Journal jdavidb's Journal: ad blocking software detected 12
This page just told me "This page cannot be displayed because ad blocking software has been detected." Cute. I guess I just won't bother reading, then.
Or I'll turn off Javascript, or I'll use wget and/or lynx.
Interesting (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
function dieAdBlockPlusDie()
{
var giframe = document.getElementsByTagName("iframe");
var bod = document.getElementsByTagName("body");
var blocked=1;
for (var i = 0; i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It seems to be detecting some client-side CSS rules too. It searches all iframes for the presence of one named "google_ads_frame" and, if it doesn't find it (say a "display: none;" rule), it replaces the content with the block message.
Re: (Score:2)
I used to run NoScript, because I didn't admit until last year that Javascript had any practical purposes at all. I got a bit tired of whitelisting increasing numbers of sites, and there were a few bugs, crashes, and incompatibilities, but overall I thought it was great, especially since it helped avoid crap like this. But when I got a new laptop last year I never got around to installing it, and have been doing fairly well without it. If I start seeing more of this, though, I'll put it back.
I original
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for the additional info.
Actually I like seeing these crusades escalate, as the software becomes more sophisticated on both ends. I just worry that someone might escalate it to using legal force, which I would consider to be wrong in this case in the absence of a contract between the site owner and users.
I think site owners ought to be able to take whatever technical measures they want in order to prevent me from seeing their site in ways other than as they intend. And at the same time I think I
Blanket FireFox [sic] ban (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Heh, that bugs me a little bit, but its easily gotten around. And I don't care about the user agent string and stats; he's very confused if he thinks that all Firefox users feel that way. Personally I don't think protocols should ever include meta information about the specific version of client or server used; doing so encourages deviations from the standard, exploitation of security holes, and in the case of http bowdlerization of content based on user-agent. Having a header in the protocol to specify
Re: (Score:2)
And for the benefit of those following along: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/59 [mozilla.org]