UK Mobile Operator Could Block Ads At Network Level (telegraph.co.uk) 109
Mickeycaskill writes: UK network operator EE says it is investigating the possibility of blocking adverts at a network level, allowing customers to limit the types and frequency of adverts they see in browsers and applications. The move is likely to concern digital publishers, many of whom rely on advertising revenue to fund their content. Ad blockers have become more popular in recent times, with many users employing them to save battery life, consume less data and protect against malvertising attacks. EE CEO Olaf Swantee said, "We think it’s important that, over time, customers start to be offered more choice and control over the level and intensity of ads on mobile. For EE, this is not about ad blocking, but about starting an important debate around customer choice, controls and the level of ads customers receive. This is an important debate that needs to happen soon."
Re: For the BEST adblocker (& more vs. threats (Score:2, Insightful)
I hope your software ability doesn't match your spelling and grammar ability.
If you pay me to try it, I may. In the meantime, I'll simply do what other users should do. Search Google for "ad block host files" and read the directions. Genius not required. Spelling and grammar are required.
Sincerely,
The Grammar Nazi
AND it's a dessert topping! (tm NBC) (Score:1)
also heals acne and toenail fungus. ask your doctor if cellphones are right for you.
if it was all typed in caps, it would be just another late-night TV ad for 1-800-YOU-FOOL type merchandise.
Re: (Score:3)
You make a big deal that browser-level blocking extensions are "usermode slower & increases messagepassing". But if a browser extension blocks a request, the CPU doesn't need to make a context switch to kernel mode in the first place. And good luck with your hosts files once ad networks start randomizing their servers' hostnames for every hit using wildcard CNAME records. Finally, and most relevantly to the article, good luck changing the hosts file on mobile devices without root privileges.
Re: (Score:2)
One extension being sub-par does not make them all sub-par. That is terrible logic.
Using ADB to update your HOSTS files is ridiculous, and HOSTS protection is far from perfect. A wildcard advertising domain can not be blocked by a HOSTS file unless the HOSTS file is megabytes large just for the single wildcard domain. If you don't understand why, you really need (more) help.
How many people actually root? (Score:2)
As chihowa points out, you need root on your phone to use a hosts file. What percentage of Android users have root on their phones? As I understand it, the farthest a "typical" Android user will go is turn on the "Unknown sources" to install an APK file. But because of Android's security model, an APK file can't affect DNS resolution, despite the name, unless it's a full-on VPN client.
AIDE is an app for apping apps (Score:2)
You need a PC to develop for them...
AIDE [android-ide.com] allows development of Android applications directly on an Android tablet with a USB, Bluetooth, or clip-on keyboard. After the discontinuation of netbooks [slashdot.org], some people recommended pressing such a tablet into service as a substitute for a laptop.
Even if the sky is falling down (Score:2)
well... when the sky falls, then chickenlittle should worry
In this model, I've spotted the pieces of camouflage that the aliens are assembling [wikipedia.org].
my sources in the security community get those new adserver names as the pop up easily too.
Not if they're like a328bc97.someadnetwork.example. Even eight hex digits would require four billion lines in a hosts file.
Re: (Score:2)
In other words, you won't be satisfied until you see a proof of concept. I'll put that on my list.
Re: (Score:2)
I've tried it, and my core 2 duo never finished without crashing.
So much duplication that it never completed? Just ground it to a halt (not out of ram) even after several tries.
I wish you'd just post the output weekly somewhere as APK master host file so I could just copy it in to place on all my devices.
Websites will block EE ip ranges (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
French provider Free has been blocking ads for years. First as an ISP, then also for mobile customers.
This started during the Free-Google war which settled in the meantime, but the ad blocking is still in effect. But that won't make all companies do the same.
In fact, only Free can do that since they do not rely on any collaboration or contracts with ad providers. All the others are stuck because they are either part of a big advertisement group or have heavy bilateral contracts with ad agencies.
Re: (Score:1)
No, this is about getting a cut of the action. These are MY customers. If you want your ads to show up on MY customers devices, you will have to pay me $x/impression.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure. Many of these web sites are operated by people who don't control the advertisements themselves. They outsource the ad job to a third party then wait for revenue to trickle in. They may not even have the skills to do the blocking if their tech skill level is just enough to customize wordpress.
Re: (Score:1)
No, websites will not. Now that Net Neutrality is officially dead, all ISPs will do this.
Publicly, ISPs will sell this as removing ads for their valued customers. The hoi polloi will take the bait; Hook, line, and sinker. This is why Google fought for net neutrality. It's not because they were protecting fairness and level playing fields. Google's only concern is defending their primary source of reven
Re: (Score:2)
They're gonna block ip addresses at 'network level'. it's not going to be matching the host name against 'googleanalytics.com', they're going after 173.194.112.XXX
Re: For the BEST adblocker (& more vs. threats (Score:1)
Spamming? How cool of you!
I suggest people interested search Google for FREE solutions. Simply search, "ad block hosts files" read the simple directions and BAM your done. No executables, no untrusted software, no convincing from Anonymous Cowards.
Re: Elephant in the room (Score:2)
Which is why the *real* elephant in the room is *browser security* and the fact that javascript *still* isn't effectively sandboxed in 2015.
That alone would be a a shockingly big deal, but making it even bigger is the fact that the world's largest ad supported company also manufactures the world's most popular web browser -- oh, and bundles Flash.
Still though-- NoScript works. Don't kill off your favorite website just because out browsers are broken.
Re: (Score:2)
Still though-- NoScript works.
If a web application has a good reason to require JavaScript to function, what should it do to gain the trust of a NoScript user?
How to make publishers willing to offer source? (Score:2)
If a web application has a good reason to require JavaScript to function, what should it do to gain the trust of a NoScript user?
Offer source so people can run it locally.
What use is a local app that is unable to access the resources it requires due to the Same Origin Policy? Some of the resources are dynamically generated by the web app's server. Even ability to download static resources locally as well would fail because Chrome considers each file in the file: scheme to be a separate origin.
If you instead refer to storing all resources on a computer owned by the user, there are two things likely to happen. The first is unwillingness to share source code: "You can use the a
Having to write a half dozen native apps (Score:2)
As more Internet users adopt NoScript, does this mean people are going to have to stop writing web apps and instead write six different native apps, one each for Windows desktop, Windows UWP, OS X, iOS, X11/Linux, and Android?
Bad idea! (Score:2)
First they blocked ads, but I don't see ads
Then they blocked porn, but I don't watch porn... (Liar!)
Then they blocked politicians... well, that's okay (No it's not!)
Then they blocked Slashdot... Okay that's going too far, everybody, out!
Re: (Score:2)
Why not use the "offered more choice" to upsell or differentiate with new services?
A provider might come with a few settings for email accounts, SPAM filter setting, their own adsl settings (1, 2+, a low latency profile), free or upgraded web site setup. Blocking as an on/off option?
The user is still a customer with some real network options
Re: (Score:1)
Blocking will not remain optional for very long. The old slippery slope applies here.
Re: (Score:2)
Badly behaved adverts are the problem (Score:1)
Re:Badly behaved adverts are the problem (Score:5, Insightful)
It gets better. Adverts use in 30-50% of current bandwidth. By blocking add on the network the mobile company saves precious bandwidth instead of using data caps.
Datacaps will kill internet advertisers.
Re: (Score:1)
Adverts use half the bandwidth? Which arse did you pull that statistic out of?
Re: (Score:2)
Likely the same arse that thought it was a great idea to auto run fucking video advertisements with no sound controls, this on a page with no other video and just a few images ie so about 99% of bandwidth in that case being advertisement that could not be shut off without leaving the page or running an ad blocker and reloading the page or permanently blocking that particular advertising agency and reloading the page.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, the figure seems too low to me.
Ummmm.. no (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't like ads, but I don't want ISPs to be allowed to monitor or alter content mid-stream. I appreciate the intention, but that's a door we've already been clear we don't want opened.
What I would like, however, is an ad-blocking router.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd have to update it from time to time, however once every two/three years is more than enough in my experience. Or you could be fancy, and do a cron-job.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you!
Starting An Important Debate (Score:1)
this is not about ad blocking, but about starting an important debate
No, it's about ad blocking. No one ever wants to "start a debate" or "have a conversation" or "open a dialog".
Everyone saying those things simply wants to do their thing and ram it down your throat while getting tards to parrot their talking points in the guise of "debate", "conversation", or "dialog".
I'm 100% against ads and 100% for blocking them. I'm just sick of asshats using the phony debate/dialog/conversation bullshit to pretend they haven't already taken a hardline stance on a subject.
Why not ... (Score:2)
Free (in France) already offers that option (Score:1)
Free, a network operator in France, already offers the option to block ads on both their fixed (DSL and FTTH) and mobile networks. It was first implemented and enabled by default) three years ago when they were “fighting” with Google about who should pay for interco upgrades.
It is now default-disabled and opt-in as they managed to reach an agreement with them.
Net Neutrality? (Score:2)