my eyes with flashing GIFs and CSS fly-overs, I'm taking my eyeballs and money elsewhere.

Re:It's not the adverts in themselves

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, because that's not my problem.

My problem is trusting all those 3rd party sites I've never heard of that are being invited by the one website I'm interested in to download javascript to my computer.

Besides, ease of maintenance and storage also means raising the value of single target.

Re:It's not the adverts in themselves

[Runaway1956]

Yes, of course it is. If I'm browsing YOUR site, then I've implied that I have some trust in YOUR site. Cross site scripting demands that I also trust those other ten, twenty, fifty, or maybe even thousand other sites. If you demand that kind of trust, then I don't need your site. Drive-by installation of malware is far to common for us to trust all those unidentified sites.

Re:It's not the adverts in themselves

[DickBreath]

I think advertisers SHOULD NOT BE RUNNING CODE on my computer.

If you must show me an ad, that's one thing. To ask to run code on my computer is quite something else. Malware has been spread through ad networks, and I promise you it will be again. And again.

Advertisers have only themselves to blame that people block ads. At first web ads were more than tolerable. I was happy to see them, knowing they paid the bills. Then it got worse. And worse. Sites started having tiny bits of content surrounded by ads and you had to click the Next button twenty times to read a ten paragraph article that turns out to be devoid of real information. And other things I could go on about.

Online publishers ought to be careful of the ad networks they get into bed with. Those ad networks should be careful about the actual advertisers. Some of these ads are outright deceptive -- trying to imitate the look of a dialog box on a certain widely used OS. That kind of clever behavior turns out to be bad for ALL advertisers in the long run.

I did say I actually liked the idea that ads paid the bill in the early days. Now I view ads as a wretched hive of scum and villainy. Many of the advertisers have absolutely no sense of shame or restraint. They would tattoo advertisements to the insides of our eyelids if they could. Yes, really.

Re:It's not the adverts in themselves

[DickBreath]

Yes that!

Deliver ads as a set of pixels, and then, and only then, I might begin to trust advertisers enough to let their pixels on to my screen.

Re: It's not the adverts in themselves

[Anonymous Coward]

I've always wondered whether the extremely intrusive ads actually get more clicks (at least intentional ones).

For me, at least, I go into "kill it with fire" mode whenever something intrusive pops up, or over, or starts playing sounds and I rarely even pay attention to what the ad is about. It is a knee-jerk "kill it!" response.

Then you have the "Adwords" where they not only turn words in the page into hyperlinks, but cause popups on mouse over. These turn an article into an advertisement "mine-field" for your mouse cursor.

Re:It's not the adverts in themselves

[DickBreath]

Advertisers eventually ruin everything.

I gave up on Cable TV. It is now less than 1/2 content and more than 1/2 ads. And then the ads intrude into the program you are trying to watch with stupid bugs and animated people walking on the bottom 1/4 of your screen. Sometimes they obscure something important in the content of the program. At the same time the content has deteriorated to the point that it is not even worth watching. And content not worth watching definitely means the ads are not worth watching.

Now that was off topic, but then there is the web. Will it turn out the same way? Maybe not because there are no central 'broadcasters'. There can be good sites with good ads and good advertisers who can behave decently and sell products through the ad views they get.

Re:It's not the adverts in themselves

[Anonymous Coward]

Now that was off topic, but then there is the web. Will it turn out the same way?

As I get older it is more readily apparently than ever that 99% of all human endeavor is misguided. People really don't have any idea what they are doing, but through some quirk in brain chemistry they think they do. Delusional thinking isn't just for mental patients; it's a defense mechanism that allows us to cope with an increasingly absurd existence.

There is still a place for intelligent advertisers; the ones that provide entertaining and informative material that people will actually enjoy seeing. But that material is buried so far down the dung heap of distracting ads that it matter not a bit to intelligent people. Those are the ones who have disabled ads permanently and completely.

Re: It's not the adverts in themselves

[Anonymous Coward]

Especially when squid and either squid guard or dansguardian can already do this in one place... AND limit more than just ads... AND save bandwidth through caching. Add have and you get virus scanning too.

Re:It's not the adverts in themselves

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree, and would add that advertizers should PAY ME if they want screen real estate on my computer. If I was running a company I would certainly not allow advertizers to stick billboards up in the hallways. If advertizers are throwing stuff at my employees on my dollar, they should again - PAY ME.

The 'clever' marketers did this to themselves. In any case, people are becoming hard-wired to ignore advertizing and signage in general. For myself, the louder your ads the less I will think of your product, and if you come door-2-door or cold call my home you are doomed to the boycott list.

Re:It's not the adverts in themselves

[vlad30]

If content providers had some sort of person in charge of which ads were on there sites like tv stations and newspapers had in the early days (yes there was a time they considered their reputations) but all they care about is revenue gained and rely on automated scripts to supply appropriate ads for there site from the ad network, this however doesn't work very well. Additionally Organisations like Advertising Standards Bureau (Australia) have no reach on the web and can't enforce ads from other countries to disappear.

Additional reason for Adblock - Children I hate when my kids see an advert on internet or tv as most ads are not appropriate for them and when they inevitably click on them all sorts of crap happens to the computer coupled with the kids screaming, adblock is one thing I gratefully install.

Re:It's not the adverts in themselves

[Bite The Pillow]

A coworker got infected by visiting a reputable programming reference site. He didn't know, and virus scan didn't pick it up. Other employees did get detected malware from the same site, so the security folks examined everyone who visited the site, and detected an anomaly.

Our security settings do not allow us to disable scripting in Internet Explorer, which is the only allowed browser. Nor Flash, because it's needed for training.

This is not hypothetical, and security best practice does not solve the problem. Because best practice should be to only enable scripting when absolutely needed, and that should be never.

I realize web 2.0 has a lot to offer, and I have no issues enabling worthwhile content. Slideshows no. Loading chrome and doing everything else by script no. Crapping out a bunch of absolutely positioned DIVs and fixing up the UI with script, no. But only your site, no advert business, nothing external.

There's a NOSCRIPT option for a reason, and your server should be able to inject a dynamic IMG SRC in that section unless you really don't deserve advertising money.

Re:It's not the adverts in themselves

[amber_of_luxor]

Take a look at the adds that fans have uploaded to YouTube sometime.

I seriously doubt that the only clicks those videos are getting, are from people who want to see what commercials in other countries are like.

Re:It's not the adverts in themselves

[iMadeGhostzilla]

Ah everything is code. Even jpeg data is a sequence of instructions for the jpeg decoder FSM. Therefore nothing from the advertisers should run on my computer! But in seriousness, I agree. I think though that channel is doomed, exhausted forever. On the PC, I run noscript and adblock. On the phone, if I can't close an intrusive ad in half a second I close the page. I downloaded a stupid puzzle game (research, I swear) for the phone and the game asked me mid-play. "interested in annuities?" That's sheer desperation. It's game over for ads. (Uninstalled the game a second later.) The only "ad" I remember clicking on in years -- when I wasn't searching for something to buy on Amazon or Google -- is ArsTechnica's "tech deals" post. And the difference between us and non-tech folks is they are only slightly more patient waiting for the ads to be over b/c they don't know they have the technology that could bypass the ads. Only the outliers click and outliers' outliers buy. And the multibillion empires like FB seem to be based on the premise that there are enough of the latter.

Great timing

[Anonymous Coward]

The video ad at above this summary is larger than the summary block is.

Re:Great timing

[johanw]

What video ad? :-)

Re:Great timing

[Anonymous Coward]

mega LOL

Ugh

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

I'm not looking forward to this arms race. Close one door with advertisers, they open a new one that's more obnoxious.

Re:Ugh

[Blue Stone]

Ad blocking was born in response to the arms race advertisers launched (and lets be fair here, also the websites that hosted them) where their ads became increasingly intolerable, obnoxious, disturbing and disruptive (to simple reading comprehension, never mind anything else). This behaviour *necessitated* a response; intitially simple pop-up blockers (now integrated into browsers AS STANDARD!) and gradually moving forward.

If anything, we've seen a lull in hostilities for the past few years as ad blockers have proved very successful, limited only by their install base.

The next round will probably involve websites refusing to show content until adblocking software is disabled (seen here and there already) and if/as this becomes more prevalent, ad blockers responding with stealthing mechanisms.

Since users ultimately own the rendering device, I'm not certain the advertisers can ever win. And god knows, they lost the moral argument long, long ago.

Re:Ugh

[stoned_ritual]

The industry workaround for "owned rendering devices" is in licensing the use of the rendering device, but ownership will not be given, expressed or implied in the new EULA on your smartphone contract. Actually, I'm curious as to how that works out currently, with people effectively renting their devices from service providers, how much ownership of the device can you actually claim?

Re:Ugh

[Anonymous Coward]

I am all for sites blocking if the ads don't show.

I can then make a choice, is this site WORTH the adverts or WORTH paying for.

Most sites are for entertainment value and if they die or I can't get access, too bad, no great loss.

I will STILL be able to go to Amazon,Alibaba,RadioSpares, etc etc etc and buy stuff, the stores which sell physical/useful stuff will still be there, however the clickbait sites who's sole income is from adverts will eventually die.

Re:Ugh

[Anonymous Coward]

I see you've just identified the need for free and open hardware. I agree. There is a lot money to be made giving consumers what they really want.

The short term money is now obtained from fucking consumers at every turn. The long term money is giving customers what they really need.

I get that ads are nessesary for websites...

[Anonymous Coward]

But there's too many malware/spyware disguised as ads out there.(also when you go and download something and there's like 50 download "buttons" on the page... find the right one..)
We can't take a chance anymore. Until I installed adblock on my aunt's computer, I had to do a malware clean up every weeks, with dozens of results each time. Now I do a cautionary one once every few months and nothing is ever found... her usage hasn't diminished either, it's all because she doesn't get all the bad ads anymore.

The few bad apples in the basket resulted in us throwing the entire basket out of the window.

Re:I get that ads are nessesary for websites...

[grimmjeeper]

The few bad apples in the basket resulted in us throwing the entire basket out of the window.

Yeah, it's sad that 95% of the ads out there had to ruin it for the rest of them. ;)

Contributor

[MSG]

I wonder if AdBlock should refer people to alternative means of supporting web sites that publish useful content. I'd like to see something like Contributor gain widespread acceptance.

https://www.google.com/contrib...

I used to work for Broadcom

[Anonymous Coward]

They used ad-blocking at the corporate firewall. No local plugins needed.

Re:I used to work for Broadcom

[DickBreath]

That is a real shame.

It would seem better to use ad-blocking at all the major internet backbones and interconnection points.

Re:wait... Illegal?

[Anonymous Coward]

legal

Re:wait... Illegal?

[Anonymous Coward]

"after a German court ruled the practice [of adblocking] was legal"

What's Going On?

[Anonymous Coward]

So, the article seems to be mostly an opinion piece about the German court's finding.

To the best of my ability, it seems that LSD(such a terrible acronym) is still just a development goal, not a shipping product/feature/option. Am I misunderstanding this?

I'd love to be able to be able to push preconfigured ADP via group policy for IE, Firefox and Chrome. Post deployment configuration via Group Policy would be a fine secondary option as well.

Who gives a FUCK what a court says?

[Anonymous Coward]

For more than a century, US courts at every level said slavery was fine, and represented the wishes of 'god'. The same courts stated that since slaves were 'property', their masters had the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to rape them, no matter what the age of the slave.

Dice constantly tells you BETA MORONS that 'morality' is that thing defined by a US court. The articles chosen for promotion here lay down this rule, when not demonising Iran or Russia or lionising Israel.

Courts and laws are a PRAGMATIC construct at best- not any form of absolute search for fundamental truths. Only Betas allow such things to over-ride their own internal morality.

AdBlock blocks DISGUSTING abuses by the on-line advertising companies, and most people who installed the blocked did so NOT on 'principle' but because the egregious and frequently ILLEGAL assault on one's computer had become too much to accept. Major newspaper and technical outlets have served HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of copies of MALWARE to their visitors, for instance, using the excuse that the people contracted to provide the ads had allowed the malware through. Not one entity serving malware via ads it financially benefits from has ever been punished in court.

When AdBlock went to court against various media outlets, it wasn't 'us vs them', as you Betas are told. 'WE' didn't get a 'victory' in court. NO- AdBlock was supported by another, even more powerful group of corporate entities - entities of the lowest morality possible (like Google) who fear a public backlash if unregulated ad abuses continue to multiply online.

Google wants local, UNBLOCKABLE ad serving, where the ads are seemlessly incorporated into editorial content. This plan is the next generation of online advertising, and a natural progression of the technology. Today's ads are like the separate INSERTS in a newspaper. Tomorrow's ads will be like the ads printed in the newspaper itself.

When an ad looks like editorial content, it becomes hard to impossible to have an automatic script that identifies ad content. If the page is dynamic, it is hard even for the user to inform the browser of the ad area. Of course, I wouldn't block ads myself if they behaved themselves, took near zero CPU/RAM/GPU resources and owned only an acceptable portion of the screen (and did not track me). Google wants to address all these issues BUT tracking- but Google wants the tracking to be so invasive, it cannot be stopped anyway.

Re: Who gives a FUCK what a court says?

[Z00L00K]

Usually the ads are provided in distingushable elements anyway, likendiv elements with specific ids or classes.

Re:Who gives a FUCK what a court says?

[amber_of_luxor]

>When an ad looks like editorial content, it becomes hard to impossible to have an automatic script that identifies ad content

There is/was an extension for Firefox that identified opinion pieces as third party advertising masquerading as an opinion piece.

The surprising thing was how much content on "news" sites was third party advertising, masquerading as a "reliable news source".

Good security impact

[Anonymous Coward]

As an IT manager I would be interested in something like that that helps protect my users from themselves. I suspect that blocking or reducing Internet advertising would cut down on Malware that seems to infect the computers of even my most savvy users and consume so many of my resources. Obviously content requires funding and without profit content will evaporate, but the final answer is probably somewhere closer to having trusted/whitelisted advertising channels. Channels that have basic standards like no blinking "Click here for you download" when the page contains actual download links.

Roll Out

[Translation Error]

Oh, so now it's possible to roll out Adblock Plus? I wonder what I've been doing by requiring the plug in via the Google administrative template in group policy.

Though, it might be nice to suppress the initial run page, which seems to be what the article is actually praising.

Re:Roll Out

[Anonymous Coward]

Been doing it since the 80's with hosts files (they do more than adblock) updating from a server to a WAN endpoints all over this planet from a fairly simple script that operates on a cron job schedule automatically for me.

Re:Roll Out

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, so now it's possible to roll out Adblock Plus? I wonder what I've been doing by requiring the plug in via the Google administrative template in group policy.

Though, it might be nice to suppress the initial run page, which seems to be what the article is actually praising.

The chromium wiki is quite crap about describing how to do it step-by-step, but I have been auto-installing a local copy of ublock with chromium and bypassing the initial loading page on each invocation.

ublock auto-installs from local copy of .crx and .json that are placed in /usr/share/chromium/extensions. cjpalhdlnbpafiamejdnhcphjbkeiagm.json contains path to the ublock cjpalhdlnbpafiamejdnhcphjbkeiagm.crx in the same directory:

{
        "external_crx": "/usr/share/chromium/extensions/cjpalhdlnbpafiamejdnhcphjbkeiagm.crx",
        "external_version": "0.9.7.5"
}

Where ublock crx is downloaded using wget as follows:

HASH=$1
wget -O $HASH.crx "https://clients2.google.com/service/update2/crx?response=redirect&prodversion=38.0&x=id%3D$HASH%26installsource%3Dondemand%26uc"

The following /etc/chromium/master_preferences lets me skip initial run page.

{
    "distribution": {
          "import_bookmarks": false,
          "import_bookmarks_from_file": "/etc/chromium/initial_bookmarks.html",
          "skip_first_run_ui": true,
          "make_chrome_default": false,
          "make_chrome_default_for_user": false,
          "create_all_shortcuts": false,
          "show_welcome_page": false,
          "oem_bubble": false,
          "import_search_engine": false,
          "import_home_page": false,
          "import_history": false,
          "suppress_first_run_bubble": true
    },
    "browser": {
          "show_home_button": true,
          "check_default_browser" : false
    },
    "bookmark_bar": {
          "show_on_all_tabs": false
    },
    "homepage": "chrome://version",
    "homepage_is_newtabpage" : false,
    "first_run_tabs": [ "chrome://version" ],
    "session": {
        "startup_urls": [ "chrome://version" ]
    }
}

flash driven ad's suck

[Anonymous Coward]

flash driven ad's suck they can suck your ram and cpu.

Re:flash driven ad's suck

[DickBreath]

While I agree with your sentiment, the word you are looking for is 'bite'.

flash driven ads bite

For example those unwanted "Video Bytes" inserts on Slashdot which should be titled "Video Bites".

Re: Expect the Republicans to put an end to this

[Anonymous Coward]

RIGHT. Its only Republicans who are interested in money. Just more idiotic mindless comments brought to you from the caring folks on the left coasts.

It's practical business sense.

[Anonymous Coward]

Ads are threats. They eat resources just waiting for them to be displayed even if benign. EVERY EMPLOYER has a benefit in getting rid of them entirely, with few exceptions if any.

The fact that it's free, that just drives home the point.

Why?

[Lumpy]

Block at the firewall/server.

http://www.privoxy.org/

Re: Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

My thoughts exactly. Most companies of any size use proxies.

What about their "acceptable" ads?

[johanw]

Adblock Plus defaults to letting some ads pass. Can admins block those by default as well on a large scale deployment?

Boo hoo ...

[gstoddart]

The move is likely to concern online publishers who rely on advertising to generate revenue.

Boo fucking hoo.

If the ad industry is going to be a vector for malware, then too damned bad. Inside the corporate firewall, the integrity of the systems is all that matters, and your damned ad revenue isn't even relevant.

Yes, your model says you'll make money from ads. But nobody is under any obligation to view your damned ads.

Don't like people skipping your ads? Make it a subscription site with login required.

Between the security risks, and the privacy implications, I will block any and all ads for as long as I have the technology to do so.

There are 8 domains just on this page as I type this whose sole purpose for being embedded in this page is advertising revenue. And that's not my damned problem.

I would love to see more corporate firewalls just straight up blocking ads. Corporations would probably have far less viruses and security problems.

Re:Boo hoo ...

[Ash-Fox]

If the ad industry is going to be a vector for malware, then too damned bad. Inside the corporate firewall, the integrity of the systems is all that matters, and your damned ad revenue isn't even relevant.

The Internet is a vector for malware, you should filter out the entire Internet.

Re:Boo hoo ...

[gstoddart]

Well, start small ... block ads, ignore sourceforge, disable Flash, block javascript.

That probably covers a lot of it.

Re:Boo hoo ...

[drinkypoo]

I would love to see more corporate firewalls just straight up blocking ads. Corporations would probably have far less viruses and security problems.

Last time I checked, squid with ad-blocking was nowhere near as graceful about removing the content as Adblock plus. I have done the whole transparent squid proxy thing before though, and it's pretty cool. If I were running a corporate network today, I'd certainly do the same. It's simple enough to provide an unfiltered proxy port to the users who need unfettered access and can handle their own blocking.

Re:Boo hoo ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps the next time an infected ad causes havoc on a corporate network they send the ad company the clean up bill and see how they respond to that.

Why would we even want this?

[AnonymousOfCourse]

I don't think I understand why IT managers would want to install software that blocks only a part of the ads of websites which don't pay the company behind Adblock to be whitelisted. If you do value the websites you visit and understand they need to get some revenue, do you want to have that website to have to pay pay the company behind Adblock a third of the revenue just to let their ads go through? Won't that just make the websites have to put up more ads? Do you trust Adblock enough not to fall for bribes that will make their software capture and send your personal browsing history to 'selected bussiness partners', or to become a new malware distribution provider? Is this crappy software the best our community can invent to both get websites some revenue and at the same time avoid the in-your-face ads?

Re:Why would we even want this?

[Anonymous Coward]

My personal browsing history doesn't exist, as I've taken advantage of tuning Firefox's about:config to ensure nothing exists. No DOM storage, no cookies, no JS traces, no CSS visited links, no media peerconnect, no history of any kind. I've been doing this for years and in concert with Disconnect and other tools, it works very well. In addition, I'm considering setting up a Linux server that acts as an ad-blocking/beacon/tracking blocking proxy I can point all my devices to so as to not have to set up this stuff on every device. Simple: cheap domain name, unlimited bandwidth cheap Webhosting plan, a couple of hours on a Saturday afternoon, share with friends because friends don't let friends see ads whilst surfing.

Re:Why would we even want this?

[Darinbob]

Because blocking some of the ads is better than no blocking at all. For a supposedly evil whitelist, I have never once seen an ad show up with Adblock Plus.

Damnit, AdBlock

[StikyPad]

The only reason you work is because most people don't use you. Success is the shortest path to failure, because websites *will* find another way to serve ads, whether it's through an EULA or randomizing/obfuscating the references to ads, or even serving the pages as images. Please stop trying to become more popular.

Re:Damnit, AdBlock

[netsavior]

websites *will* find another way to serve ads, whether it's through an EULA or randomizing/obfuscating the references to ads, or even serving the pages as images.

I would be happy about an ad strategy that doesn't break the pages I want to browse. If they come up with an alternative to current ad strategies that doesn't result in accidental malware attacks and autoplay videos and flash animations, I will be too lazy to block it.

Adblock plus is pretty much the most effective antivirus on the market, even though that isn't even their intent, and that is the primary reason I use it.

Re:Damnit, AdBlock

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, you mean like Micro$oft wanting to install malware on your computer to serve ads to your browser? Sorry, but I liked the Internet a lot better before corporations ruined it with their ads! I get to decide what I see on MY computer! I PAID for this computer. Its MINE. I am the only one who gets to control what I see on MY screen, and what is installed on MY computer! End of argument! And I don't care who might decide that they think blocking ads is immoral or illegal! NO ONE can tell me that corporations have any right to force me to see their ads!

Re: Expect the Republicans to put an end to this

[Anonymous Coward]

"Its only Republicans who are interested in money" -No, just selling out cheaply.

DuckDuckGo

[dltaylor]

When I switched to DuckDuckGo, I was prompted, very politely, to allow their advertising. I whitelisted that site ONLY, and, so far, have not been burned by them (reasonably well-targeted ads, clearly identified, without visual or audible noise, and, AFAICT, no malware).

You want a site whitelisted? Treat me with respect.

This is about "Adblock Plus" not "AdBlock"

[xenoc_1]

Seriously folks, pay some attention to the name of the product and what it means. It's stuff that matters.

"AdBlock": A Chrome, and later other platform, ad blocking extension that has nothing whatsoever to do with "Adblock Plus" either in terms of codebase or project history.

"Adblock Plus" (note no MixedCase): The increasingly-monetizing adblocker which is owned and marketed by for-profit company Eyeo, that Wladimir Palant created to make money with the open source adblocker he took over as maintainer years ago, but did not create. The one that takes money from advertisers to whitelist so-called "Acceptable Ads" and has that feature turned on by default, so most non-techies see ads from Eyeo customers.

"adblock": Not a product at all but a generic term for an advertising, and sometimes also privacy, blocking extension for browsers. There are many competing products which might be generically called "adblock".

"adblocker" A more obviously generic term for the set of "adblocker" products that include, among many others, AdBlock, Adblock Plus, Adblock Edge, Bluhell Firewall, uBlock, uBlock Origin.

"Adblock" One of, if not the, earliest adblocking extensions for Firefox. Long obsolete, it was the inspiration for, and partially the codebase for the first version, of Adblock Plus. The maintainer of AdBlock (note the MixedCase) also claims Adblock is an inspiration for AdBlock but is no part of its codebase.

The article is about only Adblock Plusâ from Eyeo Inc. Which has the most commercialized, most cooperative with advertisers, and some including me would say, most skeevy business model of any of the major adblocker. Though the drama around the creator of uBlock forking it to "uBlock Origin" and the massively overlarge donation-begging by the new uBlock owners are some evidence that new-uBlock is pretty skeevy too. Which is why this tablet has uBlock Origin running in Firefox.

Re:This is about "Adblock Plus" not "AdBlock"

[drinkypoo]

The one that takes money from advertisers to whitelist so-called "Acceptable Ads" and has that feature turned on by default,

And I say unto thee: wah. It's not difficult at all to turn off. Meanwhile Adblock Plus also makes ad-blocking easier on Android these days... and you can turn off acceptable ads there, too. And it provides a proxy service, so you don't have to see banner ads in apps either, for the most part.

It's really hard to get people incensed about a checkbox. If he starts bundling the Ask.com toolbar, you'll see the revolt you're looking for.

Re:This is about "Adblock Plus" not "AdBlock"

[Anonymous Coward]

The "Acceptable Ads" in AdBlock Plus option can be toggled off in, like, 3 clicks. There's always the fork, AB Edge, if it really is that much of a problem to make those changes.

AdBlock, the one on Chrome, on the other hand, is a sketchy one, as it isn't open sourced any longer, and doesn't have enough transparency, and Ghostery, which has some affiliations with ad statistic companies.

This will sound trite, but using host files to block may be the most effective. Ads are blocked at a relatively low level, and it's customizable, too.

Re:This is about "Adblock Plus" not "AdBlock"

[xenoc_1]

And I say unto thee, "RTFP". I explicitly noted that with this: "has that feature turned on by default, so most non-techies see ads from Eyeo customers."

Wherein I made clear that most non-technical users, which are not most of us Slashdot members, will leave it as-is. Implied, and from years of experience with non-technical users, because non-techies don't know/don't understand how/are afraid, to change anything from "normal".

Which means that Eyeo, Inc. continues to create a big user base of "pay for play" payola opportunities to sell to Google, Amazon, and other ad networks. And indeed they do sell the right to be listed as "Acceptable Ads" - it's right on their website, buried in weasel-words but there, and it's been in plenty of news articles about them. You do the DuckBingGoogle if you want cites of sites. Yes, the small guys, like my blog or yours, can probably get listed as "Acceptable" for free, and Eyeo will have a big public discussion on each and every one of those on their site, because, "transparency". But the details of the huge moneyflows from Google et al will not be there.

Here's the thing: Ad blockers are not default in any browser nor as part of any operating system. Which means that anyone who installs an ad blocker has already made an affirmative choice to block ads. That means it's contrary to common sense and clearly against the desire of the user, for any "ad blocker" to have a default setting that deliberately allows ads - ANY ads.

Unless, of course, the "user" AKA "the customer" is NOT the person who installs the adblocker. Unless that person is the product. And for Eyeo, the person using Adblock Plus is no longer the user/customer, they are the "product" - the eyeballs being sold to their real customer, the companies that pay Eyeo to be part of the "Acceptable Ads" program.

It's not "you can just turn it off". It's how the very concept of a partially non-blocking adblocker, and a very non-transparent financial arrangement between Eeyo and "BigAdNetworks", is inherently contrary to the baseline concept and user case for an adblocker.

Obviously I didn't need somebody to lecture me about the existing of Adblock Edge, or the ABP checkbox, or the other various adblocking options, when I put references to such things right in my post.

And for the record, in the years of using Adblock Edge, its brief predecessor Adblock Light, the pre-Acceptable Ads Adblock Plus, and since this month, uBlock and now after reflection on their ethics, uBlock Origin instead, I have and continue to un-block many sites, specific third-party networks, major affiliate-link trackers such as Amazon Associates, Commission Junction, Shareasale, Linkshare, etc., so that small webmasters and some large websites who aren't eyebleed-inducing, can get some potential monetization from my use. I even sometimes go back to look for and click through an ad of specific interest, or via a site's affiliate link, to a product/service I'm considering buying. I also run a few affiliate link ads on some of my own sites - and make sure I do nothing to force people to unblock them. In fact, I suggest adblockers and privacy blockers right in the privacy policy on my sites.

Difference between that and the skeevy policies of Adblock Plus/Eyeo: Transparency and full choice. Choice on my part as to ads I want to see, choice on visitors to my sites on how they can not see ads and not get into my analytics. No pay-for-play, no whitelisting decisions made for somebody else.

Anybody who can't see the difference is either a) brainwashed, b) a sockpuppet for the ad industry, c) a sockpuppet for Eyeo/Adblock Plus (which really is part of the ad industry at this point), or d) naïve.

Ghostery, Inc is totally open and fully upfront about their connection to the advertising industry. And their not-quite-equivalent feature is OPT-IN, rather than OPT-OUT.

AdBlock (Chrome) as far as I know was never really Open Source - it was one-time-nag (install-time) donationware but not with a "libre" li

Which Adblock Plus?

[Anonymous Coward]

There seem to be multiple extensions that bill themselves as "Adblock plus". Which one is the legitimate one?

Re:wait... Illegal?

[Anonymous Coward]

after a German court ruled the practice was legal

I think you misread that part.

I'd Like the Old Internet Back Please

[lazarus]

I don't care what happens to websites that rely on advertising revenue to stay alive. I preferred the "web" when the content was provided by enthusiasts, not corporate clowns. And yes, that definitely includes this web site.

I don't feel even the slightest bit of shame for blocking ads. You use technology against me. I'll use it against you.

Re: I'd Like the Old Internet Back Please

[Anonymous Coward]

Good luck with that!

Re:I'd Like the Old Internet Back Please

[thegarbz]

I preferred the "web" when the content was provided by enthusiasts, not corporate clowns.

You mean the tiny web with less content which was more difficult to find and for the most part had a lack of common content aggregation beyond (and I'm throwing up in my mouth as I type this) web rings?

No thanks. I'll take today's web with a basic adblocker any day. The internet was orders of magnitude less useful when run by enthusiasts because quite frankly a lot of people don't share things for free.

Re:I'd Like the Old Internet Back Please

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you. Amazing how many people think that ads are cluttering up their otherwise free content.

There's a powerful entitlement attitude here.

Re:I'd Like the Old Internet Back Please

[Anonymous Coward]

"The internet was orders of magnitude less useful when run by enthusiasts because quite frankly a lot of people don't share things for free."

There are a few misconceptions dancing merrily here, and they need to be stomped.
"The Internet", when I got involved, had two components. The Serious Stuff involved standards and Interoperability; how do I get these Alpha Decay Spectra from Dubna to Berkeley. How to get the latest GEANT from CERN. Making sense, and even speed, from UUCP bang-paths.
The Fun Stuff was everything else. UNIX was useful, and all sorts of useful things got piped together, and it created USENET, among other things. Quite gleefully, and maybe obnoxiously, Microsoft was Given A Powder. Other than the Suns, our first Internet capable machines were Mac SE-20s running NCSA TELNET and FTP.
Everything was Free online back then. Hell, nobody had any idea how to make money on the Internet, back then, other than losing money in running a local ISP.
We did it for the Fun.

Pretty much, Advertising and Windows came hand-in-hand. That was the beginning of the dumbing down of the Internet.
  Tim Berners-Lee; nice guy. But his concept of a "WWW", (There were a lot of others...), pretty much destroyed Our Sandbox. Appealing to the Lowest Common Denominator always goes badly... well, for example... Windows...

If I want the latest GEANT4 Code, or some ALICE Spectra, (ALICE is incredibly cool.), I know just how to get it.
There is another Internet. Actually, there are several other Internets.
No advertising. Not many cat videos. And yet all of it is run by Enthusiasts. Some of them are even paid.
You can't easily get There, from Here.

I'm pretty sure that nobody here on Slashdot even have a clue about these other Internets. If they do, they aren't talking. Well and Good.
This isn't the Darknet. This isn't Underground. (Other than those Neutrino Observatories...) If you are in a decent University and have good reason, you just might get an Account on The Something.

The Something is where Your Internet just may be, in a decade or so. There are still a few REALTIME issues to be settled. (Timing is _Everything_.)
And The Something will be given to you by the Enthusiasts.
Just because it's Fun.

I just want some security myself...

[Anonymous Coward]

With ad servers being one of the primary vectors of infection (because even though a legit website is using a legit ad network, who knows what third parties, and third parties from those third parties are being used), it isn't a matter of blocking because I don't like seeing someone's banners, but it becomes a matter of security.

After over 10 years, I've found that AV doesn't matter squat. The primary protection I use is ad blocking software, and I have had remarkably clean systems, just by doing that, although I do run AV, and run the browser in a sandbox/VM for added security.

Proving my point, I decided to fire up a VM with a typical web browser, all software updated, and browse some common social network sites (not pr0n... the sites on the top 10 list that most people use). Yep, 10 minutes later, the VM was infected with a rootkit, proven when I snapshotted the VM, and scanned its disk with an AV utility.

So, ad blocking isn't just to get rid of the "fist the monkey for cheap TARP mortgage payments"... it is arguably the #1 security measure I can take next to keeping software updated to keep my computers clean.

Re:I just want some security myself...

[weilawei]

10 minutes later, the VM was infected with a rootkit, proven when I snapshotted the VM, and scanned its disk with an AV utility.

I don't know what websites you browse or how your security is set up, but you are doing something incredibly wrong if you're getting infected 10 minutes in.

My own policy is no box touches a network (beginning with installation) until a firewall is active and all services are locked down/disabled except for absolutely necessary ones. Then, I take a flash drive and drop a copy of a few essentials on to the new box (browser, plugins, firewall/AV for windows boxes). Once the box is locked down, it can go online and finish getting updates. If I were really paranoid, I'd host a local repo.

Viruses? Malware? What are those? I'm forever cleaning off boxen for friends and family, but I never have to clean my own...

Re:I just want some security myself...

[Anonymous Coward]

Then, I take a flash drive.

BZZZZZZTT! Wrong answer. Thanks for playing.

Re:I just want some security myself...

[weilawei]

Seriously, when was the last time you were infected by a flash drive? I suppose you pick them up in parking lots and plug them in, do you?

I'm Considering a Proxy

[Anonymous Coward]

I own several domain names and in all honesty, what with unlimited bandwidth and very inexpensive Web hosting, I'm thinking of setting up a Linux-based server that I can use a proxy to access the Web from home. In addition, I could use it for any device I own, including my mobile device. This could be a business opportunity if done correctly.

Use EFF's Privacy Badger instead...

[Anonymous Coward]

Some months ago I decided to get rid of adblock and friends, instead installing a flash click-to-activate thing and Privacy Badger.

Pretty much no ads at all, cookies and crap from external sites don't load unless I allow them, life is good.

Enough is enough

[raxtich]

You know, I was willing to accept a few ads on a website because I understood the need to generate revenue. But I finally had to resort to installing AdBlock because it seems many websites forgot about actual content in favor of revenue. It got to the point of absolute ridiculousness, there were pages with maybe one or two paragraphs of content buried under tons of zooming, flashing, auto-playing, screen-covering crap that it just wasn't worth the bother, so I would just click away. It also doesn't help that the #1 reason for my browser crashes and lockups where because of some stupid Flash ad.

Re:Enough is enough

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's something you could try. Login with google/facebook on another computer, even a public one. Then go home and log in again. You'll see ads targeted at everyone that used that computer before you. Everything ranging from prom dresses, shoes watches, pregnancy tests and books, free checkups for venereal diseases, strange sex toys and all other kind of things you never even knew you were interested in.
Now ... imagine that your kid or wife, or friend or colleague just throw a casual glance at your monitor and catch one sight of those ...

Also, I've used the internet for 15 years. If the ad revenue were to drop to 1% killing all sites depending on it, nothing of value would be lost.

Re:Expect the Republicans to put an end to this

[Anonymous Coward]

Thankfully, Republicans don't rule Germany

Your router

[Runaway1956]

Whatever you use for a router can do it. I have a Netgear open source router. Flashed it with Tomato firmware, then installed the MVPS Hosts file on it. A startup script updates the Hosts file at boot, and then every four days after booting. Of course, the concept isn't exclusive to Netgear, or to commercial routers. Install it on your gateway, whatever that gateway may be.

I would be interested to hear how much bandwidth you save by blocking advertising for a company. I'd also be interested in learning how much your internet improves in terms of responsiveness. It made a big difference for me, but I don't administer hundreds or thousands of computers.

Question

[Stan92057]

Question how do we keep sites from scanning our PCs to see if we have an ad blocker installed? what can be done if anything to stop them from doing that. If they can scan for an ad blocker im guessing they are scanning for everything we have installed.

Re:Question

[orient]

Question how do we keep sites from scanning our PCs to see if we have an ad blocker installed? what can be done if anything to stop them from doing that. If they can scan for an ad blocker im guessing they are scanning for everything we have installed.

They do not scan your computer. Their scripts running in your browser just check for a cookie or a session parameter that should have been set by the ad-showing script. If that's missing, you have an ad blocker.

Re:Question

[Scoth]

This gets into the arms race thing again. Right now some sites/ad networks are doing things like setting cookies, parameters, checking logs, etc to make sure that you've hit the ad server. Alternatively, sometimes they'll use annoying NOSCRIPT code (or just rely on ad scripts to do something to the main page content) to blow up the website somehow if the ad scripts aren't loaded. There are any number of ways to detect whether adblockers are running or not.

Right now, most websites are still feeling like bad press and lost market share generated by turning away visitors with adblockers aren't worth it, so you'll usually see something fairly unobtrusive asking to unblock the site. At some point, especially if adblocking reaches a tipping point, more and more sites might actually start blocking content if ads are blocked. If this happens, adblockers will have to come up with a way to convince the networks that the ads are loaded, even when they aren't. Sadly this might require going back to the way adblocking used to be done whereby the whole page was loaded, and then ads were removed. This will hurt the bandwidth savings since all that will have to be downloaded anyway, and may also open up some attack vectors since scripts will have to execute somewhere.

Just the nature of the arms race. Probably the best-case scenario is that most mainstream websites will never want to risk alienating visitors and completely wall off their content to adblockers. We may start seeing more paywalls and microtransaction requirements though.

There are other options now

[Foresto]

I've already dumped Adblock Plus and moved on to uBlock Origin, which I trust a bit more to do the right thing.

Use hosts (clarityray etc. can't see it)

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject + APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit http://start64.com/index.php?o... & then that could be run on every node OR central scripts from servers could migrate the update hosts to every endpoint on the LAN/WAN, easily.

FREE & adds speed, security, + reliability, doing more with less, more efficiently vs. browser addons & locally installed DNS servers @ home + fixes DNS' redirect security issues - obtaining its data vs. online threats & adbanner blocking from 10 reputable sites in the security community!

* :)

By "yours truly" - "The Lord of Hosts" so-to-speak:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:

"The image this title brings to mind is of a mighty military commander, one who can at a mere word summon rank upon rank of protective power" from https://answers.yahoo.com/ques... & in myself, via hosts/custom hosts files use.

(Accept NO substitutes!)

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

APK

P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"

...apk

Hosts = there natively already on everything

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: Updates = GUI easy for new data via APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit http://start64.com/index.php?o... & then that could be run on every node OR central scripts from servers could migrate the update hosts to every endpoint on the LAN/WAN, easily.

FREE & adds speed, security, + reliability, doing more with less, more efficiently vs. browser addons & locally installed DNS servers @ home + fixes DNS' redirect security issues - obtaining its data vs. online threats & adbanner blocking from 10 reputable sites in the security community!

* :)

By "yours truly" - "The Lord of Hosts" so-to-speak:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:

"The image this title brings to mind is of a mighty military commander, one who can at a mere word summon rank upon rank of protective power" from https://answers.yahoo.com/ques... & in myself, via hosts/custom hosts files use.

(Accept NO substitutes!)

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

APK

P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"

...apk

ClarityRay stops "Almost ALL Ads Blocked"

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: Not hosts via APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit http://start64.com/index.php?o... & then that could be run on every node OR central scripts from servers could migrate the update hosts to every endpoint on the LAN/WAN, easily.

FREE & adds speed, security, + reliability, doing more with less, more efficiently vs. browser addons & locally installed DNS servers @ home + fixes DNS' redirect security issues - obtaining its data vs. online threats & adbanner blocking from 10 reputable sites in the security community!

* :)

By "yours truly" - "The Lord of Hosts" so-to-speak:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:

"The image this title brings to mind is of a mighty military commander, one who can at a mere word summon rank upon rank of protective power" from https://answers.yahoo.com/ques... & in myself, via hosts/custom hosts files use.

(Accept NO substitutes!)

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

APK

P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"

...apk

ab+ = slower, inferior + 'souled-out'

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ab+ do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stops C&C communique
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stops C&C communique
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stops C&C communique
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phish
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound (ie email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily controlled data
16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* ANSWER ="NO" to each above on ab+ doing it + hosts = already on every device natively.

APK

P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).

+

ClarityRay defeats it

+

Ab+'s paid to not do its job http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

Ab+ adds complexity from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

What's better?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

... apk

Hosts = already on everything & updates?

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: GUI easy for data via APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit http://start64.com/index.php?o... & then that could be run on every node OR central scripts from servers could migrate the update hosts to every endpoint on the LAN/WAN, easily.

FREE & adds speed, security, + reliability, doing more with less, more efficiently vs. browser addons & locally installed DNS servers @ home + fixes DNS' redirect security issues - obtaining its data vs. online threats & adbanner blocking from 10 reputable sites in the security community!

* :)

By "yours truly" - "The Lord of Hosts" so-to-speak:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:

"The image this title brings to mind is of a mighty military commander, one who can at a mere word summon rank upon rank of protective power" from https://answers.yahoo.com/ques... & in myself, via hosts/custom hosts files use.

(Accept NO substitutes!)

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

APK

P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"

...apk

Hosts files stop MS' Privad too... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject & see here on how + why hosts work vs. MS' Privad http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

* :)

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit http://start64.com/index.php?o... & then that could be run on every node OR central scripts from servers could migrate the update hosts to every endpoint on the LAN/WAN, easily.

FREE & adds speed, security, + reliability, doing more with less, more efficiently vs. browser addons & locally installed DNS servers @ home + fixes DNS' redirect security issues - obtaining its data vs. online threats & adbanner blocking from 10 reputable sites in the security community!

* :)

By "yours truly" - "The Lord of Hosts" so-to-speak:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:

"The image this title brings to mind is of a mighty military commander, one who can at a mere word summon rank upon rank of protective power" from https://answers.yahoo.com/ques... & in myself, via hosts/custom hosts files use.

(Accept NO substitutes!)

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

APK

P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"

...apk

Fire any administrator who does this

[Harlequin80]

Seriously WHY would you want to deploy a plugin to 100s of users when you can be far more effective and far more secure at the gateway??? Run a proxy, filter at the proxy. Your individual machines should not be getting direct access to the internet anyway.

Re:Fire any administrator who does this

[vyvepe]

Can the proxy filter remove specific tags from an html document?

Like for example remove all div elements with class name "advertisement"?

Re:Fire any administrator who does this

[Harlequin80]

Yes they can. http://www.psl.cs.columbia.edu... is specifically designed for the extraction of content based on class names.

ADP Large Scale Deployments in IT? WTF?

[kosmosik]

As I know from my job experience large scale IT deployments inside their WAN networks can filter whatever the fuck they want. Sudden appearance of ADP as an enterprise deployable package - who the fuck cares? We are right now black/white listing all the stuff we need. Who needs to introduce something like ADP that probably can mess with loads of internal services and need to be tested if you could just not use it? if an user has a problem with advertisements he/she is probably far away of what he/she should be doing on their workstation.

AdBlock = slower, inferior + 'souled-out'

[Anonymous Coward]

Can adblock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C communique
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C communique
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C communique
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phishing
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound (i.e. email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily controlled data
16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* ANSWER ="NO" to each above on AdBlock doing it as well or at all + hosts = already on every device natively.

APK

P.S.=> AdBlock does FAR less than hosts do & FAR less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... & ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

AdBlock adds complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

AdBlock's SLOWER than hosts: http://superuser.com/questions...

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

... apk

This is about Almost all ads blocked+ inferiority

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ab+ do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stops C&C communique
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stops C&C communique
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stops C&C communique
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phish
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound (ie email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily controlled data
16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* ANSWER ="NO" to each above on ab+ doing it + hosts = already on every device natively.

APK

P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).

+

ClarityRay defeats it

+

Ab+'s paid to not do its job http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

Ab+ adds complexity from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

What's better?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

... apk

Then why can't you ever prove me wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

Can adblock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C communique
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C communique
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C communique
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phishing
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound (i.e. email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily controlled data
16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* ANSWER ="NO" to each above on AdBlock doing it as well or at all + hosts = already on every device natively.

APK

P.S.=> AdBlock does FAR less than hosts do & FAR less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... & ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

AdBlock adds complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

AdBlock's SLOWER than hosts: http://superuser.com/questions...

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

... apk

Fuck Adblock Plus

[Anonymous Coward]

Those are the scum that tried to make money off of their users... via ads.

uBlock Origin all the way - open source, no cost, and they don't even *allow* donations to their project.

And it is tiny and fast as fuck.

Re:Expect the Republicans to put an end to this

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess you didn't notice that both sides are beholden to corporate interests.

Ublock does less & consumes more vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ublock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stops C&C communique
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stops C&C communique
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stops C&C communique
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phishing
10.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on ANYTHING webbound (ie email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* ANSWER ="NO" to each above on UBlock doing it as well or at all!

APK

P.S.=> UBlock does FAR less than hosts do & FAR less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

Ublock's NOT as efficient as hosts:

Hosts @ 3mb-11mb w/ current data vs. threats + ads - test yourself using my program.

UBlock uses 63++ MB -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...

SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

UBlock adds complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

... apk

Ublock = inferior: Does less + consumes more

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ublock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stops C&C communique
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stops C&C communique
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stops C&C communique
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phishing
10.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on ANYTHING webbound (ie email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* ANSWER ="NO" to each above on UBlock doing it as well or at all!

APK

P.S.=> UBlock does FAR less than hosts do & FAR less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

Ublock's NOT as efficient as hosts:

Hosts @ 3mb-11mb w/ current data vs. threats + ads - test yourself using my program.

UBlock uses 63++ MB -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...

SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

UBlock adds complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

... apk

Ublock does less & consumes more

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ublock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stops C&C communique
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stops C&C communique
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stops C&C communique
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phishing
10.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on ANYTHING webbound (ie email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* ANSWER ="NO" to each above on UBlock doing it as well or at all!

APK

P.S.=> UBlock does FAR less than hosts do & FAR less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

Ublock's NOT as efficient as hosts:

Hosts @ 3mb-11mb w/ current data vs. threats + ads - test yourself using my program.

UBlock uses 63++ MB -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...

SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

UBlock adds complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

... apk

Clarityray stops adblock (not hosts)

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: by native browser methods dumping addons used + AdBlock = slower, inferior + 'souled-out'!

Can adblock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C communique
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C communique
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C communique
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phishing
10.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound (i.e. email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* ANSWER ="NO" to each above on AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

APK

P.S.=> AdBlock does FAR less than hosts do & FAR less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... & ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

AdBlock adds complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

AdBlock's SLOWER than hosts: http://superuser.com/questions...

For the BEST hosts?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

... apk

Question: How's it taste "eating your words"?

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject & answer it vs. you doing it here http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... so keep "puffing that pot" fool!

* :)

Gotta love it - seeing you give me guff (yet being a "ne'er-do-well" pothead with nothing better to show for yourself vs. what I've done that gives others more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity)!

Knowing you CRIPPLE your OWN thought processes with pot is priceless, since it makes it (& I've just GOTTA say it, you're making me do it) "too, Too, TOO EASY - just '2ez'" to utterly crush you by making you "eat your words", spiced w/ the bitter taste of SELF-defeat, + your foot in your mouth RAMMING THEM DOWN, rinsing down the puke you spewed on /. that I smacked you down with easily!

APK

P.S.=> Gotta LOVE pot smoking dolts - they're stupid enough to do what "stoned_ritual" did, & smash themselves into the ground everytime vs. myself, lol... apk

Hosts = already on everything & updates?

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: GUI easy for new data via APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit http://start64.com/index.php?o...

FREE & adds speed, security, + reliability, doing more with less, more efficiently vs. browser addons & locally installed DNS servers @ home + fixes DNS' redirect security issues - obtaining its data vs. online threats & adbanner blocking from 10 reputable sites in the security community!

* :)

By "yours truly" - "The Lord of Hosts" so-to-speak:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:

"The image this title brings to mind is of a mighty military commander, one who can at a mere word summon rank upon rank of protective power" from https://answers.yahoo.com/ques... & in myself, via hosts/custom hosts files use.

(Accept NO substitutes!)

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

&

It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

+

In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

APK

P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"

...apk

Cry me a river.

[RockDoctor]

The move is likely to concern online publishers who rely on advertising to generate revenue.

Choose a phrase composed from the following words in any descending alphabetical order : "shit" ; "tough."

If loss of advertising revenue means that I have to choose which websites to pay for my news, mail service, etc, then that's just dandy and fine. Oddly, when I go to the cinema to watch a movie, I choose which one I want to watch then pay (and annoyingly still get some adverts, but by turning up 20 minutes late I can avoid that). When I go to the newsagent, I choose which newspaper I want to read, then buy it. What is different about the web?

Re:Hosts = already on everything & updating?

[ZorglubZ]

Can the HOSTS file block these incessant ads about the glory of the HOSTS file? Is it truly the final solution that will forevermore remove the blight that is APK Hosts File Engine spam? If so, sign me up!