Latest NoScript version (1.9.2) breaks Adblock Plus

General discussion about the NoScript extension for Firefox
Ares2

Re: Latest NoScript version (1.9.2) breaks Adblock Plus

Post by Ares2 » Mon Apr 27, 2009 10:10 pm

Giorgio Maone wrote:Is Ares2 watching this topic? ;)

Damn, got me. :mrgreen:

Giorgio Maone wrote:has been running a crusade against all the InformAction web sites in the past two weeks, issuing more than 30 updates (the ones I counted, even 4-5 per day) specifically targeted to noscript.net, flashgot.net, informaction.com and hackademix.net.

Well, it started with 2 lines to block ads (obviously the purpose of EasyList/AdblockPlus), then you worked around the filters - I updated them - you tried all kinds of workarounds and this resulted in those crazy rules we now have (still only to block the ads) because I don't think that you working around the filters is a reason to stop (I mean you didn't gave up either, did you? ;) ).

The escalation definitely happened on both sides.

Giorgio Maone wrote:ban every web technology

Up till now (of course you can intentionally change that) the rules didn't break anything.

Giorgio Maone wrote:and labeled my initial approach as "malware"

This workaround to display Google ads were the initial reason to watch noscript.net (though I can't guarantee that I wouldn't have blocked the ads anyway one day).

Giorgio Maone wrote:the "explicit whitelist filter" which I explained above. He [Wladimir] did not object to it, provided that it was explained to our common users rather than happening behind the scenes.

IMO, this is a really bad solution, it's still some kind of "malware" used in a security program (add-on). On the other hand it IS a solution as I can't do anything about it which would end this war.

BTW this might be a stupid question but is the ad revenue that important for you, or is it that high that you don't want to forgo it? Or do you now do that as a matter of principle? Really no offense, just asking.
Last edited by GµårÐïåñ on Mon Apr 27, 2009 10:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: updated username from Guest to Ares2 at the request of the poster
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.9) Gecko/2009040821 Firefox/3.0.9

User avatar
pirlouy
Junior Member
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Latest NoScript version (1.9.2) breaks Adblock Plus

Post by pirlouy » Mon Apr 27, 2009 10:26 pm

Like I said, EasyList goes in the wrong direction. I hoped it would be a list to block annoying ads. But now, it's a game with the aim to block every ads. This way has no future to me.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1b5pre) Gecko/20090426 Shiretoko/3.5b5pre

User avatar
GµårÐïåñ
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 3339
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 5:19 am
Location: PST - USA
Contact:

Re: Latest NoScript version (1.9.2) breaks Adblock Plus

Post by GµårÐïåñ » Mon Apr 27, 2009 10:44 pm

Yes, I believe that adblocking solutions should aim to be broad spectrum and aim to block majority using logical patterns and not aim directly for sites unless its a matter of cleanup or element hiding. I feel conflicted now, there was a time Adblock Plus was a good solution and it still is for me to create my own rules but the lists are going in a wrong direction I think and Rick would be the first to say that its wrong to make it personal.
~.:[ Lï£ê ï§ å Lêmðñ åñÐ Ì Wåñ† M¥ Mðñê¥ ßå¢k ]:.~
________________ .: [ Major Mike's ] :. ________________
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.9) Gecko/2009040821 Firefox/3.0.9 AdblockPlus/1.0.2 RequestPolicy/0.5.5 NoScript/1.9.2.2

User avatar
Giorgio Maone
Site Admin
Posts: 8743
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:22 pm
Location: Palermo - Italy
Contact:

Re: Latest NoScript version (1.9.2) breaks Adblock Plus

Post by Giorgio Maone » Mon Apr 27, 2009 10:54 pm

Ares2 wrote:
Giorgio Maone wrote:ban every web technology

Up till now (of course you can intentionally change that) the rules didn't break anything.

Wrong. They break many things, and among them:

  1. Automatic hiding of AMO install button for http://noscript.net/getit#direct - http://noscript.net/getit#devel - http://flashgot.net/getit#direct - http://flashgot.net/getit#devel
  2. Visual readability enhancements on http://noscript.net/changelog and htp://flashgot.net/changelog
  3. Any scripting/flash/iframe PoC hosted on http://hackademix.net
  4. The embedded video on http://hackademix.net/2009/03/28/noscript-on-bbc-news/
and of course any script, frame, movie, audio clip, Java appet or AJAX request, present or future, involving our sites.
This is quite a problem, since your filters are not nearly as discoverable as NoScript's blocking (as Pirlouy's experience demonstrates).
I'm all for granting users the power of blocking whatever they want on any site, but targeting a specific website with an automated and not easily discoverable subscription is a different story.

Ares2 wrote:BTW this might be a stupid question but is the ad revenue that important for you

Since I spend the vast majority of my time in developing these two extensions (and especially NoScript, as anybody here can testify), it is important to me and my family, otherwise I wouldn't have put any effort in counter-reacting dozens of your filter updates.
And yes, since my child is born and I'm responsible for him, it is also a matter of principle if you prefer.

Update:
Right now (0:20 UTC) Ares2 updated Easylist to ublock scripts on hackademix.net.

Code: Select all

< /hackademix.net/*.$script
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; en-US; rv:1.9.0.9) Gecko/2009040821 Firefox/3.0.9 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729)

Ares2

Re: Latest NoScript version (1.9.2) breaks Adblock Plus

Post by Ares2 » Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:29 pm


I see no difference ABP turned on and off (except for the ads of course). :oops:

Giorgio Maone wrote:Visual readability enhancements on http://noscript.net/changelog and htp://flashgot.net/changelog

Confirmed.

Giorgio Maone wrote:Any scripting/flash/iframe PoC hosted on http://hackademix.net

Wrong, the only 2 falsely blocked scripts were on http://hackademix.net/page/4/ -> http://hackademix.net/r/twitter_feed and http://hackademix.net/r/twitter_poc That's far from any. :) Fixed now.

Giorgio Maone wrote:The embedded video on http://hackademix.net/2009/03/28/noscript-on-bbc-news/

Works fine here. :?:

Giorgio Maone wrote:and of course any script, frame, movie, audio clip, Java appet or AJAX request, present or future

I know those filters are very restrictive but they were never meant to stay the way they are forever. Temporary they seem to work OK (one minor false positive compared to all those obscuring techniques and workarounds is not that bad).
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.9) Gecko/2009040821 Firefox/3.0.9

User avatar
therube
Ambassador
Posts: 7470
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 4:17 pm
Location: Maryland USA

Re: Latest NoScript version (1.9.2) breaks Adblock Plus

Post by therube » Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:32 pm

While not entirely on nor entirely off topic ...

Softpedia uses its' definition of "adware". And because of its' definition things like this happen, Comodo Software Removed from Softpedia.

This (while well known) just came up recently in chat. Guess what, KaiRo (SeaMonkey) earns money - how, from ads, Earning money in surprising ways.

And this machine named Mozilla (or mozilla.org, or mozilla foundation, or its namesake, FF, or ...) earns revenues ... gosh ...

So I guess we should adblock Google & Mozilla & SeaMonkey & while we're at it, every other site in the world. Then we can start paying directly for these & all other services, rather then indirectly as we now do.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110420 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 Pinball NoScript FlashGot AdblockPlus
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1b4pre) Gecko/20090423 SeaMonkey/2.0b1pre

User avatar
Giorgio Maone
Site Admin
Posts: 8743
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:22 pm
Location: Palermo - Italy
Contact:

Re: Latest NoScript version (1.9.2) breaks Adblock Plus

Post by Giorgio Maone » Tue Apr 28, 2009 12:10 am

Ares2 wrote:

I see no difference ABP turned on and off (except for the ads of course). :oops:

Check again. All the section about AMO installation gets hidden to prevent confusion when user is invited to install either from the direct on-site link or a development build.

Ares2 wrote:
Giorgio Maone wrote:Visual readability enhancements on http://noscript.net/changelog and htp://flashgot.net/changelog

Confirmed.

Another thing broken in the changelog is deep linking: something like http://noscript.net/changelog#1.1.8.5 doesn't land on the relevant section, which is a big issue since it's a veeery long page to scroll.
Ares2 wrote:
Giorgio Maone wrote:Any scripting/flash/iframe PoC hosted on http://hackademix.net

Wrong, the only 2 falsely blocked scripts were on http://hackademix.net/page/4/ -> http://hackademix.net/r/twitter_feed and http://hackademix.net/r/twitter_poc That's far from any. :) Fixed now.

Wrong again. It was "any", because those still working were hosted on http://evil.hackademix.net or inlined.
Ares2 wrote:
Giorgio Maone wrote:The embedded video on http://hackademix.net/2009/03/28/noscript-on-bbc-news/

Works fine here. :?:

It doesn't here, but it actually might be a Gecko or WMP bug on my side (I've already seen this kind of stuff in 3.0.9), even though that object is served from http://noscript.net ...
Ares2 wrote:
Giorgio Maone wrote:and of course any script, frame, movie, audio clip, Java appet or AJAX request, present or future

I know those filters are very restrictive but they were never meant to stay the way they are forever. Temporary they seem to work OK (one minor false positive compared to all those obscuring techniques and workarounds is not that bad).

Are you really saying you've kidnapped my websites but you offer to free them at some point in the future when you decide I've given up any attempt to display ads?
Kind of you :lol:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; en-US; rv:1.9.0.9) Gecko/2009040821 Firefox/3.0.9 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729)

Ares2

Re: Latest NoScript version (1.9.2) breaks Adblock Plus

Post by Ares2 » Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:05 am

Giorgio Maone wrote:
Giorgio Maone wrote:Any scripting/flash/iframe PoC hosted on http://hackademix.net

Wrong again. It was "any", because those still working were hosted on http://evil.hackademix.net or inlined.

Ah, you want it that way? Now what flash/iframe PoC's were blocked before (adjusting the blog now doesn't count)? :)

Giorgio Maone wrote:Are you really saying you've kidnapped my websites but you offer to free them at some point in the future when you decide I've given up any attempt to display ads?
Kind of you :lol:

:D :D :D Now you know what a generous person I really am. ;)

Anyway, fixed the problems.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.9) Gecko/2009040821 Firefox/3.0.9

Alan Baxter
Ambassador
Posts: 1586
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 4:47 am
Location: Colorado, USA

Re: Latest NoScript version (1.9.2) breaks Adblock Plus

Post by Alan Baxter » Tue Apr 28, 2009 6:58 am

Giorgio Maone wrote:therefore user was unable to block my ads even if he really wanted to (short of disabling active content using NoScript itself).
I promptly fixed this in subsequent development versions, which enable users to block ads on these sites as well if they wish to.
However I decided to make this work-around simpler and more apparent to users, for transparence sake: so next stable releases will just add an explicit whitelist site filter, also providing instructions about disabling such a filter for those ABP users who don't know how to do it and are determined not to see any ad supporting NoScript and FlashGot development.

Using NoScript 1.9.9.2, element hiding still doesn't work on noscript.net. I'm unable to remove either the drivers or free scan ads. I have no intention of clicking on those ads and would prefer not to see them every time I look at the NoScript pages, which is quite often since I'm providing support.

By the way, do you get revenue for just displaying the ads, even if they're not clicked? I have no intention to click on any third-party products on your site, especially the ones you haven't personally vetted. Clicking third-party ads is often used to vector malware, and so far you've only been able to blacklist some of them. We both know what you think about the effectiveness of blacklists, eh? ;)
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.10) Gecko/2009042316 Firefox/3.0.10

Tom T.
Field Marshal
Posts: 3620
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:58 am

Re: Latest NoScript version (1.9.2) breaks Adblock Plus

Post by Tom T. » Tue Apr 28, 2009 8:23 am

pirlouy wrote:Like I said, EasyList goes in the wrong direction. I hoped it would be a list to block annoying ads. But now, it's a game with the aim to block every ads. This way has no future to me.

GµårÐïåñ wrote:Yes, I believe that adblocking solutions should aim to be broad spectrum and aim to block majority using logical patterns and not aim directly for sites unless its a matter of cleanup or element hiding. I feel conflicted now, there was a time Adblock Plus was a good solution and it still is for me to create my own rules but the lists are going in a wrong direction I think and Rick would be the first to say that its wrong to make it personal.

Every time I've mentioned AdBlock Original, which *cannot* accept subscriptions, someone tells me how out-of-date I am not to use ABP. I stand on my position to create my own choices on ad-blocking and *never* to substitute anyone's else decisions for my own. If I didn't want control over my own machine, why would I be using NS?

ABO avoids this whole discussion and controversy.
therube wrote:So I guess we should adblock Google & Mozilla & SeaMonkey & while we're at it, every other site in the world. Then we can start paying directly for these & all other services, rather then indirectly as we now do.

It's your choice, but I'd like to point out that you make a considerable contribution to NS (and, I believe, to other MZ-related fora) by providing a large quantity of high-quality tech support on a volunteer basis.

Giorgio is far too modest to *ask* for donations, other than a teensy little box hidden in the upper corner of the NS pages, and far too nice and generous with himself to produce nag screens or "crippleware" versions of NS and FG, as so many other developers of "freeware" do. So for my part, I've tried to make it easier for those with a US bank account to donate, (not an easy thing to do on behalf of a non-resident alien with no immediate plans to visit the US), and kicked off the account with what little spare change the current miserable economic situation allows. Without NS, I would be too afraid (literally) to use the Internet, although it's needed in my Real Job. So its value to me is more than I could ever repay.
Alan Baxter wrote:Using NoScript 1.9.9.2, element hiding still doesn't work on noscript.net. I'm unable to remove either the drivers or free scan ads. I have no intention of clicking on those ads and would prefer not to see them every time I look at the NoScript pages, which is quite often since I'm providing support.

I've never bothered to try before, but since you brought it up, AdBlock Original (still beating the same drum) blocks the Free Scan instantly on reload. The "Drivers" warning logo also disappears upon request, but the link itself appears to be a simple HTML <a href... link of the type that I use all the time in posting links, etc. on places that allow it. Being part of the page, you can't block that any more than you could block part of the page text. (although you could prevent the parsing of the HTML, but never mind that...)
Alan Baxter wrote:By the way, do you get revenue for just displaying the ads, even if they're not clicked? I have no intention to click on any third-party products on your site, especially the ones you haven't personally vetted. Clicking third-party ads is often used to vector malware, and so far you've only been able to blacklist some of them. We both know what you think about the effectiveness of blacklists, eh? ;)

My understanding of "general" Internet ad practice is: a tiny fraction of a cent for each display (e. g., USD $0.02 per *thousand* page views with your ad on it), plus a few cents per click, and perhaps a portion of the revenue if a sale results. Like you, I'm on the NS site frequently -- so frequently that I hardly even notice the ads, so if my repeated visits add up to a couple of cents for Giorgio, so much the better. I *could* block them, as above, but I don't. That doesn't necessarily apply to other sites, though. ;)
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US at an expert level; rv:1.8.1.20) Gecko/20081217 Firefox/2.0.0.20 diehard

Mc

Re: Latest NoScript version (1.9.2) breaks Adblock Plus

Post by Mc » Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:16 am

Tom T. wrote:Every time I've mentioned AdBlock Original, which *cannot* accept subscriptions, someone tells me how out-of-date I am not to use ABP. I stand on my position to create my own choices on ad-blocking and *never* to substitute anyone's else decisions for my own. If I didn't want control over my own machine, why would I be using NS?

ABO avoids this whole discussion and controversy.

I'm trying BlockSite to whitelist and blacklist for my own
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.9.0.10) Gecko/2009042316 Firefox/3.0.10 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666

MonztA

Re: Latest NoScript version (1.9.2) breaks Adblock Plus

Post by MonztA » Tue Apr 28, 2009 12:34 pm

pirlouy wrote:Like I said, EasyList goes in the wrong direction. I hoped it would be a list to block annoying ads. But now, it's a game with the aim to block every ads. This way has no future to me.

EasyList is blocking Google ads since its existence. Why should it allow like 3 sites to display those ads and keep blocking all other sites?
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; de; rv:1.9.0.9) Gecko/2009040821 Firefox/3.0.9

User avatar
GµårÐïåñ
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 3339
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 5:19 am
Location: PST - USA
Contact:

Re: Latest NoScript version (1.9.2) breaks Adblock Plus

Post by GµårÐïåñ » Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:20 pm

I believe the issue in discussion now is that the filters are no longer targeting patterns and ad sources but rather blocking based on specific sites, that's wrong. If you block all google ads and someone happens to be running them and gets blocked, then that's fine but if you target site xyz.com to cripple it regardless, that's wrong.

Now Tom, ABP still allows you to do your own filters and make your own decisions. The filter subs are optional and available but not required. ABP is better than ABO in the sense that it has better integration and detection of more recent technology, so you can make a better blocking filter, that's all. Otherwise they are both the same concept and ultimately achieve the same thing.
~.:[ Lï£ê ï§ å Lêmðñ åñÐ Ì Wåñ† M¥ Mðñê¥ ßå¢k ]:.~
________________ .: [ Major Mike's ] :. ________________
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.9) Gecko/2009040821 Firefox/3.0.9 AdblockPlus/1.0.2 RequestPolicy/0.5.5 NoScript/1.9.2.2

Tom T.
Field Marshal
Posts: 3620
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:58 am

Re: Latest NoScript version (1.9.2) breaks Adblock Plus

Post by Tom T. » Wed Apr 29, 2009 7:05 am

GµårÐïåñ wrote:ABP is better than ABO in the sense that it has better integration and detection of more recent technology, so you can make a better blocking filter, that's all. Otherwise they are both the same concept and ultimately achieve the same thing.

Guardian, I understand your support for ABP. My own philosophy is, "The less stuff there is, the less there is to go wrong". This whole topic was irrelevant to me. I finally looked at it because of the sheer number of views and posts, and was unhappy to see some of what was going on. All of this would be impossible with ABO. ABP created an opportunity for someone, of whatever motive, to mess up perfectly respectable sites. With ABO, the only one who can mess things up is I, and only on my own machine, no one's else.

Perhaps there are better filtering methods in ABP, but between NS and ABO (and most ads *are* scripted these days), there's never been anything obnoxious that I couldn't block. Everyone's mileage varies. Cheers!

Mc wrote:I'm trying BlockSite to whitelist and blacklist for my own

Not familiar with it, but I'm sure sharing your experience with it would be of interest. Thanks.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US at an expert level; rv:1.8.1.20) Gecko/20081217 Firefox/2.0.0.20 diehard

User avatar
GµårÐïåñ
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 3339
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 5:19 am
Location: PST - USA
Contact:

Re: Latest NoScript version (1.9.2) breaks Adblock Plus

Post by GµårÐïåñ » Wed Apr 29, 2009 7:29 am

Ok Tom, agreed.
~.:[ Lï£ê ï§ å Lêmðñ åñÐ Ì Wåñ† M¥ Mðñê¥ ßå¢k ]:.~
________________ .: [ Major Mike's ] :. ________________
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.9) Gecko/2009040821 Firefox/3.0.9 AdblockPlus/1.0.2 RequestPolicy/0.5.5 NoScript/1.9.2.2

Locked