6 ms·

Adblockers should get more devious then. I've not looked into exactly how adblockers work, but I presume they just don't allow advert content through to be ren

Adblockers should get more devious then. I've not looked into exactly how adblockers work, but I presume they just don't allow advert content through to be rendered by the browser - they block the html/css/js from loading in the page - and that's how places like Youtube and other sites can detect one is using an adblocker. If I were going to write an adblocker, I'd make it such that it pretends to load and play/display the adverts, meanwhile allowing the video which the user intends to watch through. The adblocker basically says somehow that "yup! I'm the browser and your advert was definitely rendered. Honest, guv'nor!" Something like that. (I fully recognize that I may be talking out of my ass if my assumptions above are incorrect.)

Freedom2 3y ago
Your approach sounds entirely feasible, and it doesn't make sense why others haven't thought of it yet. I'm not surprised that the HN community is full of great ideas, though.
dpedu 3y ago
That's why they want the Web Environment Integrity api.
- martin1975 3y ago
  judging by the flame fest they received on their github issues/comments section, I doubt they'll be proceeding. Then again, money talks and b.s. takes the walk every time and twice on sunday.
  - freedomben 3y ago
    The standard playbook on this is: table it for 6 months, then try again as quietly as possible. Repeat until the outrage is tolerable. Works great for corporations and governments alike. Eventually people won't be outraged and will just quietly take whatever they're giving us.
  - HDThoreaun 3y ago
    I don’t think some angry comments on GitHub are going to stop them with the amount of money on the table here.
- imglorp 3y ago
  And that's why we leap to Firefox + UBO. Until, of course, we get the modal of death: "For best and safest experience, must view on officially certified Google Chrome (tm) (r) (diaf)."
  - martin1975 3y ago
    That's ok, we split the internet then.
  - tivert 3y ago
    > And that's why we leap to Firefox + UBO. > Until, of course, we get the modal of death: "For best and safest experience, must view on officially certified Google Chrome (tm) (r) (diaf)." Which will probably happen super fast (unless antitrust regulators get involved) since Firefox's market share is in the toilet and continuing to drop. Firefox also can't push too hard, since (IIRC) pretty much all their funding comes from Google.
    - sshine 3y ago
      I'm trying out Orion by Kagi: https://browser.kagi.com/ https://browser.kagi.com/ But I would also consider Waterfox: https://www.waterfox.net/ https://www.waterfox.net/ They're WebKit-based and for MacOS/iOS/iPadOS only, so they don't get max points for browser diversity, and I can't run it on my Linuxes. As far as I understand, they plan to target more operating systems, and to target the most popular add-ons for other browsers. I'm not satisfied until it supports an OS-agnostic (non-sucky, no thank you 1Password) password sync and works on Linux. I hope they'll grow into a worthy alternative to Firefox, because Firefox is going down. One review of alternatives here scores Waterfox at the highest, but I think I prefer if a company is behind it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgFS1Do_1As https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgFS1Do_1As
- jauntywundrkind 3y ago
  Subresource Integrity has been around for much longer & seems like a much more effective & targetted plan to combat extensions having control over embedded content. If the fetched data doesn't match what the page says it should be, it won't work. Another pro-security feature that DNGAF about user agency.
dreamcompiler 3y ago
This is doable. Ten years ago it would have been hard because bandwidth was more scarce, but today the wasted bits wouldn't matter as much. The countermeasure would be to ask you to take a quiz on the ad contents before showing you the payload video. I'd like to think they would realize this is a non-starter, but the stupidity and venality of advertisers are pretty much unbounded. Plus, modern AI will very soon be able to pass such a quiz with flying colors. In fact this is my favorite use case for [client-resident!] AI: "Surf the web for me, deal appropriately with all the faff, and distill the relevant bits you think I'll probably want to see." It will happen.
- ryandrake 3y ago
  > The countermeasure would be to ask you to take a quiz on the ad contents before showing you the payload video. Please Drink Verification Can
  - burnerburnito 3y ago
    Just gotta hope nobody else walks in front of the kinect while I'm drinking...
piepiepieguy 3y ago
> pretends to load and play/display the adverts How would you pretend to show the adverts in way that's undetectable? Even if you had complete control of the browser through your ad blocking extension (you don't). Youtube could trivially get around this by not sending the actual video content down to the browser until after the expected length of an the ad.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- softg 3y ago
  Worst case scenario the ad blocker can show a blank screen while pretending to play. Many people would prefer that to watching the ad imo.
  - crtasm 3y ago
    Like the ones for Spotify that would set your system volume to 1% when it detected an advert playing. For video content an alternative would be to replace ads with a clip from the next video on your playlist/suggestions as a short "coming up next" preview.
- HankB99 3y ago
  IIRC there was a recent Android compromise that played ads under the main window, invisible to the user (except for performance and battery drain) and collecting $$$ for the company that sold the ads.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
tzs 3y ago
> If I were going to write an adblocker, I'd make it such that it pretends to load and play/display the adverts, meanwhile allowing the video which the user intends to watch through. The adblocker basically says somehow that "yup! I'm the browser and your advert was definitely rendered. Honest, guv'nor!" They could delay serving the post-ad part of the video by the length of the ad. Your ad blocker could stop the ad from actually playing so you don't actually see it but your viewing would still be disrupted. My guess is that for most people it is that disruption that annoys them more than actually seeing ads, and so this would still be effective as an inducement to subscribe. On broadcast TV the content creators usually know when the ad breaks will occur, and they work that into their scripts. They structure their stories so that the ad breaks occur between the acts in the script. Most people are used to that and have no trouble picking up a book or magazine (in the old days) or their phone or tablet (nowadays) to pass the time during the ad. On YouTube the ads often come right in the middle of something interesting going on in the video, which forced an abrupt context switch. So even if you don't see the ad itself the damage is done.

Freedom2 3y ago

Your approach sounds entirely feasible, and it doesn't make sense why others haven't thought of it yet. I'm not surprised that the HN community is full of great ideas, though.

dpedu 3y ago

That's why they want the Web Environment Integrity api.

martin1975 3y ago
judging by the flame fest they received on their github issues/comments section, I doubt they'll be proceeding. Then again, money talks and b.s. takes the walk every time and twice on sunday.
- freedomben 3y ago
  The standard playbook on this is: table it for 6 months, then try again as quietly as possible. Repeat until the outrage is tolerable. Works great for corporations and governments alike. Eventually people won't be outraged and will just quietly take whatever they're giving us.
- HDThoreaun 3y ago
  I don’t think some angry comments on GitHub are going to stop them with the amount of money on the table here.
imglorp 3y ago
And that's why we leap to Firefox + UBO. Until, of course, we get the modal of death: "For best and safest experience, must view on officially certified Google Chrome (tm) (r) (diaf)."
- martin1975 3y ago
  That's ok, we split the internet then.
- tivert 3y ago
  > And that's why we leap to Firefox + UBO. > Until, of course, we get the modal of death: "For best and safest experience, must view on officially certified Google Chrome (tm) (r) (diaf)." Which will probably happen super fast (unless antitrust regulators get involved) since Firefox's market share is in the toilet and continuing to drop. Firefox also can't push too hard, since (IIRC) pretty much all their funding comes from Google.
  - sshine 3y ago
    I'm trying out Orion by Kagi: https://browser.kagi.com/ https://browser.kagi.com/ But I would also consider Waterfox: https://www.waterfox.net/ https://www.waterfox.net/ They're WebKit-based and for MacOS/iOS/iPadOS only, so they don't get max points for browser diversity, and I can't run it on my Linuxes. As far as I understand, they plan to target more operating systems, and to target the most popular add-ons for other browsers. I'm not satisfied until it supports an OS-agnostic (non-sucky, no thank you 1Password) password sync and works on Linux. I hope they'll grow into a worthy alternative to Firefox, because Firefox is going down. One review of alternatives here scores Waterfox at the highest, but I think I prefer if a company is behind it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgFS1Do_1As https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgFS1Do_1As
jauntywundrkind 3y ago
Subresource Integrity has been around for much longer & seems like a much more effective & targetted plan to combat extensions having control over embedded content. If the fetched data doesn't match what the page says it should be, it won't work. Another pro-security feature that DNGAF about user agency.

dreamcompiler 3y ago

This is doable. Ten years ago it would have been hard because bandwidth was more scarce, but today the wasted bits wouldn't matter as much. The countermeasure would be to ask you to take a quiz on the ad contents before showing you the payload video. I'd like to think they would realize this is a non-starter, but the stupidity and venality of advertisers are pretty much unbounded. Plus, modern AI will very soon be able to pass such a quiz with flying colors. In fact this is my favorite use case for [client-resident!] AI: "Surf the web for me, deal appropriately with all the faff, and distill the relevant bits you think I'll probably want to see." It will happen.

ryandrake 3y ago
> The countermeasure would be to ask you to take a quiz on the ad contents before showing you the payload video. Please Drink Verification Can
- burnerburnito 3y ago
  Just gotta hope nobody else walks in front of the kinect while I'm drinking...

piepiepieguy 3y ago

> pretends to load and play/display the adverts How would you pretend to show the adverts in way that's undetectable? Even if you had complete control of the browser through your ad blocking extension (you don't). Youtube could trivially get around this by not sending the actual video content down to the browser until after the expected length of an the ad.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
softg 3y ago
Worst case scenario the ad blocker can show a blank screen while pretending to play. Many people would prefer that to watching the ad imo.
- crtasm 3y ago
  Like the ones for Spotify that would set your system volume to 1% when it detected an advert playing. For video content an alternative would be to replace ads with a clip from the next video on your playlist/suggestions as a short "coming up next" preview.
HankB99 3y ago
IIRC there was a recent Android compromise that played ads under the main window, invisible to the user (except for performance and battery drain) and collecting $$$ for the company that sold the ads.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

tzs 3y ago

> If I were going to write an adblocker, I'd make it such that it pretends to load and play/display the adverts, meanwhile allowing the video which the user intends to watch through. The adblocker basically says somehow that "yup! I'm the browser and your advert was definitely rendered. Honest, guv'nor!" They could delay serving the post-ad part of the video by the length of the ad. Your ad blocker could stop the ad from actually playing so you don't actually see it but your viewing would still be disrupted. My guess is that for most people it is that disruption that annoys them more than actually seeing ads, and so this would still be effective as an inducement to subscribe. On broadcast TV the content creators usually know when the ad breaks will occur, and they work that into their scripts. They structure their stories so that the ad breaks occur between the acts in the script. Most people are used to that and have no trouble picking up a book or magazine (in the old days) or their phone or tablet (nowadays) to pass the time during the ad. On YouTube the ads often come right in the middle of something interesting going on in the video, which forced an abrupt context switch. So even if you don't see the ad itself the damage is done.