5 ms·
oh wow, thanks for submitting our research! So, we've essentially found that free mobile games engage in a form of traffic arbitrage by making users load entire
by antoniojtorres 4y ago
oh wow, thanks for submitting our research! So, we've essentially found that free mobile games engage in a form of traffic arbitrage by making users load entire websites that are ad monetized in order to earn in-game currency. This is considered invalid traffic (IVT) in the digital advertising industry.
The bit that HN may find interesting is that when entire web pages are embedded in a webview like that, the verification javascript embedded in the ads that are present on the page cannot (sometimes at all) realize that they are within a webview. Making this traffic seem totally organic.
What's worse, recently we found that a major podcast network was autoplaying podcasts in order to juice their numbers for all their shows using this rewarded traffic scheme, and again, nearly impossible to verify on the other end.
There's a lot of interesting technology challenges to solve in the ad-tech space because let's be honest, it's pretty rough and privacy hostile.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- aaaaaaaaaaab 4y ago>the verification javascript embedded in the ads that are present on the page cannot (sometimes at all) realize that they are within a webview Good! Webviews are browsers. Browsers are webviews. There’s no way to tell the difference, because there is no difference!
- Huh1337 4y agoBut there is a significant difference. Browser is an impenetrable sandbox, while Webview can be accessed and modified by the app in many ways.
- aaaaaaaaaaab 4y agoLmao, no. When you put a webview in an app, the app is the browser. Period. A browser is by definition an app that displays webviews. And yes, a browser can access and modify the webpages it is displaying, no shit. That’s literallt the job of the browser, aka the user agent.
- Huh1337 4y agoYeah, that's the problem.
- aaaaaaaaaaab 4y agoThe problem? So you're saying that laypeople shouldn't be allowed to create new browsers that interact with the Web in whatever way they want to? Why exactly?
- nmacias 4y agoI think that Apple should insist that webviews used this way identify themselves via JS as monetization containers, with clear definitions for when and why subject to App Store review. Done.
- nmacias 4y agoI get that idealists will be up in arms about user-agent based self-censorship and still feel this way. It’s reversible immediately if it was proven to be harmful.
- bee_rider 4y agoIDK it seems like a problem between the ad networks and the developers. What motivation does Apple have to fix it? It seems like it benefits both of their customers -- the third party developers and the end consumers. Isn't Apple engaging in a war against the ad networks? They should do all they can to facilitate this -- add a special type of embedded browser window to their OS that has garbage cookies/fingerprinting info and is rendered off-screen.
- canjobear 4y agoApple should insist that these webviews be as indistinguishable from organic traffic as possible, in order to extinguish parasitical ad networks.
- nitrixion 4y ago> recently we found that a major podcast network was autoplaying podcasts in order to juice their numbers This is a tactic that some video game streamers use as well. One big example of this is the fextralife wiki site[0]. I get very frustrated when it is the top result from a web search or if it is the only place to get relevant information. [0] - https://monsterhunterworld.wiki.fextralife.com/Monster+Hunter+World+Wiki https://monsterhunterworld.wiki.fextralife.com/Monster+Hunte...