Why can't we have an undetectable adblocker?

On Fri, 08 Nov 2019 09:33:49 -0000, CoMmAnDoTrOn wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:

How hard can it be to run whatever the ad requests, and ONLY omit the
actual display on the screen?

Anything is easy for the person who will not do it himself or herself.
I challenge Commander Kinsey to walk the talk and produce a *working*
adblocker which gets around our powerful techniques at Leet Website
Command.

Our ads run a script *after* the actual display, to check whether the ad
is actually displayed and tell the web server. We can tell when the
actual display is omitted. We can tell when the ad is displayed but
covered over. If you run whatever the ad requests, the server knows when
there is an adblocker. If you don't run whatever the ad requests, the
server knows from the silence.

Adblockers cannot fake what our script tells the server. We change it
every few hours, faster than adblockers can keep up. We change it by
geographic location. No adblocker can afford to pay for the full-time
army of workers needed to keep up with our constant changes.

Bull****. Absolute utter bull****. There is no way you can tell if an ad is displayed on my monitor, or if a white box is displayed on my monitor. You'd need a camera in my house to do that.

"Shadow" wrote

| On the homesite there's a 2 year old request to add support
| for Palemoon. Un-answered.
|
| https://github.com/gcrico/disable-style-button/issues/1
|

I don't think I've ever got an extension for FF that didn't
install in PM/NM. Though many of them seem to be faulty.
Over they ears there seems to be more funky behavior. There's
the issue with unsigned extensions. Then there are extensions
that don't seem to install by droppong them in the window. I
have to go to add-ons and browse to them. Or sometimes I
have to do that twice. I haven't noticed a pattern. Just
general discord.

| I managed to get it to install, it seems to un-crappify
| Reddit, but I have no toggle button. I searched in the toolbar items.
| Nada!! So I uninstalled.
| Maybe one of my dozens of about:config edits is messing
| something up.
| PS I use the same browser you do. (Newmoon, now renamed back
| to Palemoon - I never did understand why)
|

I have a stop sign icon on the toolbar. I think it just worked,
but it's possible I had to add it from the customizing window.
It works perfectly in NM and FF52.9. (2 or 3 others did not
work and never showed an icon.)
I don't use tabs, though I doubt that would affect the
icon showing up.

On 2019-11-08 14:19, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 08 Nov 2019 00:51:49 -0000, Carlos E. R.
wrote:

On 08/11/2019 01.30, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 07 Nov 2019 22:44:11 -0000, Carlos E. R.
wrote:

On 07/11/2019 21.47, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Why can't someone write an adblocker that isn’t detectable?Â* Don't
block
the ad, simply download it but don't display it, the web server
wouldn't
know the difference!

They can find out, because they don't see the results of the scripts
they run with the adds. Like one cookie not appearing, or a download
request at some URL with the same identifier that does not happen.

How hard can it be to run whatever the ad requests, and ONLY omit the
actual display on the screen?

Well, they are associated and unwanted actions the adds do that is not
displayed. I really prefer that nosy code not running, if possible.

All very well, but if that breaks the page so you can't see what you
wanted to see, then you have to turn the blocker off anyway!

The the webpage is so badly set up that removing the scripts makes it
unusable, I go to a different page. I do not turn off my script blocker.
I do not turn off my ad blocker.

Try this one. I think this is where I got it:

https://legacycollector.org/firefox-...202/index.html

It's v. .1.1 while the one from the site you got it
was .1. Looking at the two, it appears they're the
same thing but .1.1 also has files from 2016 added:
mozilla.rsa, mozilla.sf, manifest.mf.

Sorry for the confusion. I had asked about this,
I think in the Win7 group. Someone pointed me to
lecacycollector.org. I'd forgotten that was where
I got the extension. Nice site. That was also where
I got several alternatives that didn't work.

"Mayayana" wrote:

I think in the Win7 group. Someone pointed me to
lecacycollector.org. I'd forgotten that was where
I got the extension. Nice site. That was also where
I got several alternatives that didn't work.

Better get in quick. See the main page:
https://legacycollector.org/
"This archive will be shut down in December 2019"

wrote:

Ads which interfere with browser functionality are bad.
Ads which obscure web page are bad.
Ads with video and/or audio are bad.

In other words, ads are bad.

If you are doing this to support your family, I suggest you change the focus
of your work.


If you believe the ads are bad, you should not visit the web site.
You have no rights to the web site content without the ads.


Many web sites would not exist without the ads to pay for them. If
we changed the focus of our work, web sites would be killed off for
everyone. Let these web sites exist for those who will accept the
ads, and choose not to visit the web site yourself. Do not be a
totalitarian nazi.


--
Who pays the piper calls the tune.

Commander Kinsey wrote:

Bull****. Absolute utter bull****. There is no way you can tell if an
ad is displayed on my monitor, or if a white box is displayed on my
monitor. You'd need a camera in my house to do that.


Screenshots do not need a camera in your house. You are posting on a
topic you know nothing about. (And we have other ways to tell if an ad
is displayed.)

On Fri, 08 Nov 2019 19:43:22 -0000, Panthera Tigris Altaica wrote:

On 2019-11-08 14:19, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 08 Nov 2019 00:51:49 -0000, Carlos E. R.
wrote:

On 08/11/2019 01.30, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 07 Nov 2019 22:44:11 -0000, Carlos E. R.
wrote:

On 07/11/2019 21.47, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Why can't someone write an adblocker that isn’t detectable? Don't
block
the ad, simply download it but don't display it, the web server
wouldn't
know the difference!

They can find out, because they don't see the results of the scripts
they run with the adds. Like one cookie not appearing, or a download
request at some URL with the same identifier that does not happen.

How hard can it be to run whatever the ad requests, and ONLY omit the
actual display on the screen?

Well, they are associated and unwanted actions the adds do that is not
displayed. I really prefer that nosy code not running, if possible.

All very well, but if that breaks the page so you can't see what you
wanted to see, then you have to turn the blocker off anyway!

The the webpage is so badly set up that removing the scripts makes it
unusable, I go to a different page. I do not turn off my script blocker.

On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 14:46:02 -0500, "Mayayana"
wrote:

Try this one. I think this is where I got it:

https://legacycollector.org/firefox-...202/index.html

It's v. .1.1 while the one from the site you got it
was .1. Looking at the two, it appears they're the
same thing but .1.1 also has files from 2016 added:
mozilla.rsa, mozilla.sf, manifest.mf.

Sorry for the confusion. I had asked about this,
I think in the Win7 group. Someone pointed me to
lecacycollector.org. I'd forgotten that was where
I got the extension. Nice site. That was also where
I got several alternatives that didn't work.


I managed to install it, but again, no icon

disable styles button was successfully installed

Debug report:

//Error: disablestylesbutton: An exception occurred.
Error: Module `sdk/ui/button/toggle` is not found at
resource://gre/modules/commonjs/sdk/ui/button/toggle.js//

That's the start of a 4000 byte report ... most of which complained
about sdk and missing .js resources.
I'll just go back to using the menu -- view option.

Thanks for the site link. I bookmarked it.
[]'s

UPDATE - Installed perfectly on my portable Palemoon, and I get the
icon in the top left hand corner. Some setting I toggled in my default
Palemoon ..... I'll probably never figure out which one.
TY
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

On 08.11.19 21:44, Apd wrote:
"Mayayana" wrote:

I think in the Win7 group. Someone pointed me to
lecacycollector.org. I'd forgotten that was where
I got the extension. Nice site. That was also where
I got several alternatives that didn't work.

Better get in quick. See the main page:
https://legacycollector.org/
"This archive will be shut down in December 2019"


Thanks. Got a few fireftp xpi `s.

On Fri, 08 Nov 2019 22:25:27 +0100, Sjouke Burry
wrote:

On 08.11.19 21:44, Apd wrote:
"Mayayana" wrote:

I think in the Win7 group. Someone pointed me to
lecacycollector.org. I'd forgotten that was where
I got the extension. Nice site. That was also where
I got several alternatives that didn't work.

Better get in quick. See the main page:
https://legacycollector.org/
"This archive will be shut down in December 2019"


Thanks. Got a few fireftp xpi `s.

//Most importantly I've received several threats to my person for
running legacycollector.org - not the kind of thing I signed up for.
But hey, Internet, if that is how you want to play ball, I'm out.

Considering this, I've decided to stop providing this free archive and
void my plans.
This archive will be shut down in December 2019. Merry Christmas.
For those wanting to mirror this site, please use the following
torrent magnet link in favor of scraping the website. I won't be able
to seed this torrent for long, so please seed for others if you grab
this.//

magnet:?xt=urn:btih:2332zbsojxkxt36szehrjnck5nn4px f4&dn=legacycollector.org.tar.xz
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

On 08.11.19 22:15, CoMmAnDoTrOn wrote:
wrote:

Ads which interfere with browser functionality are bad.
Ads which obscure web page are bad.
Ads with video and/or audio are bad.

In other words, ads are bad.

If you are doing this to support your family, I suggest you change the focus
of your work.


If you believe the ads are bad, you should not visit the web site.
You have no rights to the web site content without the ads.

cut

Pardon me, but I dont remember signing a contract with any
website (not counting my provider website(s)).
What law are you quoting?

In article op.0aya8mxdwdg98l@glass, Commander Kinsey
wrote:

I don't want to have to set preferences for every page. I just want to
browse the internet and not see ads. How can it be that hard to write
something to just hide them?

it's not that it's hard, it's that the ad companies figure out ways
around whatever the ad blockers do.

In article op.0aybc6u3wdg98l@glass, Commander Kinsey
wrote:


How hard can it be to run whatever the ad requests, and ONLY omit the
actual display on the screen?

Anything is easy for the person who will not do it himself or herself.
I challenge Commander Kinsey to walk the talk and produce a *working*
adblocker which gets around our powerful techniques at Leet Website
Command.

Our ads run a script *after* the actual display, to check whether the ad
is actually displayed and tell the web server. We can tell when the
actual display is omitted. We can tell when the ad is displayed but
covered over. If you run whatever the ad requests, the server knows when
there is an adblocker. If you don't run whatever the ad requests, the
server knows from the silence.

Adblockers cannot fake what our script tells the server. We change it
every few hours, faster than adblockers can keep up. We change it by
geographic location. No adblocker can afford to pay for the full-time
army of workers needed to keep up with our constant changes.

Bull****. Absolute utter bull****.

unfortunately, it's not bull****.

There is no way you can tell if an ad is
displayed on my monitor, or if a white box is displayed on my monitor. You'd
need a camera in my house to do that.

there is no need for a camera and it's not that difficult either.

On Fri, 08 Nov 2019 21:20:57 -0000, CoMmAnDoTrOn wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:

Bull****. Absolute utter bull****. There is no way you can tell if an
ad is displayed on my monitor, or if a white box is displayed on my
monitor. You'd need a camera in my house to do that.

Screenshots do not need a camera in your house. You are posting on a
topic you know nothing about. (And we have other ways to tell if an ad
is displayed.)

Taking a screenshot of someone's computer is hacking into it and highly illegal. And you can't do it without installing a virus.

And you simply can't tell if it's displayed. If the browser downloads it from you, you can't tell whether those pixels end up on my screen or in the bin where they belong.

And if you're an ad creator, you're a ****. Nobody likes you, nobody wants your product, so **** off and die.