5 ms·

Given that Rapportive runs client side and has full access to browser internals, I'm sure Google would lose the Rapportive-detector war.

mattmanser 16y ago
How does that help? I can change my server every second. The only way rapportive can change their parser is to get the user to download a new version. In fact it's quite the opposite of what you're claiming. And anyway, sod the browser internals. Google has lots more lawyers than rapportive. That's who'd win that fight.
- bensummers 16y ago
  While you can change the server every second, it still has to look roughly the same to the user. If they try changing the name of the HTML elements on every page load, Rapportive just needs to detect based on position on the screen. If they start looking at the DOM or making behavioural tests to see if Rapportive is loaded, then Rapportive just needs to make sure the browser returns the same results as when it's not loaded. They could even run it in another process, and just position a window over the right area. User agents (tend to) run on general purpose computers with no lock down. If you control the user agent, you win the detection war. Lawyers are Google's own means of effectively stopping Rapportive, but the PR fallout might be interesting to watch.
jacquesm 16y ago
> I'm sure Google would lose the Rapportive-detector war. I wouldn't bet on that. Chrome is at 10% and rising by the way, so there is another angle to be wary of. Betting against 800 # Gorillas is usually not a winning strategy anyway, especially not if you just took off with their banana.
- pclark 16y ago
  You think Google would make it so Chrome would not handle their extension? That would cause such a shitstorm for Google - and isn't Adblock a far more likely target if they wanted to go down that road?
  - jacquesm 16y ago
    Adblock is not site specific, google could make it their policy that any extension targeted to mess with advertising on a specific site would be against their TOS. This would catch a whole pile of potential malware and, unfortunately, stuff like this would be caught in the dragnet.
    - sandipagr 16y ago
      It's the user who are agreeing to the TOS by visiting a given website. Google cannot define TOS for any other website. They can however do it for their own website. But then, since it's the user who visits the website, why should an extension designer be responsible? And it would be crazy for anyone to go after each user without making a big mess.
- bensummers 16y ago
  I think that's probably why Rapportive are looking at working with mail apps other than GMail.
ww520 16y ago
There are a lot of ways Google can play ball: change the TOS of GMail to exclude certain plug-ins, change the ad div's signature, randomly generate different ad's display logic, digitally sign the GMail's content/code to prevent alternation, have their own plug-in to verify the content, bring out the big gun lawyers.

mattmanser 16y ago

How does that help? I can change my server every second. The only way rapportive can change their parser is to get the user to download a new version. In fact it's quite the opposite of what you're claiming. And anyway, sod the browser internals. Google has lots more lawyers than rapportive. That's who'd win that fight.

bensummers 16y ago
While you can change the server every second, it still has to look roughly the same to the user. If they try changing the name of the HTML elements on every page load, Rapportive just needs to detect based on position on the screen. If they start looking at the DOM or making behavioural tests to see if Rapportive is loaded, then Rapportive just needs to make sure the browser returns the same results as when it's not loaded. They could even run it in another process, and just position a window over the right area. User agents (tend to) run on general purpose computers with no lock down. If you control the user agent, you win the detection war. Lawyers are Google's own means of effectively stopping Rapportive, but the PR fallout might be interesting to watch.

jacquesm 16y ago

> I'm sure Google would lose the Rapportive-detector war. I wouldn't bet on that. Chrome is at 10% and rising by the way, so there is another angle to be wary of. Betting against 800 # Gorillas is usually not a winning strategy anyway, especially not if you just took off with their banana.

pclark 16y ago
You think Google would make it so Chrome would not handle their extension? That would cause such a shitstorm for Google - and isn't Adblock a far more likely target if they wanted to go down that road?
- jacquesm 16y ago
  Adblock is not site specific, google could make it their policy that any extension targeted to mess with advertising on a specific site would be against their TOS. This would catch a whole pile of potential malware and, unfortunately, stuff like this would be caught in the dragnet.
  - sandipagr 16y ago
    It's the user who are agreeing to the TOS by visiting a given website. Google cannot define TOS for any other website. They can however do it for their own website. But then, since it's the user who visits the website, why should an extension designer be responsible? And it would be crazy for anyone to go after each user without making a big mess.
bensummers 16y ago
I think that's probably why Rapportive are looking at working with mail apps other than GMail.

ww520 16y ago

There are a lot of ways Google can play ball: change the TOS of GMail to exclude certain plug-ins, change the ad div's signature, randomly generate different ad's display logic, digitally sign the GMail's content/code to prevent alternation, have their own plug-in to verify the content, bring out the big gun lawyers.