Strange, I do that at my webbrowser without requiring any DNS manipulation and/or other administrative tasks, without clooging the logfile of my webserver running at 127.0.0.1, and due to regular expressions it's surely more effective. Even further, other applications are not influenced.
BTW, it doesn't work well for ads for the same reason why it doesn't work for malware: DNS wildcards.
What part of the word "abuse" didn't you understand?
One that allows filtering by netranges and resolves DNS names?
Popular demand.
cu
59cobalt
For ad-blocking nothing beats WebWasher. And it works as a proxy (the right way?) Preventing ads from ever beeing downloaded
Then again. Filters like WebWasher filter on PARTS of the URL. Neat.
With respect to interfering with proper functionality? I'd actually believe you.
The worst way, since it must use store & forward, therefore breaks pipelining. The mentioned software products also breaks compression and E-Tag.
Uh, oh, that's really special. Unless you consider almost any content-blocking extension for the Mozilla platform under the sun.
Adblock Plus doesn't even need any additional programs, and it has a huge performance advantage due to the available DOM content.
But is it as customisable as WebWasher (parts of URLs, own list, exceptions)? And does it work both with IE6, IE7, FF and Opera?
Where can I find more info (to test and compare)
Sadly I have to use IE6 and IE7 for things (bad applications). And even though I do that using IE-TAB, it uses the IE enginge. Will AdBlock work then? How does it filter? Does it remove images etc before they are fetched (like WebWasher). I like the speedup not having to waste bandwith on junk....
I guess WebWsher works like this
1) Fetches HTML-code for page 2) Removes all things filters find 3) Forwards HTML-code to browser 4) Browser fetches IMG tags that still are in the codeOf course a litt delay since it need to fetch the HTML, parse it, and send it to the browser, but it's not noticable at all on my PCs...
How does AdBlock work in comparison, can you explain a bit more?
On the internet? Then discussing this is useless due to the inherent security issues. A malicious website could and typically does simply install its very own program code for displaying the advertisement, bypassing/undermining the proxy.
Exactly.
For me it is, because I have a working HTTP 1.1 Pipelining.
AdBlock has the huge benefit that the browser already does the parsing, so it can work on the highly optimized (and well standardized) in-memory presentation.
Sure.
No, it only works for the Mozilla browser series. For Opera, there're also some extensions available even though it only has a slight filter integrated. Dunno for IE, and I don't care since they're trivially vulnerable to any kind of malware which does its own way of displaying ads.
Because people believe in that nonsense and want to buy that. Metaphysics in Informatics.
It's just like with raw sockets in Windows XP.
Yours, VB.
Well, some sites (MS ones too) doesn't wokr OK with FF. At work (another issue) lots of web applications require IE :-( And since the IE core files always are on the system (and are used by applications for "itegrated" web windows)...
Well, one need to protect as good as possible for IE as well (WebWasher removes ads inside apps using IE and engine too :-)
Show me one. In contrast I can show you many which wouldn't work with IE.
Web applications are something different than webpages. Of course you might use any insecure application client as long as you run it over an encrypted and authenticated connection. That's why Windows Update, at least until Microsoft broke it with version 6, is not a security problem.
that's a serious problem. But well, we already know that.
There is no even partially tangible protection for IE, by design.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required