Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

UK Mobile Operator Could Block Ads At Network Level (telegraph.co.uk)

Posted by Soulskill on from the it's-almost-like-the-customers-are-customers dept.

Mickeycaskill writes: UK network operator EE says it is investigating the possibility of blocking adverts at a network level, allowing customers to limit the types and frequency of adverts they see in browsers and applications. The move is likely to concern digital publishers, many of whom rely on advertising revenue to fund their content. Ad blockers have become more popular in recent times, with many users employing them to save battery life, consume less data and protect against malvertising attacks. EE CEO Olaf Swantee said, "We think it’s important that, over time, customers start to be offered more choice and control over the level and intensity of ads on mobile. For EE, this is not about ad blocking, but about starting an important debate around customer choice, controls and the level of ads customers receive. This is an important debate that needs to happen soon."

35 of 109 comments (clear)

  1. Websites will block EE ip ranges by bazmail · · Score: 1

    Its not going to work, and besides he only said that to kickstart a conversation in the UK about annoying ads.

    1. Re:Websites will block EE ip ranges by Guybrush_T · · Score: 1

      French provider Free has been blocking ads for years. First as an ISP, then also for mobile customers.

      This started during the Free-Google war which settled in the meantime, but the ad blocking is still in effect. But that won't make all companies do the same.

      In fact, only Free can do that since they do not rely on any collaboration or contracts with ad providers. All the others are stuck because they are either part of a big advertisement group or have heavy bilateral contracts with ad agencies.

    2. Re:Websites will block EE ip ranges by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure. Many of these web sites are operated by people who don't control the advertisements themselves. They outsource the ad job to a third party then wait for revenue to trickle in. They may not even have the skills to do the blocking if their tech skill level is just enough to customize wordpress.

    3. Re:Websites will block EE ip ranges by davester666 · · Score: 1

      No, this is about getting a cut of the action. These are MY customers. If you want your ads to show up on MY customers devices, you will have to pay me $x/impression.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    4. Re:Websites will block EE ip ranges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, websites will not. Now that Net Neutrality is officially dead, all ISPs will do this.

      "You want to advertise to my customers? Pony up my cut of the revenue, or I block your ad serving domains."

      Publicly, ISPs will sell this as removing ads for their valued customers. The hoi polloi will take the bait; Hook, line, and sinker. This is why Google fought for net neutrality. It's not because they were protecting fairness and level playing fields. Google's only concern is defending their primary source of revenue.

  2. Re: For the BEST adblocker (& more vs. threats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I hope your software ability doesn't match your spelling and grammar ability.

    If you pay me to try it, I may. In the meantime, I'll simply do what other users should do. Search Google for "ad block host files" and read the directions. Genius not required. Spelling and grammar are required.

    Sincerely,
    The Grammar Nazi

  3. Re: For the BEST adblocker (& more vs. threats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Spamming? How cool of you!

    I suggest people interested search Google for FREE solutions. Simply search, "ad block hosts files" read the simple directions and BAM your done. No executables, no untrusted software, no convincing from Anonymous Cowards.

  4. Bad idea! by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

    First they blocked ads, but I don't see ads

    Then they blocked porn, but I don't watch porn... (Liar!)

    Then they blocked politicians... well, that's okay (No it's not!)

    Then they blocked Slashdot... Okay that's going too far, everybody, out!

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re:Bad idea! by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      In theory a provider is like a cloud computer system that offers direct network access as the main product.
      Why not use the "offered more choice" to upsell or differentiate with new services?
      A provider might come with a few settings for email accounts, SPAM filter setting, their own adsl settings (1, 2+, a low latency profile), free or upgraded web site setup. Blocking as an on/off option?
      The user is still a customer with some real network options :)

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    2. Re:Bad idea! by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Blocking will not remain optional for very long. The old slippery slope applies here.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    3. Re:Bad idea! by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Once NGO's, local and other governments work out thats its looking deep into the flow of data... why not block or scan for other data too? Images (hash list), movies, files names, file types.. it will get interesting fast.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  5. Badly behaved adverts are the problem by agoodm · · Score: 1

    I believe the problem on mobile devices is not per say well behaved adverts, but instead its adverts that cause the page to morph or change some seconds after it is rendered. My local newspapers website is virtually unusable on my android tablet device. The page loads, you start reading, or decide what to click on next and suddenly the content moves down the page so that an advert can appear...

    1. Re:Badly behaved adverts are the problem by peragrin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It gets better. Adverts use in 30-50% of current bandwidth. By blocking add on the network the mobile company saves precious bandwidth instead of using data caps.

      Datacaps will kill internet advertisers.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    2. Re:Badly behaved adverts are the problem by Threni · · Score: 1

      Adverts use half the bandwidth? Which arse did you pull that statistic out of?

    3. Re:Badly behaved adverts are the problem by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Likely the same arse that thought it was a great idea to auto run fucking video advertisements with no sound controls, this on a page with no other video and just a few images ie so about 99% of bandwidth in that case being advertisement that could not be shut off without leaving the page or running an ad blocker and reloading the page or permanently blocking that particular advertising agency and reloading the page.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    4. Re:Badly behaved adverts are the problem by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Agreed, the figure seems too low to me.

  6. Ummmm.. no by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't like ads, but I don't want ISPs to be allowed to monitor or alter content mid-stream. I appreciate the intention, but that's a door we've already been clear we don't want opened.

    What I would like, however, is an ad-blocking router.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    1. Re:Ummmm.. no by grumpy_old_grandpa · · Score: 1

      An edit to the /etc/hosts file would be a much cheaper fix for you. Works on all major OS, including Android. An of course, works regardless of where you connect.

      You'd have to update it from time to time, however once every two/three years is more than enough in my experience. Or you could be fancy, and do a cron-job.

    2. Re:Ummmm.. no by jacobbrett · · Score: 1

      If you have an OpenWRT-compatible router and are comfortable administrating it you could install this adblocking script, which automatically updates its own block list from a variety of sources. I've personally been using this set-up for about a month and its been working well.

    3. Re:Ummmm.. no by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Thank you!

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  7. Re: Elephant in the room by popo · · Score: 1

    Which is why the *real* elephant in the room is *browser security* and the fact that javascript *still* isn't effectively sandboxed in 2015.

    That alone would be a a shockingly big deal, but making it even bigger is the fact that the world's largest ad supported company also manufactures the world's most popular web browser -- oh, and bundles Flash.

    Still though-- NoScript works. Don't kill off your favorite website just because out browsers are broken.

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
  8. Re:For the BEST adblocker (& more vs. threats) by tepples · · Score: 2

    You make a big deal that browser-level blocking extensions are "usermode slower & increases messagepassing". But if a browser extension blocks a request, the CPU doesn't need to make a context switch to kernel mode in the first place. And good luck with your hosts files once ad networks start randomizing their servers' hostnames for every hit using wildcard CNAME records. Finally, and most relevantly to the article, good luck changing the hosts file on mobile devices without root privileges.

  9. Re: Elephant in the room by tepples · · Score: 1

    Still though-- NoScript works.

    If a web application has a good reason to require JavaScript to function, what should it do to gain the trust of a NoScript user?

  10. Re:All newspapers will have SSL by behrooz0az · · Score: 1

    I don't think that's how they wanna go about it. security is part of their reasoning.
    They're gonna block ip addresses at 'network level'. it's not going to be matching the host name against 'googleanalytics.com', they're going after 173.194.112.XXX

    --
    Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
  11. Why not ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... capture all the ads and offer a 'sponsors' button/tab with the requested page? That way, people who want to see the ads can elect to view them as a list. Or reload the page with ads included. Whatever works best.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  12. How to make publishers willing to offer source? by tepples · · Score: 1

    If a web application has a good reason to require JavaScript to function, what should it do to gain the trust of a NoScript user?

    Offer source so people can run it locally.

    What use is a local app that is unable to access the resources it requires due to the Same Origin Policy? Some of the resources are dynamically generated by the web app's server. Even ability to download static resources locally as well would fail because Chrome considers each file in the file: scheme to be a separate origin.

    If you instead refer to storing all resources on a computer owned by the user, there are two things likely to happen. The first is unwillingness to share source code: "You can use the app on the public server without charge, or you can license a copy to run on your own private server for $9,999." The second is network effects. Consider a web application that allows users of a particular server to interact, but user accounts on your private server cannot interact with users on the public servers. So good luck getting the majority of users to use your private server instead of the public ones.

    If you want more concrete examples, consider whether the publisher would be wiling to offer the source code for Google Maps or H&R Block At Home or Netflix or an HTML5 multiplayer game with greater-than-hobbyist production values. Or what would be the business model for funding the continued development of such an application as free software?

  13. Having to write a half dozen native apps by tepples · · Score: 1

    As more Internet users adopt NoScript, does this mean people are going to have to stop writing web apps and instead write six different native apps, one each for Windows desktop, Windows UWP, OS X, iOS, X11/Linux, and Android?

  14. Re:For the BEST adblocker (& more vs. threats) by EETech1 · · Score: 1

    I've tried it, and my core 2 duo never finished without crashing.

    So much duplication that it never completed? Just ground it to a halt (not out of ram) even after several tries.

    I wish you'd just post the output weekly somewhere as APK master host file so I could just copy it in to place on all my devices.

  15. Free (in France) already offers that option by illogict · · Score: 1

    Free, a network operator in France, already offers the option to block ads on both their fixed (DSL and FTTH) and mobile networks. It was first implemented and enabled by default) three years ago when they were “fighting” with Google about who should pay for interco upgrades.
    It is now default-disabled and opt-in as they managed to reach an agreement with them.

  16. Re:I'll let others speak for me on that account by dave420 · · Score: 1

    One extension being sub-par does not make them all sub-par. That is terrible logic.

    Using ADB to update your HOSTS files is ridiculous, and HOSTS protection is far from perfect. A wildcard advertising domain can not be blocked by a HOSTS file unless the HOSTS file is megabytes large just for the single wildcard domain. If you don't understand why, you really need (more) help.

  17. How many people actually root? by tepples · · Score: 1

    As chihowa points out, you need root on your phone to use a hosts file. What percentage of Android users have root on their phones? As I understand it, the farthest a "typical" Android user will go is turn on the "Unknown sources" to install an APK file. But because of Android's security model, an APK file can't affect DNS resolution, despite the name, unless it's a full-on VPN client.

  18. Net Neutrality? by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

    Could this possibly go against net neutrality rules? Though I do totally agree with blocking them on Mobile -- especially video-based ads (I'm looking at you YouTube)

  19. AIDE is an app for apping apps by tepples · · Score: 1

    You need a PC to develop for them...

    AIDE allows development of Android applications directly on an Android tablet with a USB, Bluetooth, or clip-on keyboard. After the discontinuation of netbooks, some people recommended pressing such a tablet into service as a substitute for a laptop.

  20. Even if the sky is falling down by tepples · · Score: 1

    well... when the sky falls, then chickenlittle should worry

    In this model, I've spotted the pieces of camouflage that the aliens are assembling.

    my sources in the security community get those new adserver names as the pop up easily too.

    Not if they're like a328bc97.someadnetwork.example. Even eight hex digits would require four billion lines in a hosts file.

  21. Re:Phantasyland "theoreticals" != reality by tepples · · Score: 1

    In other words, you won't be satisfied until you see a proof of concept. I'll put that on my list.