Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Advertisers Already Using New iPhone Text Message Exploit

Posted by timothy on from the you-rang? dept.

Andy Smith writes: The annoying App Store redirect issue has blighted iPhone users for years, but now there's a new annoyance and it's already being exploited: Visit a web page on your iPhone and any advertiser can automatically open your messages app and create a new text message with the recipient and message already filled in. We can only hope they don't figure out how to automatically send the message, although you can bet they're trying.

111 comments

  1. Not clicking that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Visit a web page on your iPhone and any advertiser can automatically open your messages app

    You'll forgive me if I dont click that

    1. Re:Not clicking that by Technician · · Score: 1

      It's ok to visit and read the article, but use a PC, not an Apple product. May I recommend Firefox on Linux?

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
    2. Re:Not clicking that by hyperar · · Score: 1

      It's ok to visit and read the article, but use a PC, not an Apple product. May I recommend Firefox on Linux?

      Firefox?

    3. Re:Not clicking that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, Firefox + NoScript + Squid + Privoxy.

  2. See by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's shit like that that drives people to adblock. And also to class action lawsuits.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:See by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly, Adblocking for the most part isn't about trying to stop advertising that helps pay for the operation of the website, but to stop abusive add companies that attempt to turn your full device into an advertising media. Especially when it gets past the site you are viewing, then the add revenue doesn't go to the web-site but only to the advertising company, thus creating a no benefit business model.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:See by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I do not currently and do not expect to ever have a personal opposition to advertisements hosted on the same server as the page I am viewing and inserted by server-side script.

      So long as the advertisements are handled by a third party client-side script, page owners can claim ignorance of what is being advertised through their page. This willful refusal to asses their own contribution to the spread of malicious software is why I have no doubts about my decision to use ad blockers and a nice big host file.

    3. Re:See by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      I do not currently and do not expect to ever have a personal opposition to advertisements hosted on the same server as the page I am viewing and inserted by server-side script.

      No, no scripts.. certainly not without asking permission to run. They can put up regular old HTML static pictures and text in the main page.

      The only safe browser we will soon have is one that just views the page source without parsing it.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    4. Re:See by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly, Adblocking for the most part isn't about trying to stop advertising that helps pay for the operation of the website, but to stop abusive add companies

      Bingo. I'd be happy seeing a reasonable number of non-intrusive ads on a page, but that's not the problem here.

      I run AdBlock specifically to try and avoid the malware-laden ads and auto-playing ads with sounds. I have no problem with text ads whatsoever, but when ads cross the line and infect my PC or blare sound unrequested, that's it.

      The advertisers have really brought this on themselves for the most part. Not 100% of the blame, but ~95% of the blame is on them.

      I say 95% because I realize it's hard to vet every ad, especially those with flash, but that's not my problem- it's their problem and if they can't get a grip on it then they completely lose my eyeballs.

      Really, I don't mind a reasonable number of benign ads, but infecting my PC isn't something I'm willing to agree to.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    5. Re:See by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Server-side scripting is just a fancy way of saying "static HTML generated by the server and sent to your client as-is". It's not a script you have to run, as that would be client-side scripting (a.k.a. Javascript).

      For all practical intents and purposes, "server-side scripting" produces static HTML. (The only reason there's a distinction at all is because of page caching.)

    6. Re: See by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought that this is exactly what "mailto" links do and we're intended for?

    7. Re:See by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Do you not understand what server-side scripting is?

      Hint: it's different from client-side scripting. And turning off JavaScript in your browser has no effect on it.

    8. Re:See by Grishnakh · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Maybe, but I don't really see the problem here. This is the price you pay for using Apple products. You can't even install a different browser like Firefox on Apple's iCrap devices because they won't allow anything that doesn't use their own WebKit renderer, so everything is going to be stuck with whatever vulnerabilities that the regular Apple browser has.

      Android has its issues to be sure, but at least you're allowed to install whatever browser you want on an Android device. So if the built-in one sucks, just install Firefox.

    9. Re:See by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      Note that advertisement, advertiser, advertising, etc each have 1 letter D. "Add" is a mathematics term.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    10. Re:See by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Server side scripting can generate dynamic HTML that includes client scripts.

    11. Re: See by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just a user switchable 'disable JavaScript button up on the browser's control bar would suffice. Not interested in your kludge, 'web programmer.'

    12. Re:See by ripvlan · · Score: 2

      Yes - right on.

      I've noticed that many websites that link from FB in the mobile app are overtaken by the ads they serve. I tried reading a newsy item and each time the site came up briefly before auto-forwarding to some spamy ad site instead. Pressing the Back button didn't work - the original site was unusable.

      These bad-ads are affecting "legitimate" content sites.

      I haven't seen this behavior in mobile Chrome. But whatever browser FB uses isn't all that secure. I've wondered how much extra tracking happen in that browser? (e.g. where do I clear my cookies?)

    13. Re:See by Technician · · Score: 1

      I find sometimes it is best to make it blow up to get it fixed.

      Sometimes a bug is managed and annoys a lot of people.

      Remember the fake PC support scam from a year ago? The calls have pretty much stopped once it became game on to call them and abuse them in a virtual PC and post the results online.

      If this remains unfixed, there should be some way to bait it to overload the workers responding and never sending money.

      How many users can a gambling website support who have no credit cards? Join and try to get technical support because your ficticious credit card isn't working. Overload them, then it will get fixed.

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
    14. Re:See by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not advertising, it's hijacking of my phone. That would seem to be illegal somehow.

    15. Re:See by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      I agree. They need to subtract the extra letter.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    16. Re:See by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not advertising, it's hijacking of my phone. That would seem to be illegal somehow.

      It's not hijacking shit, it's the same damn thing as clicking a link which starts with "mailto:" and having it open a new email message.
      If you have a problem with that behavior, go complain to Apple about their web browser.

    17. Re: See by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Calls installing plugin a kludge. Wants a button to disable JS that you would probably have to install a plugin (or get a different browser) to get. Web idiot.

    18. Re:See by Fnord666 · · Score: 1

      The advertisers have really brought this on themselves for the most part. Not 100% of the blame, but ~95% of the blame is on them.

      Yep, it's that miscreant 95% that give the other 5% a bad name!

      --
      'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
    19. Re:See by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its more like 99%! And speaking of infecting your PC, most of the more obnoxious ads come from ad servers that can easily be infected with viruses and malware/spyware. Ads from these infected servers infect your computer with that crap! Ad-blocking is self defence against these threats as well as self defence against advertisers stealing your time, your attention, your bandwidth, and your privacy!

  3. News at 11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the other news: clicking links can possibly open unwanted pages in your browser or open a new e-mail message with some fields filled in.

  4. Sometimes it's good to wear tin foil? by s.petry · · Score: 1

    I know I'm an odd ball, cynical, and critical. As proof, I use my phone as a Phone and iPod. I didn't like Palm Pilots either, for some of the same reasons. The screen is too small, the keyboard sucks ass, and it's too slow. Phones added a new dimension though.. which is whether or not I trust a network my phone connects to that I can't see or audit.

    You can do what ever you want on your phone in my opinion. The vendor should be responsible for teaching people risks, but risks are then up to the consumer. Want to play games, brows the web, use custom Social media apps all on a mobile device? Good for you. I don't, and won't, and am pretty happy with my decisions.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:Sometimes it's good to wear tin foil? by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Yep. Its not my 'phone', its my pocket computer and is an extension of my secured network. No your kid cant play games on my pocket computer.

      --
      Good-bye
    2. Re:Sometimes it's good to wear tin foil? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Yes, the on-screen keyboards on phones are a pain to type on. However, it's better than nothing at all, or in many cases trying to lug around a laptop. That's why many of us use them.

      I guess if you never leave your parents' basement, then you might not see the use in a handheld mobile communication device with internet access.

  5. Seems illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Let's fine them $100k per infraction

  6. Hey, they paid a lot for that feature! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's not an "exploit"!

    You've been "productized" and then "monetized".

  7. Computer fraud ... by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So when will we start holding ad agencies accountable for what is basically hacking?

    This is precisely why I will never have any qualms about blocking every damned ad site I can possibly identify ... because they're all ran by assholes who feel entitled to do anything they wish.

    They're untrustworthy, and willing to do anything for a buck. Which means we should be blocking the hell out of this shit.

    Boo hoo to anybody who says they need the ad revenue ... unless you plan on being accountable for this shit done by your advertisers, stop expecting us to trust them or you.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Computer fraud ... by lesincompetent · · Score: 2

      I didn't read TFA but i think these advertisers are using a feature.
      Am i wrong?

    2. Re:Computer fraud ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You assume these ad agencies are reputable businesses that aren't fly by night shells (all the way down) designed to do nothing but fleece their clients and remorselessly annoy their targets.

      Selling ads online is really about dividing saps from their money as quickly as possible

    3. Re:Computer fraud ... by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1

      I am reading your comment's parent to mean that, if people are charged with "hacking" for doing much less, why not these ad agencies?

    4. Re:Computer fraud ... by MyAlternateID · · Score: 1

      I am reading your comment's parent to mean that, if people are charged with "hacking" for doing much less, why not these ad agencies?

      The main reason? The ad agencies are corporations with plenty of lawyers. It takes far less time and resources to prosecute a private individual. Additionally, the private individual has little or no PR capability to make the state look like bad guys for doing so (that part would come naturally to an ad agency).

    5. Re:Computer fraud ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When even "AlmostALLAdsBlocked" got them LAUGHED OUT OF COURT & more than just once.

      Also - Hey - Guess what (which YOU of all people help me prove no less)?

      I've got something a LOT better in terms of abilities since it does FAR MORE for users in added speed, security, reliability, & even anonymity vs. INFERIOR slower browser addons, many of which SOLD-OUT to advertisers no less, YET IT CONSUMES FAR LESS RESOURCES too

      Here 'tis - merely using what you ALREADY NATIVELY HAVE BUILT-IN TO YOUR SYSTEM, vs. "bolting on 'MoAr' STUPIDLY & especially a massively inferior one on ALL levels more:

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

      * :)

      Those AD AGENCIES?

      Heh - THEY did no better than YOU, Mr. Bullshitter!

      (YOU, who *just* started posting on slashdot August of this year (as a sockpuppet given your registered 'luser' name you use, & that I STRONGLY suspect that you are for modding up your other ID here, Coren22 I'd say, & downmodding anyone flooring "either of you" (same person))

      OR

      Are you able to prove me validly technically WRONG here http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

      ?

      HELL NO (lmao @ U)...

      (Surprised you didn't use an abused downmod on THAT one, as you did all my other posts that NONE of you WEASELS can prove validly technically wrong - you weak little SCHMUCKS & TROLLS the lot of you!)

      DOWNMODDING LAST TIME I POSTED THIS, eh? Yes http://slashdot.org/comments.p... since it's ALL you can manage since your intellect is that of a carrot!

      APK

      P.S.=> In case you didn't get it? I think you're a SERIOUS shitbag & weasel - in fact, your 'evasive maneuvers' vs. what's in the link above PROVE it for me - & YOU KNOW IT, I know it, anyone reading with 1/2 a BRAIN here does too... apk

  8. Apple should remove apps that adds point to. by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    Or they can just give us an option to disable Safari from doing anything other than web browsing.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:Apple should remove apps that adds point to. by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      You can actually turn off javascript in safari.

      Settings > Safari > Advanced > JavaScript

      Breaks a lot fixes a lot.

      Pretty much eliminates browser crashes tho.

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    2. Re:Apple should remove apps that adds point to. by cfalcon · · Score: 1

      Still frustrating to not have access to noscript. I want scripts on my bank. I want scripts on some web forums that I trust. I don't want scripts in general.

  9. Why does this API exist? by ZorinLynx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why is there an API for sending a text message from a web page? Why does this need to exist at all?

    You'd think someone at Apple, when they came up for this idea for this, would be shot down by someone else saying "Sorry dude, this is a feature that can be abused."

    Same deal with javascript being able to open the App Store. WHY??

    1. Re:Why does this API exist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It sort of makes sense. Like being able to tap on a phone number to copy the number to the dialer app. I can't come up with any use for automatically generating a text message, but I support it could be useful in a weird set of circumstances.

      What makes no sense is that these can be done via JavaScript. Desktop browsers learned ages ago that things like window.open should only be allowed on a user-initiated event. So just disable these APIs unless they're done in response to a click-equivalent event being sent to a same-origin script. Solved. You keep the feature where it's potentially useful (user interaction with the page they're visiting) and disable it for hostile ads, along with preventing it from happening automatically. I don't understand why these features were ever added without that restriction.

    2. Re:Why does this API exist? by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      The most likely thing is so that web-pages can have links to their app.

      I agree it's idiotic and open for abuse.

      I want my browser locked down in a sandbox and largely precluded from interacting with the rest of the OS, but apparently they don't make those.

      Why do we keep trusting the web? Because time and time again it proves to be anything but trustworthy.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:Why does this API exist? by cdrudge · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why is there an API for sending a text message from a web page? Why does this need to exist at all?

      You'd think someone at Apple, when they came up for this idea for this, would be shot down by someone else saying "Sorry dude, this is a feature that can be abused."

      It wasn't shot down when mailto: was included in the HTML spec. As long as the API doesn't allow you to actually send it without further consent, how is it any different than every other app's "Send to Facebook|Twitter|Email|Whatever" functionality?

    4. Re:Why does this API exist? by idji · · Score: 1

      this is probably just using IPhone URL Schema to make an sms: URL, just like a mailto: URL, and no I don't think they can click send - that can only be done within the message app.

    5. Re:Why does this API exist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I want my browser locked down in a sandbox and largely precluded from interacting with the rest of the OS, but apparently they don't make those.

      They do, actually.

    6. Re:Why does this API exist? by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      Someone definitely should have said no to the text api I can't think of any good reason to have one.

      A clickable link for app store apps was a good idea.
      But they fked up when they allowed scripts to open it.

      Why do almost none of the 3rd party browsers allow you to switch off javascript? You can turn it off in safari why not the others? Is it really that complicated to not run javascript?

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    7. Re:Why does this API exist? by tlhIngan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why is there an API for sending a text message from a web page? Why does this need to exist at all?

      You'd think someone at Apple, when they came up for this idea for this, would be shot down by someone else saying "Sorry dude, this is a feature that can be abused."

      Same deal with javascript being able to open the App Store. WHY??

      JavaScript can't open the App Store. What it can do is open a link to iTunes. What happens here is if you click a link that points to iTunes (iTunes Preview), on the desktop, it goes to a page that shows you the target, followed by a button that says "Open in iTunes" at which point iTunes is supposed to open and go to the app/music/movie/tv page of that item.

      On iOS, if you do the same, instead of iTunes opening, it goes to the appropriate store that sellsthe item. This is a regular feature and it's the same on iOS or Android. If you click on the "Apple App Store" button or the "Get it on Google Play", same result - it takes you to that product page in the appropriate store. Both are basically links that get treated specially.

      Likewise, it's possible to do text messaging - iOS has the ability to recognize phone numbers on webpages, and if you tap them, gets you the ability to send a text or phone that number. (Sometimes its heuristics mess up in humorous ways).

      That's by design.

      However, iOS does not allow anyone to send a text, make a phone call, send an email or other things without manual intervention. Siri can do it, but only after Siri composes it for you. Again, this is for safety purposes - apps cannot programmatically run up your phone bill. So at worst, you have an app switch out to Messages or Mail or the App Store on you. But at that point, you must tap "Purchase" or "Send" to actually perform the task. (a webpage can't do it because that point, the other app is onscreen)

      I wouldn't call this a new phenomena ... I have seen ads do this for years - especially on mobile ones where they pop up a full screen interstitial that advertises some freemuim game and the javascript calls open() on it which triggers the app store.

      It's really a form of advertising that's existed on desktops for years exploiting the new mobile technology, except instead of switching between apps, it's triggering plugins.

      Heck, the email one is really a lot like mailto: URLs that can fill in the To, Subject and body of a message, and wait for you to click Send.

    8. Re:Why does this API exist? by geekmux · · Score: 1

      WHY you ask?

      Perhaps it was Lone Starr who said it best when exclaiming, "We're not just doing it for money...We're doing it for a shitload of money!"

    9. Re:Why does this API exist? by Spaham · · Score: 1

      it's a BUG, dude...

    10. Re:Why does this API exist? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      Same deal with javascript being able to open the App Store. WHY??

      Well, I have an app in both the app store and the play store. So, when i talk about it, I use a URL that checks which os is hitting it, and redirects to the appropriate store. Great for tweeting, cards (next to the QR codes for each store), etc.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    11. Re:Why does this API exist? by CCarrot · · Score: 1

      Why is there an API for sending a text message from a web page? Why does this need to exist at all?

      You'd think someone at Apple, when they came up for this idea for this, would be shot down by someone else saying "Sorry dude, this is a feature that can be abused."

      It wasn't shot down when mailto: was included in the HTML spec. As long as the API doesn't allow you to actually send it without further consent, how is it any different than every other app's "Send to Facebook|Twitter|Email|Whatever" functionality?

      The difference is money.

      For many people, there is a cost per message (over some monthly limit) to send/receive texts, and 'subscription' texts (as the ad in the article was apparently trying to set up through this sketchy exploit) charge the user above and beyond the carrier costs. Posting to FB or Twitter doesn't carry any significant cost rider (just loss of dignity, but that's going cheap nowadays), unless the payload is big enough to impact data costs. Even emails are not individually metered like text messages, although I suppose there the data costs could potentially be higher depending on attachments.

      This is even worse than those scammy mailers for credit cards, the ones that 'helpfully' pre-fill the application form out with as much of your personal info as they have access to. At least for those you have to make an effort to fill in the remaining fields and physically mail the application form: here you just have to accidentally hit the 'send' button instead of the 'cancel' button (easy to do, esp. if you're used to Android) in order to give them 'permission' to charge you, not only once but multiple times. Also, you can bet that your phone number is now on as many robot scam-dialer databases as possible...there's just no way the user wins in this scenario.

      --
      "I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
    12. Re:Why does this API exist? by Ronin+Developer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      However, there is no cost if you don't hit "Send". You have the option to cancel the text just as we have done for years with mailto: links.

      Now, if they figure out how to actually send the text without consent, that's another game altogether.

    13. Re:Why does this API exist? by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      As long as the API doesn't allow you to actually send it...

      the difference ceases to be money.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    14. Re:Why does this API exist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You just need to explain to Apple how this "feature" somehow gives the end-user extra power to do something with the phone that Apple didn't intend them to be able to do. That will get the "feature" taken away quite quickly.

    15. Re:Why does this API exist? by CCarrot · · Score: 1

      However, there is no cost if you don't hit "Send". You have the option to cancel the text just as we have done for years with mailto: links.

      Now, if they figure out how to actually send the text without consent, that's another game altogether.

      If you accidentally hit 'Send' on a mailto link, there are no monetary consequences either, unless there's a whack of data attached to the email. If you do on the text, you're unwittingly establishing a monetary contract to pay some asshat real dollars on a regular basis. I have also heard that once 'subscribed' to these jerks, it can be hellish to get them to 'unsubscribe' you.

      They're banking on the fact that the user a) is a fumble-fingered idiot like me, or b) isn't technically savvy enough to know how to cancel the text, like my parents, grandparents or the 5yo playing with moms phone in the grocery store. Actually, strike that, the 5yo would probably know how to cancel a text better than me, but they wouldn't necessarily understand why they should cancel instead of hitting send.

      In a similar vein, those scam 'your windows computer has a virus' phone calls are often hilarious diversions to people who know better, but there must be a percentage of people who don't otherwise they'd die off for lack of funds/results. IMO this is in roughly the same category of sleaze.

      --
      "I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
    16. Re:Why does this API exist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually a bit different.

      Mailto:s needed to be clicked on... and even if you did, it would pop up in a separate window. It was painfully easy to get back to where you were since it's a separate window.

      On mobile devices, it may not be immediately obvious to the casual user how to resume. "I didn't even come close to opening messages... I'll just press Home to about".

    17. Re:Why does this API exist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's Apple's shit security that allows it to happen. Stop making fucking excuses for them. You think it's fine for rouge software to manipulate the UI in an attempt to trick the user? Fuck you and your kind.

  10. It sounds like by AndyKron · · Score: 0

    It sounds like Apple has pretty shitty customer support. Good thing I don't own any Apple products. Fuck Apple.

    1. Re:It sounds like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      considering i just spent $1k on a 6s, I would say not!

  11. This means war!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Well, not a real war. I mean, it's just the Internet, so like a hacker war or something. And I'm probably not going to do anything about it. Don't know anything about hacking, personally But I'm sure someone somewhere out there will take up the torch! I just need a catchy hashtaggy thingy, and I guess I'd have to make a Twitter account? Wow, that sounds like a lot of work for a war. Uh, I guess someone else who already uses Twitter would have to do that part.

    Anyway, I've done my part. It's now up to you, random outraged people of the Internet! Focus your anger and hatred into something positive and wage unholy war on these adver--what's that? 50% off penis enlargements and porn? HOW DO I HIT SEND FASTER!? AWAY!!

  12. mailto: by Aaden42 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How is this different than a mailto: link which can populate the subject, body, etc. but not actually send it until you tap send?

    1. Re:mailto: by clonehappy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not.

      Just like every meatspace annoyance turned into public hyperventilation when translated into computer annoyances, now every regular computer annoyance means public hyperventilation when translated into mobile annoyances.

      Even for slashdot, calling this an "exploit" is a fucking stretch. But oh yeah, fuck Apple or something...

    2. Re:mailto: by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 1

      How is this different than a mailto: link which can populate the subject, body, etc. but not actually send it until you tap send?

      While I don't use iJunk, my guess is that it's not set up to be one transparently and/or intentionally in the coding--so, it's basically a case where intent made the difference between a useful feature and a security hole.

    3. Re:mailto: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is this different than a mailto: link which can populate the subject, body, etc. but not actually send it until you tap send?

      It is different because phone companies allow you use text messages to subscribe for services that will be paid directly from your phone bill, and it's notoriously difficult to get them to cancel those.

      If you accidentally send a prefilled text message you may end up paying hundreds of dollars for something that you didn't want. That can't happen with an email.

  13. "Ads hard to find because changed after approval" by JoeyRox · · Score: 1

    In that case we'll all continue to run ad blockers until you guys are able to figure out which ads are good and which are bad. This fiasco should serve as motivation for the ad industry to start aggressively self-regulating, including funding action against rule breakers. They'll be the death of your industry if you allow them to continue.

  14. This Isn't Just on iPhone by asimons04 · · Score: 2

    Using the SMS URL scheme in Chrome on Android does the exact same thing. If any webpage has a link or uses Javascript to simulate a click to an SMS URL, it will bring up your default messaging app with a pre-populated phone number and optional message.

    [a href="sms:+18005551234?body=hello%20there"]SMS Me[/a]

    Like iOS, this does not automatically send the message. I don't know why this is not reported as being just a feature of modern browsers like the old mailto: tag. This is a feature, not an exploit. Whether or not it should even be a feature in the first place is another argument altogether.

    1. Re:This Isn't Just on iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      further, applications have been doing this on computers for decades. Basically it's an override of the protocol (replace http with something), that then gets pushed to an appropriate application. We've been using "svn+ssh:", "git:", "cvs:", "itunes:", "ftp:", etc... for years. How exactly is this a surprise to anyone?

      OH EM GEE! THE ADVERTISERS HAVE HACKED MY PHONE! THEY WANT TO SEND SOMEONE AN SMS!

      Get those pitchforks and torches ready folks. The Apple iCrusade (patent pending) is underway.

  15. Easy solution.... pull the app.... by CraigCruden · · Score: 1

    If an ad is caught doing this the app gets pulled from the app store. Makes the advertising useless.

    1. Re:Easy solution.... pull the app.... by cfalcon · · Score: 1

      Really? I found several webpages that spam opened the app store when visited, to whatever was being promoted. Way too often for it to be a fully bannable offense. I bet the developer just has to be like "ohh noooo i had no ideaaaaaa" and all is well.

      Where would I report abuse like this anyway?

  16. Not a big deal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just like clicking a mailto: link, there are URL schemas that open various apps on iOS. Messages just happens to be one of them. It isn't like this information is hidden from developers, and it isn't like it hasn't been there for a few releases of the os ... just like jumping to the maps app or you tube app, open the telephone app, etc, when you click on links. Apple even has the patent for detecting in context a string associated with a likely app and allowing to to click it even though there is no extra decoration of the string... Nothing is sent from the phone without the users approval. Nothing to see here. Try tel:

  17. Advertisers & their CRONIES want one... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject + these articles I've run across http://www.techcentral.co.za/a... AND http://lauren.vortex.com/archi...

    Per my subject-line above: Seriously - look @ those articles & their titles...

    Fine, ok, I'm ready. Always HAVE been, for years.

    Let's do it with facts on the merits of the subject directly, & ON THIS FORUMS then... they won't. Why? Simple: I regularly destroy "their kind" here ALL the damn time. It's very easy using facts & truth.

    It's pretty simple using documented facts from reputable sources, truth, technical chops, & being determined. The last one's easiest of all when you KNOW you're right.

    (That last guy WEINSTEIN? Talk about trying a "jewish guilt" sort of "jedi mind trick", lol... especially considering I'd wager he's actually of the jewish faith due to his last name odds are strong I'm correct here! Please, lol: Save it for the WEAK MINDED fool - it doesn't work on us here...)

    * They don't print those here when they are submitted oddly - & that latter one especially?

    Heh - I'd LOVE to rip that fucking "FAKE-IT-TILL-YOU-MAKE-IT" crony of advertisers a new asshole right on this forums personally... with facts I'd level his sold-out ass with

    ---

    "All evil needs to triumph is for good men to do NOTHING"

    Well, that's NOT me, per -> http://apple.slashdot.org/comm...

    You may not do anything as YOU literally stated... me?

    No, senor:

    I always do to defend something good, & the internet MOSTLY is good, allowing folks to share ideas + grow/improve EXISTING ones... it's changed the world MOSTLY for the better, changing how we think AND communicate.

    APK

    P.S.=> See, IF you do that in their "blog" PRIVATE PLAYPENS? They delete your posts - same as some competition I have (AdBlock & AdBlockPlus) doing THAT VERY THING on blogs & sites THEY have - yes, they've done that to me since they can't take me on, straight-up mano-a-mano using facts!

    Man - fucking shitbags the lot of them!

    Seriously - they make me ill they're so WEAK & such reprehensible weasels... try that outside your private playpens & I'd personally ANNIHILATE YOU with facts you weasels CANNOT validly technically combat - period...

    OR

    Doesn't the DOWNMOD on my last time I posted this TELL ANYONE what's what on that account?

    Does me -> http://apple.slashdot.org/comm...

    ...apk

  18. Block them ads! by cfalcon · · Score: 1

    Yet another great reason to block all ads under all circumstances. You control what displays on your property, not some remote server! Give them a pixel, they'll take root if they can.

  19. Re:AdBlock+ = inferior & 'souled-out' vs. host by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Er, no thanks. I'll pass on installing software created by someone who routinely and flagrantly engages in unethical, immature and unprofessional behavior.

  20. Re:Anyone wonder WHY I wrote this now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Advertisers = scum!
    ...
    [advertisement]
    ...

    Well, we finally agree on something :)

  21. Re:Ad agencies didn't DO too well... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, let me install some "security software" which requires administrative privileges, written by some immature wacko who spends months stalking and harassing anyone who criticizes him! What could possibly go wrong?

  22. It's no advertisement... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not selling anything, it's free & what I state is merely truth + facts that those like you can't validly technically disprove...

    Yes - & odds are STRONG you're an advertiser SCARED SHITLESS of a product YOU CAN'T JUST "BUY OUT" + CONTROL (AdBlock/AdBlock+/Ghostery) in hosts files.

    * Am I right? You betcha...

    After all - Who the HELL ELSE would do that to something you already have that makes you safer, faster, & more reliably connected + more anonymous?

    (Well - Possibly inferior browser addon competitors that don't so as much as hosts & yet USE MORE RESOURCES, but I doubt it - they made enough money already from you advertiser FOOLS bribing them or paying them off OR outright buying them, lol)

    Malware makers/botnet herders??

    DOUBT IT - they just "make more" like DORITOS with malicious sites etc.!

    SO WHO ELSE IS LEFT WHO WOULD DOWNMOD MY POSTS?

    ANSWER = ADVERTISERS!

    (You know: Like YOU, now posting by ac + using sockpuppets to "farm karma" to gain modpoints here to downmod my post as you did to do so with... after all - IT'S NOT LIKE YOU SCUM DON'T LIVE ON DECEITS!)

    APK

    P.S.=> DECEITS & scumbaggery like this article's about for instance...

    Face facts:

    You & YOURS? Man - You're all trash (but I think you know it, since all you could manage was a shit no brain job like marketing, lol)... apk

    1. Re:It's no advertisement... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. It's still an ad. Paid or not, you're spamming to promote a product in which you have some vested interest.

  23. Guess what stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many security softwares & other system level tools DEMAND you use admin priveleges!

    FACT:

    There is LITERALLY no other way I can update hosts files to give you protection vs. myriad forms of threats online AND to speed you up 2 ways (not just blocking ads, but also putting where you spend a GOOD odds are 95++% of your TIME online by placing your favorites @ the TOP of hosts which are the 1st resolver queried over slower & MASSIVELY exploitable remote DNS).

    I'd GLADLY listen to you, "oh fountain of programming wisdom" (lol, not) if you can show me such a way while I am in Windows... ok?

    APK

    P.S.=> Are you REALLY that stupid, as well as the NO BALLS totally unidentifiable AC coward you evidence yourself to be that you can't post using your "registered 'luser'" account here to face me directly?

    Yes... lol!

    You also know I'd rip you in 1/2 with facts like the above since I'd STRONGLY WAGER I have before & you KNOW I'd just toss that RIGHT BACK IN YOUR WEASEL FACE, you little punk... apk

    1. Re:Guess what stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many security softwares & other system level tools DEMAND you use admin priveleges!

      Yup. The difference is, I might or might not have a reason to distrust them (depends on what my research turns up). You, on the other hand, have been acting immaturely and unprofessionally for years on these and other forums. I don't really care if your software is the greatest thing ever, I won't install it, because I don't trust you. You act like a spoiled toddler. It's not much of a stretch to think that you might include malicious code in your software for some insane reason. In fact, if I read tomorrow that your software had been installing rootkits to track slashdot posters so you could retaliate against people who downmod your spam posts, I wouldn't think that was out of character for you.

      P.S.=> Are you REALLY that stupid, as well as the NO BALLS totally unidentifiable AC coward you evidence yourself to be that you can't post using your "registered 'luser'" account here to face me directly?

      Like you, I don't have an account. I suppose I could always find something to sign my AC posts with. How about:

      ...apk

      ?

  24. Not "new"... by m2pc · · Score: 1

    Apple has supported the "sms:" URL scheme on iOS for years now. Here's a site with a how-to from 2013.

  25. Re:Anyone wonder WHY I wrote this now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Advertisers = scum!
    ...
    [advertisement]
    ...

  26. FTFY: It's a BETTER product - the best! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: You're welcome to prove otherwise considering you project a vested interest in my inferior competition obviously...

    (The hilarious part's that you're reduced to being an unidentifiable ac WORM, unable to face me directly OR prove me wrong... why? I've obviously CRUSHED YOU before & caught you in massive mistakes under your "registered 'luser'" account here on slashdot. Thus, you know the 1st thing I'd do is TOSS MY BLOWING YOU EASILY AWAY BEFORE RIGHT BACK IN YOUR SLIMY WORM FACE... knowing that here? Hey... that's priceless!)

    * What makes ME laugh hugely?

    Calling my posts "spam" is "the best you got" - & that "ain't much"... lol! It's "ok for my inferior competition to post but not me"? Wrong.

    Thus, so I'll be true to myself (& others as well by my telling it how it is really is), & continue.

    YOU CAN'T STOP ME POWERLESS WORM!

    APK

    P.S.=> Call it "spam" all you like - you can't prove my points on hosts validly technically wrong on how hosts add more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity over BLATANTLY INFERIOR browser addons - you know it, I CERTAINLY DO, & so does anyone else reading! FACT (that you can't disprove, history's proven this here on /. TOO many times, lol): Hosts files do FAR MORE, for FAR LESS & are already natively built-in to your system - NO questions asked... apk

    1. Re:FTFY: It's a BETTER product - the best! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First you say:

      It's no advertisement... apk

      and

      I'm not selling anything

      And then you say:

      It's "ok for my inferior competition to post but not me"? Wrong.

      If you're not selling anything, who is your "competition"?

      You're admitting that you know you're engaging in unethical behavior (spam posting ads), but have decided to excuse it by saying "well they do it too". Although I've never seen a single spam post by one of your "competitors" on this forum, while there are hundreds, if not thousands, from you.

      (The hilarious part's that you're reduced to being an unidentifiable ac WORM, unable to face me directly OR prove me wrong... why? I've obviously CRUSHED YOU before & caught you in massive mistakes under your "registered 'luser'" account here on slashdot. Thus, you know the 1st thing I'd do is TOSS MY BLOWING YOU EASILY AWAY BEFORE RIGHT BACK IN YOUR SLIMY WORM FACE... knowing that here? Hey... that's priceless!)

      A little about me, since you seem to be fishing: I don't have an account here. I'm not going to create one just so you can stalk it like you have others who have criticized you. Although if it will really make you happy, I'll consider making one and leaving a random comment here and there so you can hate on it, I'm nice like that.

      I'm not affiliated with any of your "competition". I don't make ad blocking software, and I don't promote any particular ad blocking software over any other. In fact, I don't like or dislike your software, or have any opinion on whether it's worthwhile to use or not. I dislike you. I don't trust you. And by proxy, I don't trust any software you've written. You are petty, malicious and immature in your treatment of others; why should I trust that your software does not contain these elements of your personality? Wouldn't I be like the frog, agreeing to take the scorpion on my back across the river even though I know his true nature?

      You are your own worst enemy, and the biggest obstacle to the success of your software is you... apk

  27. Telling truth = unethical? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: That's all I do - & You're welcome to validly technically prove my points on hosts wrong on how they do FAR MORE for FAR LESS & give users more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity!

    Please - go for it (you won't be able to & YOU KNOW IT, I know it... anyone reading with 1/2 a brain KNOWS it - history's my backer on that on /., lol!).

    Additionally - as far as "unethical & unprofessional"? LOL, please - LOOK @ THIS ARTICLE! Advertisers do that. What "so-called 'competition'" of mine is OWNED or BRIBED by them?? AlmostALLAdsBlocked & Ghostery!

    So give us a break Mr. Advertiser (or one of their 'cronies', lol!).

    QUESTION: Do YOU trust them now?

    (If so, you're not only an unethical unprofessional totally unidentifiable WORM & truly a coward, but you're also a TOTAL FOOL!)

    APK

    P.S.=> Lastly & by the way: bYou haven't told me of a way to update a hosts file MINUS USING ADMIN PRIVELEGE "genius" - lol, clue: It can't be done...

    A dunce such as yourself doesn't have the technical acumen to know that obviously but, of course NOW, you KNOW that, @ least now you do since I've shown that much, as well as my showing EVERYONE hosts do FAR MORE, for FAR LESS and give users more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity than ANY OTHER SINGLE slower wasteful inefficient browser addons do - by FAR, no questions asked (again, history's my backer considering NOBODY EVER VALIDLY & TECHNICALLY PROVES ME WRONG on that very account)... apk

  28. It's no advertisement: It's truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not selling anything, it's free & what I state is merely truth + facts that those like you can't validly technically disprove...

    &

    UNLIKE ADVERTISERS & their bribed or bought off to NOT DO THE 1 JOB THEY HAD blatantly inferior "so-called 'competition'" of mine (AdBlock/AdBlock+/Ghostery)? I don't bushwhack people's systems!

    I do the opposite & give users more speed, security, reliability, + anonymity FOR FAR LESS doing FAR MORE, for FREE - completely safe shown so by 57 antivirus products proving it as is shown in my posts.

    Yes - & odds are STRONG you're an advertiser SCARED SHITLESS of a product YOU CAN'T JUST "BUY OUT" + CONTROL (AdBlock/AdBlock+/Ghostery) in hosts files.

    * Am I right? You betcha...

    After all - Who the HELL ELSE would do that to something you already have that makes you safer, faster, & more reliably connected + more anonymous?

    (Well - Possibly inferior browser addon competitors that don't so as much as hosts & yet USE MORE RESOURCES, but I doubt it - they made enough money already from you advertiser FOOLS bribing them or paying them off OR outright buying them, lol)

    Malware makers/botnet herders??

    DOUBT IT - they just "make more" like DORITOS with malicious sites etc.!

    SO WHO ELSE IS LEFT WHO WOULD DOWNMOD MY POSTS?

    ANSWER = ADVERTISERS!

    (You know: Like YOU, now posting by ac + using sockpuppets to "farm karma" to gain modpoints here to downmod my post as you did to do so with... after all - IT'S NOT LIKE YOU SCUM DON'T LIVE ON DECEITS!)

    APK

    P.S.=> DECEITS & scumbaggery like this article's about for instance...

    Face facts:

    You & YOURS? Man - You're all trash (but I think you know it, since all you could manage was a shit no brain job like marketing, lol)... apk

  29. Re:Like this article shows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No thanks, I'll just continue to use my script blocker instead of relying on a blacklist maintained by a /. troll who still, after all these years, hasn't bothered taking the time to learn how to write a coherent sentence.

    Seriously APK, go take some writing courses, your posts make people want to claw their eyeballs out.

  30. Re:Anyone wonder WHY I wrote this now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I do wonder why you're spamming Windows software in an iPhone comment thread.

  31. Re:Anyone wonder WHY I wrote this now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've always wondered why none of you "big brains of /." (not) can't validly technically prove apk wrong on hosts ever? Why's that?? Is it since you're so fucking stupid and limited??? Yes obviously. Lots of "talkers" on /., few actual doers like apk. That's what I see. So does everyone else.

  32. Making a point by asking a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: Get it? It's made my point for me via verifiable, concrete, undeniable facts + reputable sources.

    * Which is, of course, my right to do AND more than you have managed since it's FAR better than being a PUNY off topic unidentifiable trolling TRULYcowardly WORM such as yourself, by far... lol!

    (Truer words were NEVER spoken on /. )

    APK

    P.S.=> Instead of being a "ne'er-do-well" troll, why don't YOU create something of great utility to others that uses what you already NATIVELY have built-in (vs. illogically & STUPIDLY "bolting on 'MoAr'") that's more efficient & does FAR MORE and for FAR LESS RESOURCE CONSUMPTION than my blatantly INFERIOR usermode slower messagepassing overheads ridden RAM bloating CPU cycles eating SOLD-OUT to advertisers browser addons?

    OH, what am I saying?? You can't - you're a mere 'talk' do nothing "ne'er-do-well"... yes, I expected TOO MUCH from the trolling off topic likes of you, "ne'er-do-well"... apk

  33. Anyone wonder WHY I wrote this now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Advertisers = scum! See subject & 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 - using something you already have vs. "bolting on browser addons 'MOAR' that's usermode slower & increases messagepassing, cpu + ram overuse overheads & actually SPEEDS YOU UP 2 ways (adblocking + locally cached in RAM favorites placed @ the TOP of hosts for fastest resolution speed), whereas by way of comparison, other "so-called security 'solutions'" SLOW YOU DOWN!

    * :)

    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/...

    ---

    "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

    P.S.=> 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... & THAT WORD = hosts!

    (Accept NO substitutes!)

    ...apk

  34. Re:I write code (better than adblock) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Time for Adblock's long overdue cousin, APKblock...

  35. I admit I tell the truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: You're saying my telling truths = unethical here http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... ?

    Hey:

    You're MORE THAN WELCOME TO VALIDLY TECHNICALLY PROVE ME WRONG on those points - go for it.

    Then again? You KNOW it can't be done & is an impossible task (especially for a no-mind TROLL like you).

    So - thus, you troll completely off topic spouting your bullshit I "spam" etc.!

    Can't BE 'spam' for 1 thing: I'm not selling a thing, only telling the truth of a BETTER way of adblocking!

    One that also protects you from FAR MORE threats online than just mere ads & also SPEEDS YOU UP more than browser addons do in more than a few ways!

    1.) Kernelmode operation vs. slower usermode layering over browsers increasing messagepassing overheads, ram + cpu overconsuming browser addons.

    2.) Browser addons use SLOW regex work

    3.) Hosts being the default queried 1st resolver operating WAY BEFORE addons can

    4.) Hosts speed you up by putting you favorite sites you use MOST, like 95++% of the time, @ the TOP of a custom hosts file you create, which is FAR FASTER RESOLUTION than remote DNS gives you (which is what most folks use, etc.) ... & you can't fight that + all my other points in favor of hosts files' superiority giving users more speed, security, reliability, & even anonymity - you aren't able to combat that technically validly, period. It's just truth... unlike your purest bullshit!

    * I'm telling the truth & you're lying (or so damn illiterate you can't understand anything written).

    APK

    P.S.=> Anyone that engages in adblocking IS a competitor to me and specifically the ones that 'souled-out' to advertisers (AdBlock/AdBlockPlus/Ghostery)!

    So - as far as I'm concerned?

    They've given up their once NOBLE goals & became pawns/cronies of the people they were SUPPOSED to be against - advertisers (for VERY GOOD REASONS like infecting us, stealing bandwidth + speed we paid for, tracking us, etc. - et al)... apk

    1. Re:I admit I tell the truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're saying my telling truths = unethical

      Actually, I have no problem with what you're posting. As I've said, I don't have any opinion on whether or not your software has any value. I have problems with where and how you're posting this stuff. You're flooding a discussion forum with your ads. People reading the discussion have to scroll past the walls of crap promoting your software product, and it's annoying enough that many people probably say to themselves (like I did), There's no way I'm ever installing anything from this asshole.

      As for being off-topic, someone else has pointed out that you're flood posting about your Windows-only software in a discussion about iPhone apps. So perhaps you could sharpen up the ol' reading comprehension skills as well.

      *Sigh*

      Y'know, maybe I am as dense as you've accused me of being... I'm just beginning to realize that you live in a special world, where you are never wrong. Anyone who challenges your behavior is the enemy and must be working for your competitors, or have some other ulterior motive besides just wanting you to stop acting like a spoiled child all the time.

      I thought initially that you might be behaving badly without realizing it, but the more we interact the more I understand that you are either being deliberately obtuse in order to avoid admitting that you're behaving like a jerk, or you have some kind of mental defect that prevents you from seeing things clearly.

      I worked with a girl once who I considered to be a good person at heart, but her behavior in social situations was so appalling (overt sexual references, over-the-top obnoxious) that nobody could stand to be around her, and she eventually stopped being invited out to social events. I felt a bit sorry for her, so one day I took her out for drinks and tried to gently explain to her what it was about the way she was acting that was causing her so much trouble.

      Her response was aggressive and accusatory: SHE didn't have a problem, EVERYONE ELSE had the problem-- and how DARE I insinuate that it was her fault in any way! For the next several months, she did everything she could to make working with her hell (she was the group administrative aide, so she could do quite a lot-- "forgetting" to book travel, making sure expense reports sat on her desk for months). She was eventually fired. I hear about her occasionally from mutual acquaintances, and every (even casual) relationship she has seems to end in flames. It's a "double whammy"-- no one wants to be around her because of the way she acts, but she retaliates violently when anyone challenges her behavior, so no one bothers to try to get her to change the way she acts.

      I think you're probably cut from the same cloth. There's no possibility of inducing you to fix your bad behavior, because you can't see that your own actions are the cause of your problems. You're operating off your own flawed, circular, but internally consistent logic. The only hope for you is that *maybe, just maybe* you're a smart enough guy who, like the character of John Nash in A Beautiful Mind, can test in vivo the hypothesis that what your brain is telling you is not a completely accurate version of reality.

      If I were religious, I'd say a prayer for you, but I'm not. Best I can do is tip a beer to you now and again. Cheers, and I wish for you this: that you have family and friends who love you and whom you can love, and that you find fulfillment and happiness in your life.

  36. Quit the unjustifiable abused downmods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: I don't get those? I don't repost. Blame others who can't validly technically prove my points wrong on hosts giving users more speed, security, reliability & anonymity + doing so for less...

    * Of course, I KNOW you're just trying to "make it look that way" & it's a setup on YOUR PART troll, so don't BULLSHIT ME or try to do that to anyone else here - we're too smart for that shit.

    (It's "your kind" who have registered 'luser' accounts replying to me by ac that issue those downmods & your ac posts are so you don't REMOVE your downmods - do you *REALLY* think you can pull your puny wannabe "jedi mind trick" on me or anyone else here? Your favorite color MUST be 'transparent' - I see RIGHT THRU YOU easily!)

    APK

    P.S.=> Unbelievable... lol! apk

  37. AdBlock+ = inferior & 'souled-out' vs. hosts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can adblock+ do 16 things hosts do 4 speed, security, & reliability:

    1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
    2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C talkback
    3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C talkback
    4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C talkback
    5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (for reliability)
    6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoning
    7.) Protect vs. trackers
    8.) Protect vs. spam
    9.) Protect vs. phish
    10.) Protect vs. caps
    11.) Get you past a dns blocks
    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.) Easily controlled data
    16.) Do all that & block ads better vs. addons more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

    * ANSWER ="NO" on ab+ doing it as well or @ ALL + 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).

    ---

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

    ---

    ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in browsers via native browser methods!

    ---

    Ab+'s paid to not do its job by default http://www.businessinsider.com... & ABP bought out adblock http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    ---

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

    ---

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

    ---

    What's best?

    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 safe per 57 antivirus programs in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    a 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    ... apk

  38. I write code (better than adblock's) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: Better than "AlmostALLAdsBlocked" by FAR doing more w/ less - how about you?

    ZERO... lmao!

    * Plus as usual - You're MORE THAN WELCOME to do so yourself!

    ---

    HOWEVER:

    The truth of it YOU yourself evidence as a PUNY off topic unidentifiable ac TROLL is, you don't have the skills... fact!

    Hell, you can't even VALIDLY & TECHNICALLY prove my points on hosts files wrong here ->http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=8090401&cid=50629611

    LMAO @ U!

    ( ... & all you try to do is effetely "hide" my posts via downmods you abuse, but you can't prove me wrong -> http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... )

    Which MOST EVERYONE SEES ANYHOW dimwit, since most here browse well below the -1 default EASILY SOCKPUPPET CHEATED FOR MODERATION ABUSED so-called 'default moderation threshold'

    Obviously it's setup just so the "agenda" of fools can be furthered here hiding posts that utterly DESTROY it...

    ---

    Clue: You're ONLY FOOLING YOURSELVES, & I just come RIGHT BACK OVER THE TOP OF YOUR LIMITED ASSES (limited on ALL fronts no less) easily!

    (Simply by posting again - eventually exhausting your modpoints you abuse, & I win - since I have NO limitsunlike most ac posters... as always I win, & simply by using facts & truth DOLTS like yourself cannot overcome or defeat!)

    ---

    Yes, it's THAT simple outsmarting & outwitting dimwitted DOLTS like yourself... proofs in the pudding after all!

    (... And, on ALL fronts noted here)

    APK

    P.S.=> Lastly & somewhat important: IF you can't determine the meaning of words from within the context of the framework in which they're used? You have the problem!

    (In being the illiterate dolt that you have evidenced your off topic trolling self to be via your utter bs in that crap, you read & understand me JUST FINE - everyone else does, which would clearly indicate YOU have the problem, illiterate moron that you are, off topic troll)... apk

  39. Time 4U to validly&technically prove me wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: Oh, that's right - you trolls CAN'T here http://apple.slashdot.org/comm...

    * :)

    (That's a fact - & that's the POWER of truth & facts that "you & yours" trolls, can NEVER ever overcome... as well as my MASSIVE computing skills + supreme determination, lol!)

    Lastly - "oh, that's SO clever", lol - too bad you can't make it happen, since you run dry of abused downmods, I just keep posting UNLIMITEDLY as ac (via my vast abilities) running you DRY of them too, every time!

    R O T F L M A O @ U!

    Pretty easy to do for me... why? Heck - it's since you're DOLTS & trolling "ne'er-do-wells"!

    APK

    P.S.=> My indomitable WILL & massive determination + excellence in computing is CLEARLY, just too much for the trolling likes of you... apk

  40. AdBlock+ = inferior & 'souled-out' vs. hosts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can adblock+ do 16 things hosts do 4 speed, security, & reliability:

    1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
    2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C talkback
    3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C talkback
    4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C talkback
    5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (for reliability)
    6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoning
    7.) Protect vs. trackers
    8.) Protect vs. spam
    9.) Protect vs. phish
    10.) Protect vs. caps
    11.) Get you past a dns blocks
    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.) Easily controlled data
    16.) Do all that & block ads better vs. addons more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

    * ANSWER ="NO" on ab+ doing it as well or @ ALL + 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).

    ---

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

    ---

    ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in browsers via native browser methods!

    ---

    Ab+'s paid to not do its job by default http://www.businessinsider.com... & ABP bought out adblock http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    ---

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

    ---

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

    ---

    What's best?

    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 safe per 57 antivirus programs in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    a 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    ... apk