4 ms·
> As long as my browser doesn't load anything from different domains other than the website's domain I don't mind So you don't care about the content, only the
by rootlocus 8y ago
> As long as my browser doesn't load anything from different domains other than the website's domain I don't mind
So you don't care about the content, only the source? There's nothing stopping the website from simply routing malicious JS from the ad network. Even worse, it would be much harder to block it this way.
- dschuetz 8y ago> EDIT: Having a process integrating ads internally will also give the operators of websites the opportunity to vet the ads for potentially malicious advertising campaigns, aka fake ads, etc. If you let inline malicious code inside your website then you're doing it wrong.
- rootlocus 8y agoThat's about as great in theory (and probably practice) as the acceptable ads program.
- geocar 8y agoSince my ad network doesn't serve any JS from an advertiser (let alone "malicious" JS), I don't know what you're talking about. What exactly are you trying to block?
- rootlocus 8y agoThe quote I argued against didn't specify anything regarding your particular ad network. My argument was pretty simple: the content is more important than the origin. > Since my ad network doesn't serve any JS from an advertiser That's about content. > As long as my browser doesn't load anything from different domains That's about the origin. Just because your network doesn't serve malicious JS, doesn't mean all networks do. And just because it comes from the same origin, doesn't mean it's safe.