(Suggestion) Fooling inlinescripts in ABP

Various discussions related to Adblock Plus development

(Suggestion) Fooling inlinescripts in ABP

Postby blade » Fri Oct 09, 2015 7:31 pm

Quite a few pages like

Code: Select all
case,domain=focus.de|stern.de|sat1.de|prosieben.de|kabeleins.de|sat1gold.de|sixx.de|prosiebenmaxx.de|fem.com|the-voice-of-germany.de|wetteronline.de|wetter.com|finanzen.net|tvspielfilm.de|gamestar.de|pcwelt.de|boerse-online.de|sportauto.de|auto-motor-und-sport.de|motor-klassik.de|4wheelfun.de|autostrassenverkehr.de|lustich.de|itectale.de


are using new Solutions from companies like bemitho.com (Addefend) that detect adblocking solutions.
If an adblocker is detected they will insert the ads as pictures with random filenames hosted on the original url.
If you try to block these pictures you might break the whole layout of the page.

Currently trying to fight this kind of anti-adblock is too demanding, as the trigger-element is constantly renamed to avoid adblock whitelisting.
There are better solutions out there that use GreaseMonkey Userscripts to disarm the javascript that detects Adblock and creates the nasty ad pictures.
https://openuserjs.org/scripts/schwarzt ... d_Klatsche for example.
The problem is, that it requires a secondary browser extension and the users knowledge that such scripts exist.

I therefore hope that ABP will eventually step up their arsenal to disarm that kind of ads as well.
Ublock seems to have done so in their latest release: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/releases/tag/1.2.0

Add custom cosmetic filter www.focus.de##script:contains(uabInject)
blade
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:48 pm

Re: (Suggestion) Fooling inlinescripts in ABP

Postby mario68 » Thu Oct 15, 2015 1:05 pm

I second that.

Especially here in Germany, more and more websites are using this obnoxious ads that bypass AdBlock Plus.

Most of them are obnoxious click-bait ads, trying to sell fake and dangerous weight loss products, spread panic about an alleged economy collapse in order to bring people to transfer all their money into dangerous investments and so on.

You could stop this fraud by implementing an inline script tag filtering similar to ulock.
mario68
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2015 6:07 pm

Re: (Suggestion) Fooling inlinescripts in ABP

Postby mapx » Thu Oct 15, 2015 1:59 pm

a feature which was requested, but ...
https://issues.adblockplus.org/ticket/748
User avatar
mapx
 
Posts: 21945
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: (Suggestion) Fooling inlinescripts in ABP

Postby mario68 » Thu Oct 15, 2015 6:39 pm

This feature request is not quite the same. The person asked to block all inline script functions in the Chrome web browser.
I am asking for blocking specific inline script functions (identified by a specific string) in Firefox.
Therefore I have created a new ticket for this:
https://issues.adblockplus.org/ticket/3207
mario68
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2015 6:07 pm

Re: (Suggestion) Fooling inlinescripts in ABP

Postby mapx » Thu Oct 15, 2015 6:42 pm

if you see the last comments we talked also about blocking only some functions
User avatar
mapx
 
Posts: 21945
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: (Suggestion) Fooling inlinescripts in ABP

Postby blade » Sat Dec 05, 2015 6:21 pm

So where would we express the importance for handling the increasing amount of anti-adblock inline javascripts?
Couldn't figure out which bugtracker entry comes close enough.
UBO is expanding and i would love to have a comparable feature level for both addons.
blade
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:48 pm

Re: (Suggestion) Fooling inlinescripts in ABP

Postby lewisje » Tue Dec 15, 2015 9:03 pm

I also noticed that Adguard has a similar syntax extension, and NoScript has long supported "surrogate scripts" to replace a tracker's API with harmless functions.

By the way, it is probably safer to just filter parts of an inline script based on the function's name, rather than any arbitrary string (if the function is part of a public API, the tracking company can't readily change the function's name).
There's a buzzin' in my brain I really can't explain; I think about it before they make me go to bed.
lewisje
 
Posts: 2744
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:07 pm

Re: (Suggestion) Fooling inlinescripts in ABP

Postby blade » Wed Dec 30, 2015 10:58 am

Surrogate Scripts would even allow hiding video ads in video players, which is currently not possible. :lol:
blade
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:48 pm

Re: (Suggestion) Fooling inlinescripts in ABP

Postby lewisje » Wed Dec 30, 2015 8:35 pm

blade wrote:Surrogate Scripts would even allow hiding video ads in video players, which is currently not possible. :lol:
How? JS can't modify a plugin-based player, and the use-case of hiding HTML5-based ads could be done with ordinary hiding rules or a UserScript.

Wait, maybe a surrogate script could mock an HTML5-based ad script, loading an invisible ad and reporting to the player that the ad was played.
There's a buzzin' in my brain I really can't explain; I think about it before they make me go to bed.
lewisje
 
Posts: 2744
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:07 pm


Return to Adblock Plus development

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests