[feature req.] Add posibility to block redirection to site

[Lain_13]

I, as maintainer of EasyList's supplementary filterlist RU AdList, would like to request feature to block not only ads opened in popups but ads opened by redirect as well.
Currently I found 1 advertising network and 1 site (not part of the network, there are lots of domains which using ads from that network) which using this technique to avoid blocking in AdBlock Plus.

Here is example video of this trick which made one of users of my filterlist: http://youtu.be/gtHyjfU-_pM
As you can see instead of opening advertisement in a popup site does something opposite. It opens next page in a new tab and loads advertisements site inside of current tab.
I've tried to block script which opens popup but without it downloading from this site is completely blocked as well.

Also identical technique are used by the PopUnder.ru. I already blocked more than 100 of their domains and they still registering new. There is no way to block their advertisements by generic part in the request (instead of filename they have alphanumerical hash-like string right after the domain name with current sitename somewhere in the middle). There are no way to hide their ads by object names because they always random and also they recommended their clients to register sub-domains on their own sites instead of using their domains. Right now without ability to forbid specific redirects it is just impossible to effectively block their ads.

So, is it possible to implement such a thing? I think it is not complicated and could be implemented as an extension to the existing popup functionality without adding new $flag.

[Lain_13]

Anyone? Nobody likes this idea?

[MonztA]

I do.

[Lain_13]

BTW, AdBlock have to block redirects only caused by a scripts on a page and only when it changes current domain of the tab. If user clicked a link to specific site and browser is going to replace current one in the current tab with a new one then AdBlock should not consider it as redirect.

MonztA
Could you please move this request into "Moderated forums / Future development" for further discussion?
As I understand feature requests is supposed to be moved there if they are worthy to look at them at least a little bit closer.

What about 2 other my requests?
forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=11161 - change hiding rules into styling rules (which is hiding by default but capable to apply custom styles if needed)
forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=11163 - block by IP when blocking by domain is not effective (it's even capable to surpass this one in most cases except case when redirecting script is integrated into current page or combined with necessary code... I know 1 example).

There is another one:
forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=11162
But it's VERY controversial.

[MonztA]

MonztA
Could you please move this request into "Moderated forums / Future development" for further discussion?
As I understand feature requests is supposed to be moved there if they are worthy to look at them at least a little bit closer.

So far (I think) only Wladimir has moved topics to the Future development forum. So I think I will leave it up to him.

[Lancing Ads Write]

here is no way to block their advertisements by generic part in the request (instead of filename they have alphanumerical hash-like string right after the domain name with current sitename somewhere in the middle). There are no way to hide their ads by object names because they always random

Could not random naming be overcome with where in the page structure the annoyance lives? I'm not clear why XPath and CSS selectors cannot be employed interchangeably.

forum/viewtopic.php?p=56535#p56535

Maybe there could be a new syntax made for "XPath-based element-hiding rules" (maybe starting with ##$ instead of ##)...... (but Firefox has supported XPath since 1.5) or its uselessness on HTML (rather than XHTML) documents (but I also read that the XPath API allows traversal of HTML documents not explicitly serialized as XML).

This guy speaks of manual conversion so why not automated?

Lool this freaking works!!!11oneeleven

Code: Select all

site.net##html > body > table > tbody > tr > td:nth-of-type(2)

Actually, i don't care if it's XPath syntax or this CSS syntax as long as they mention the same. But you should freaking definitely add this feature to element hiding helper! Since attributes combined with object path make much less fake positives so i could now commit my rules if i want! Tools i used (Dom Inspector + XPather + manual convertion from XPath to CSS) and adding the rule after clicking through 5 settings windows are not very handily.

So, is it possible to implement such a thing? I think it is not complicated and could be implemented as an extension to the existing popup functionality without adding new $flag.

A board search for XPath turned up yet another term, "Advanced Selectors":

forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=4702&p=30210& ... ath#p30210

And posts requesting XPath conversion to CSS selector

forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=9413&p=55889#p55889

What kind of CSS selector is this forum/viewtopic.php?p=15477#p15477


As I understand it the CSS selectors are applied "instantly" and XPath is after page rendering. But XPath can be more specific than CSS? So XPath use ought be used as last resort? The wiki XPath:talk is beyond comprehension at this point: http://kb.mozillazine.org/Talk:XPath. Now fold in XLink and XPointer. http://www.w3schools.com/xlink/xlink_intro.asp

Or points and ranges? http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-xpointer/#dt-point

Could Clipping Region , http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-positioning/O ... g-clipping | http://www.w3.org/TR/media-frags/ | http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr-xpointer/ , be used to hide or not-render the images? Or floating interference?

At some point DOM inspector added a button to save as EHH filter. Could not the same be done for XPath? Or could there be an ADP/EHH enhancement to specify [relative] page structure CSS location instead of using labels?




disclaimer: contains wild speculation, unfamiliarity and outright ignorance

[Lain_13]

Actually in this case there are simply nothing to hide. When you clicking a link or a button the whole page turns into advertisement while actual link opened in a new tab. The only expected behaviour is to close current tab if address were changed through a script and it matches specific filter.

> There are no way to hide their ads by object names because they always random
Here I remembered different guys not related to this case. They not only randomized IDs of objects but randomized internal structure of their ads too. So, XPath doesn't work for them.

[Lancing Ads Write]

> There are no way to hide their ads by object names because they always random
Here I remembered different guys not related to this case. They not only randomized IDs of objects but randomized internal structure of their ads too. So, XPath doesn't work for them.

I don't understand what you mean by " randomized internal structure of their ads"