Webmaster Forum Rules | Posting Guide | Contact Us | Testimonials | Contributing Geek Program | Advertise on Geek/Talk
Welcome to the GeekTalk Webmaster Discussion Forums from GeekVillage.com

Click Here To Register. It's Free!

Go Back   geek/talk: Signature-free discourse for serious web publishers > YOUR REVENUE: Making Money On The Internet > Making Money with CPC and/or CPM Programs
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-13-2003, 12:43 PM   #16
lwrules
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Richboro, PA, USA
Posts: 82
Default TOS

I recall SI including a "you cant do anything that could hurt our reputation" in their terms of service - but the bottom line still remains the same - don't accuse people in a public forum unless you are absolutely sure that what you're saying is competely true, accurate, and stated clearly with all the facts.
lwrules is offline  
Old 09-13-2003, 01:10 PM   #17
Lil_Red
Registered User
 
Lil_Red's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,579
Default Re: TOS

Quote:
Originally posted by lwrules
I recall SI including a "you cant do anything that could hurt our reputation" in their terms of service - but the bottom line still remains the same - don't accuse people in a public forum unless you are absolutely sure that what you're saying is competely true, accurate, and stated clearly with all the facts.
Do you work for them? You seem very fanatical in your defense of them considering that there are significantly better options out there.
Lil_Red is offline  
Old 09-13-2003, 01:16 PM   #18
lwrules
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Richboro, PA, USA
Posts: 82
Default nope

I don't work for them. I have known those guys for years and they are amazing at what they do and are always subject to the jealousy of others and anger of cheaters who get caught. Regardless, why make this personal? I am just stating the facts. The way I see it is the only thing MORE dangerous than a malicious exploit is the viral human distribution of malicious information.
lwrules is offline  
Old 09-13-2003, 01:19 PM   #19
Sashman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Dulles Virginia
Posts: 590
Default Re: TOS

Quote:
Originally posted by lwrules
I recall SI including a "you cant do anything that could hurt our reputation" in their terms of service
You are correct here. Which is why everyone is sending me emails / pms and not posting here .

Quote:
Even in your last post, you STILL neglect to mention that the "malicious" actions are based on a PRE-AGREED terms of service (similar to the justification you use for your own preference switching script) which is fully disclosed on the advertiser's site.
Explain yourself here. How can this be pre-agreed on? You are saying if I write a virus that goes around changing people's registry entries and make a disclaimer page on the web somewhere it's pre-agreed and ok? There is no agreement on my website for any such activity, or from where the popup is spawned. There is no agreement or prompt from the popup. What is pre-agreed?

Listen, lwrules .. I can appreciate your loyalty to Robert / SI. But, are you seriously saying this is ok? It's ok for an advertiser to use a major exploit without the user's consent? It's also ok for a publisher to continue showing this ad when they know about the exploit / problem? If this advertiser ran a program that automatically installed gator on your box without any message/confirmation, would this be ok? In either case, it's a violation of your computer and considered a hack.
Sashman is offline  
Old 09-13-2003, 01:31 PM   #20
lwrules
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Richboro, PA, USA
Posts: 82
Default terms of service

When you download ad supported programs like kazaa or other freeware program, they place a cookie on your computer stating that you agree to their terms of service, which in the case of many freeware aps includes the right to change your default homepage using whatever technology they or their software providers choose to use. Those cookies can be called up by popup providers who partner with freeware companies to confirm consent. So instead of PAYING for your theft of music, you choose to get ads (or scumware as many people refer to it on this site) - of course to some people, the scumware is horrible so they try to remove it while finding new ways to steal music without ads, for example (like kazaa lite). Then when the advertisers "fight back" some users take issue with the fact that their theft of music is being distracted by advertiser's attempts to reach the end users who benefit from the free software in exchange for said ads. Interestingly people on this board ARE PUBLISHERS/ADVERTISERS and its obviously and ultimately a JEALOUSY issue driving the urge to knock down other advertisers who find clever ways to reach the end user.
lwrules is offline  
Old 09-13-2003, 01:54 PM   #21
lwrules
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Richboro, PA, USA
Posts: 82
Default Besides

Even if it was just an exploit changing (without locking) default homepage settings with no user consent, and limited to just that, how is that different that what some adult sites have done for years?
lwrules is offline  
Old 09-13-2003, 02:13 PM   #22
Sashman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Dulles Virginia
Posts: 590
Default Re: terms of service

Quote:
Originally posted by lwrules
When you download ad supported programs like kazaa or other freeware program ... Interestingly people on this board ARE PUBLISHERS/ADVERTISERS and its obviously and ultimately a JEALOUSY issue driving the urge to knock down other advertisers who find clever ways to reach the end user.
This is interesting. I didn't realize scumware did this with the cookie. However, I can assure you that the machines I've tested this on do not have any scumware or freeware loaded. It's also easy to check for the existance of a generic cookie by calling a site you own and outputing the cookies sent (which I just did). It definately would be a good way to detect scumware on a browser if it were true.

So, are you trying to defend SI by linking them to scumware?
Sashman is offline  
Old 09-13-2003, 02:55 PM   #23
Sashman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Dulles Virginia
Posts: 590
Default

Ok, this is pretty interesting. I had suspected something on lwrule's first couple of posts, but the last one sealed the deal, so I did some digging.

http://www.smartbotpro.net/ - lwrules site in profile

Popup domain in question -

Domain Name: PASSTHISON.COM
Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, INC.
Whois Server: whois.networksolutions.com
Referral URL: http://www.networksolutions.com
Name Server: NS1.SMARTBOTPRO.NET
Name Server: NS2.SMARTBOTPRO.NET
Status: ACTIVE
Updated Date: 10-apr-2003
Creation Date: 23-mar-2000
Expiration Date: 23-mar-2006

Not 100% proof that it is his site, but good enough for me. What a small world we live in.

Edit (few minutes later) : Bam .. and the site gets disconnected. Guess I was right.

Last edited by Sashman; 09-13-2003 at 03:27 PM.
Sashman is offline  
Old 09-13-2003, 03:48 PM   #24
lwrules
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Richboro, PA, USA
Posts: 82
Default No sh*t

I never hid my identity. I don't need to hide behind anything since everything I do is fully disclosed and justified. I just don't sign these posts due to administrative requests that advertising and controversial links not be included. Anyway *what* was deleted?
lwrules is offline  
Old 09-13-2003, 04:09 PM   #25
Steve_S
I am a Contributing Geek. Are You?
 
Steve_S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Posts: 5,224
Default

Hello Please excuse the interuption.

1. I guess we won't be starting the "Webmaster Union" anytime in the next 400 years. A place where we all agree to certain standards of behavior. </joke>

2. Civil and respectfull debate with facts is encouraged and we ceretainly have lots of that in this thread. Please continue this.

3. Please eliminate the personel attacks and unfounded statements and or questions. For example: before you launch your questions and such why not carefully read the following thread including the quote:

http://www.geekvillage.com/forums/sh...852#post124852

4. Certain posts in this thread are way off topic. The issue and topic is Popup Warning so please don't use this thread as an opportunity to twist it into your own agenda. Sometimes refered to as "hijacking" and as many of you already know, it's not tolerated.

5. My own views on this issue are clearly stated in Item 9 of our Posting Guide at: http://www.geekvillage.com/posting_guide_for_bb.htm Please carefully read this document. Iv'e modified them somewhat in the last 2 years since I believe that most of us should have the opportunity to discuss and defend our respective positions in a moderated Forum like this one

6. If you can't see the value in these procedures and rules, please only send me your thoughts via our BB Feedback Form.

Thank you in advance for your anticpated cooperation.
Steve_S is offline  
Old 09-13-2003, 04:42 PM   #26
Sashman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Dulles Virginia
Posts: 590
Default

Thank you Steve, and I appreciate you keeping this thread open.
Sashman is offline  
Old 09-13-2003, 04:48 PM   #27
lwrules
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Richboro, PA, USA
Posts: 82
Default steve

What's your opinion about CONSENT if the user AGREES on the terms of service of an ad-supported software and THEN, with the use of a cookie checking pop, has his/her browser altered in COMPLETE ACCORDANCE with the terms he/she gave EXPLICIT agreement.
lwrules is offline  
Old 09-13-2003, 05:00 PM   #28
Sashman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Dulles Virginia
Posts: 590
Default Re: steve

Quote:
Originally posted by lwrules
What's your opinion about CONSENT if the user AGREES on the terms of service of an ad-supported software and THEN, with the use of a cookie checking pop, has his/her browser altered in COMPLETE ACCORDANCE with the terms he/she gave EXPLICIT agreement.
If this is your defense, then your code is not working. Earlier today I got the pop on a freshly installed machine with one application (Blizzard's Warcraft III). Unless you are saying blizzard or microsoft is in league with scumlords and setting this cookie, something is amiss. Hmm, I wonder. That gates fellow does have fairly beady eyes.
Sashman is offline  
Old 09-13-2003, 05:03 PM   #29
Leviathan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 32
Default Re: steve

Quote:
Originally posted by lwrules
What's your opinion about CONSENT if the user AGREES on the terms of service of an ad-supported software and THEN, with the use of a cookie checking pop, has his/her browser altered in COMPLETE ACCORDANCE with the terms he/she gave EXPLICIT agreement.
Ad-supported software is one thing. If the user agrees to a blanket ToS that pretty much allows anything, then that user brings whatever he gets upon himself. Of cousre, a ToS can't violate any known laws.

However, in case I am mistaken forgive me, this thread is about a popup ad being displayed by a users website. If I happen to go to a website, and I get a popup that changes things w/out my knowlege or consent, THAT is a problem.

In this case, it sounds as though a brokered popup ad is running via SI's program. That means, most likely, they have a deal to deliver a number of daily/weekly/monthly impressions, or clicks, or actions, whatever the case may be. The broker runs any number of ads, not just one specific campaign.

SI contacted the broker, and hopefully they will do what is correct, and that is halt the offending campaign/creative, as it clearly uses an operating system security exploit to do its dirty work.

In my view, both of you have good points. On the one hand, if someone downloads popup-supported software, should they be subject to even altering pops such as that, if they agreed to it? Or, does that violate the law, plain and simple, even if they did agree to it. And in the other hand, the use of an exploit on casual browsers that havn't made any agreements should certainly not be allowed.

Personally, I think in either case, it should not be allowed. Now, if you installed a program that acts as a gateway for this behaviour, that's one thing. But we're talking about a third party to the ad-ware, or website that is doing this through exploiting a vulneralability in the OS. (Which will probably soon be patched). That's just plain wrong.
Leviathan is offline  
Old 09-13-2003, 05:12 PM   #30
lwrules
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Richboro, PA, USA
Posts: 82
Default laws

Everyone keeps saying these "exploits" are against the law -- would you care to give a link to this so-called law because US hacker laws 1029 1030 are pretty specific about intent to damage or breaking into governmental or banking computers with the intent to defraud / do damage. So how is changing someone's homepage default against the law with or without consent.
lwrules is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Popup suggestions scnofx Making Money with CPC and/or CPM Programs 2 06-02-2001 10:15 AM
frameless popup script + popup = fully loaded popup demae Making Money with CPC and/or CPM Programs 2 05-29-2001 09:17 PM
Script to manage multiple popup companies Darkness Web Design and Webmaster Issues 1 04-23-2001 12:00 PM
This tricky popup demae Making Money with CPC and/or CPM Programs 4 04-01-2001 07:11 AM
new popup script Knix Web Design and Webmaster Issues 8 08-05-2000 11:02 PM

Please support our advertisers. They ensure our survival.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:11 AM.


GeekVillage.com is copyright © 1998-2015 Curiosity Cave - Science gifts for clever kids. All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.