Exclusive LG phones only from AT&T
Pop-up, pop-under blockers no longer working (#3)
We continue coverage of a non-product/platform-specific issue where Web advertisement pop-unders appear to infiltrate blocking mechanisms with greater frequency.
As noted last week, this problem isn't limited to Safari; nor is it limited to Macs. Instead, it appears to be the result of new ad delivery techniques that seek to subvert traditional blocking systems.
Several users have reported success with shareware solutions that can successfully thwart the new ad delivery schemes.PithHelmet blocks image, javascript, Flash ads and GIF animations. It can also collapse blocked content so that it is hidden from view.
Randolph Mitchell writes: No popups or pop-unders seen with Safari 1.2.4 (10.3.8) at any sites, including macosrumors.com, macdailynews.com, howstuffworks.com, and drudgereport.com; perhaps because I'm running Pith Helmet?"
Privoxy provides filtering capabilities for protecting privacy, filtering web page content, managing cookies, controlling access, and removing ads, banners, pop-ups
Lars Eggert writes "For ad blocking, you can't beat privoxy. It's an HTTP proxy running on your local box that filters the HTML before it reaches the browser. It's free, multi-platform, rock-solid and easy to install (web-based configuration.)"
Internet Cleanup blocks banner ads, pop-ups, and purports to detect the presence of spyware.
MacFixIt reader Mike writes: "If people want to block just about all pop up ads then I can recommend Allume's Internet Cleanup. Since installing this software some time ago and using it's default configuration I have not seen any pop up advertising on my Mac."
FlashBlock For Firefox users, an extension called FlashBlock enables users to have control over all flash ads and whether they show or not. See the section below on Macromedia technologies subverting pop-under blockers for more information.
A tedious workaround Meanwhile, MacFixIt reader Steve notes a kludgy workaround that works to eliminate some "on-click" pop-unders:
"I don't see the new pop-unders on the Drudge Report [Ed.- One of the sites implicated for increased pop-unders in our initial report] any more. The way these things work is that they're set to open an ad when you leave the site by clicking on a link. So I right-click on the link I want, copy the URL, and paste it in the address bar. It's a bit kludgey, but it works like a charm."
Pop-unders causing crashes A handful of MacFixIt readers have reported a more serious, but related issue where Safari crashes when attempting to display some pop-under ads.
MacFixIt reader Barry Maggert writes: "I have had a more serious annoying problem which started sometime last fall. A few sites crash Safari when trying to open a pop-up window and I have Pop-up Blocking turned on. The two sites that do this to me are CBS.SportsLine.com and PGATour.com. When visiting these sites I have to turn Pop-up Blocking off first or Safari "unexpectedly quits." They obviously have new 'pop-up code' of some kind. (Their main page doesn't do this, just certain sub-pages try to open pop-up ads.)
"Apple's discussion groups have many people noting the same problem, so I know it's not just me. I've also noticed the problem exists with OmniWeb, but not with Camino or FireFox, which leads me to believe it is KHTML based. That's what Safari and OmniWeb have in common."
If you are experiencing a similar issue, please let us know.
Response from a pop-up subverter Last week we mentioned a company called "Popuptraffic.com" that was directly boasts about their ability to subvert pop-up blockers.
MacFixIt reader David Ourisman had an interesting exchange with a representative from "Popuptraffic.com", as follows:
David Ourisman wrote: "I am writing to complain about the fact that you are intentionally trying to subvert web users desire not to view pop-under ads. This is a very poor business practice, and I consider any impression from an unwanted advertisement to be an inducement to boycott that advertiser."
Popuptraffic.com's response: "How dare you? Let me teach you a little something that you obviously never were able to grasp. If you go to a website and in exchange for taking what that website is providing, you are shown a popup ad, you allow the owner of the site the to recoup some of the very real costs involved with keeping a site online. By using a popup blocker, you are essentially stealing their work. You're nothing more than a common thief. Sincerely, Ron Holiday."
Macromedia technology used to subvert blockers As mentioned above, users have had great success using the plug-in FlashBlock for Firefox to avoid the new, more persistent pop-unders. This is because many of the new ad delivery mechanisms use JavaScript embedded in Macromedia Flash elements to force the ads through.
For example, MacFixIt reader Charles Jenkins writes: "A few months ago, using Firefox under Windows, I went to a site that required either Shockwave or Flash, and once I installed the new Macromedia plug-in, I started getting popups there and at many other sites. I guessed that my browser was blocking JavaScript popups, but the sites had to be opening the windows with Macromedia commands...so I immediately removed Macromedia stuff from my computer and went back to popup-free surfing."
An example of this code is at: http://www.flashbax.com/flash_popup_windows.htm
In order to block this particular type of pop-under, you will need to either remove Macromedia Flash plug-ins and associated software from your system or use a blocking tool that can handle Macromedia content like PithHelmet.
MacDailyNews bars pop-under ads A number of the sites cited for increased pop-under activity in our original article have since posted messages indicating that they are taking measures to prevent such ads from being delivered henceforth.
The Webmaster from MacDailyNews tells us:
"Until we understand exactly what's going on and/or Apple fixes Safari's pop up blocker to once again effectively block our pop-under ads for users that desire to block them, we will not be serving pop under ads."
Resources
%20%7C%20MacFixIt%20-%20CNET%20Reviews&srcUrl=http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13727_7-10334327-263.html){kind=small}
him that any ad "campaign" that causes negative feelings toward the
advertiser is a definite failure. ;)
So Mr. Holiday never goes to the bathroom during a commercial break when
he's watching TV. That would be stealing the program, right?
Done. I was ambivalent until I read that response. Now I'll be staying off any sites that use this technology, and letting them know why.
If advertisers and ad server companies weren't so intrusive in the first place
we wouldn't have this issue.
What's this popuptraffic.com guy's email address?
<i>What's this popuptraffic.com guy's email
address</i>
Well, check the address. Just add a www. to there.
Anyway, the mail address is:
admin@popuptraffic.com
If you have installed Hosts for blocking, you can, in IE,
show the address bar simply by selecting from the
button bar. Add the address to your hosts text file. At
least you can block the content, and possibly the page
load altogether.
In Firebird, I AM asked if I wish to view a pop-window.
The comment:
<i>The way these things work is that they're set to open
an ad when you leave the site by clicking on a link. So I
right-click on the link I want, copy the URL, and paste it
in the address bar. It's a bit kludgey, but it works like a
charm." </i>
is simply only partially correct. Pop-under ads appear
more frequently when a page is loaded, not when you
click to leave. It depends on the site. Perhaps the
person quoted meant that for only "The Drudge Report."
Not a place I visit, so I can't comment.
I have communicated with their firm. I quoted his
response. There is a direct email link. I mailed from a
seldom used address at VERIO. To add to his
frustration, I also notified him that I have blocked his
domain so any reply will be bounced. Just added his
domain to their Blacklist.
I note that popuptraffic.com is on the PithHelmet default block list.
We should all spam the maggot. Give him a taste of his own medicine.
Apparently, he knows that I blocked his entire domain at
Verio, so I received a reply.
Here is a second mail address:
admin@sinational.com
That, too, is now blocked. We'll see what else he
comes up with. Hotmail and Yahoo are also blocked.
I have no problems with ads on sites. I do however not like pop ups and pop
unders. There are some on the windows platform that if closed will respawn
themselves...even after leaving the site you just "paid" for.
On sites that I use often I will pay for the easy of use and lack of ads. I use
versiontracker and macfixit pro. I have other paid accounts as well. When
weather.com started slowing the loading of radar and weather maps for
unpaid users I decided to check into subscribing. They wanted top dollar just
to add back the features they used to have before. I went to the competitor,
weatherunderground and for 5 dollars a year I get no ads and radar loops
that go back for hours...I get the last 40 radar images and storm tracking to
boot.
AS for "complaining," the two I ran across were for dubious businesses (the whole answer 200 questions, your social security number and we might give you a gift card for $25 dollars at OLIVE GARDEN - it would be more effective to note the url the ad is telling you to go to and then go to "Darden REstaurants" which owns OLIVE GARDEN and point out that while they are not selling it directly, it affects their name & branding to be linked with spammers).
characteristic of spammers. The tone of his reply was unprofessionally
hostile and defensive, typical of the bottom feeders who populate the lower
depths of cyberspace.
There are, however, some beneficial side effects to the heavy handed
marketing that has become so popular on the internet. It?s driving people
away from Internet Explorer to other browsers that give users more control
over their web environment. And it?s encouraging a cottage industry in third-
party ad blockers.
If the trend continues, one might be so optimistic as to assume the
marketplace still works, despite Bill Gates? ernest efforts to strangle it.
---
Don't anthropomorphize computers.
They hate that.
Popup *blocking* and/or ad-load blocking could, in a very loose definition, be considered to be viewing content while avoiding "paying" for it.
However, boycotting an advertiser that stoops to using popup-blocker-subverting technologies is nothing of the sort; it is merely saying that if you choose to advertise to me in this way it is your perogative, but I will not patronize your business because I find this an unacceptable business practice.
Personally, I believe if enough people did this, the web would be a cleaner place: if a site fires a subversive popup at you, send them an e-mail letting them known you're not only never coming back to their site, but also let their advertiser know that because of the ad buy they've permenantly lost your business. That's what I'll do.
Yes.
Maybe, just maybe ad-blocking software is illegally getting only part of
content intended for viewing. But that's for a court to decide. So if the self
righteous Mr. Holiday and his bottom feeding firm feel this is true then put
their money where their nasty little mouths are and go to court.
But if I choose not to look at billboards while I drive, fast forward through ads
on taped programs, go to the bathroom while the ads run before the movie or
during the football game, or make use of software to block pop-ups, he can
do nothing. Nothing. Can he turn my head to the roadside? No. Can he
disable the fast forward button (Tivo is another thing)? No. Can he close the
bathrooms during the showing of commercials. See how ridiculous this is?
His frustration comes through the anger. Poor abused Mr. Holiday. Too bad
but we're free to skip the BS. So please skip it. Tell your friends and the
advertisers what you think. Blog this one ad nauseum. It won't stop the total
slime bags but it'll at least make some legit firms think it through.
Geez what's the click through on those obnoxious things anyway? Aren't
those folks paying these nasty man for something that barely works?
- by dvesey February 21, 2005 11:52 PM PST
- I am running latest copy of OmniWeb (not a demo version) and just upgraded
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(16 Comments)to 10.3.8. from 10.3.6.
I am having NO problems with Pop-ups or Unders. And that was with 10.3.6
and now with 10.3.8. Altho I have seen reports of others with problems using
10.3.8. Other forces must be at play.
DV