Web lists-archives.com

Re: Princeton’s Ad-Blocking Superweapon




My bloviated meandering follows what Christian Riechers graced us with on 4/19/2017 1:55 PM:
On 04/16/2017 08:39 AM, Sailfish wrote:
REF:
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/princetons-ad-blocking-superweapon-may-put-an-end-to-the-ad-blocking-arms-race

Itsy: http://tinyurl.com/mz2xpcw

<snip article quote/>

Seems to me that these new detection techniques, once incorporated,
could be countered by ad agencies by disconnecting the "sponsored" or
"close ad" display DIVs from the actual ads themselves and it's not
clear how they will be able to stop sites that don't display rendered
hints as to forthcoming ad content.

From the author of the Adblock Plus extension:

"... that’s where we are with undetectable ad blocking: possible in
theory but completely impractical."

https://palant.de/2017/04/19/is-undetectable-ad-blocking-possible

Excellent article in response, danke

[excerpt quote=\"
Altogether this means that the cost of the layout calculation will be doubled for every page, both in terms of CPU cycles and memory — only because at some point the web page might try to detect ad blocking. Add to this significant complexity of the solution and considerable maintenance cost (the approach might have to be adjusted as new APIs are being added to the web platform). So I would be very surprised if any browser vendor would be interested in implementing it. And let’s not forget that all this is only about ad hiding.
\" /]

REF: https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-plans-ad-blocking-feature-in-popular-chrome-browser-1492643233
Itsy: http://tinyurl.com/lw96w9z

[excerpt quote=\"
*Google Plans Ad Blocking Feature in Popular Chrome Browser*

In one possible application Google is considering, it may choose to block all advertising that appears on sites with offending ads, instead of the individual offending ads themselves. In other words, site owners may be required to ensure all of their ads meet the standards, or could see all advertising across their sites blocked in Chrome.
\" /]

It seems that Google had it's own, self-serving, response in waiting. It's unclear whether their approach would truly excise, or attempt the more difficult task of hiding the ad, (I suspect the former base on your article's position.) However, what I suspect is really the goal of *the largest ad revenue company in the world* is to focus on non-displaying pages that don't adhere to certain agreed on standards, perhaps with some confusing error display and, worst case, threaten to blacklist said sites from Google SERPs.

--
Sailfish
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general