Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EasyList is in trouble and so are many ad blockers

adguard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 439 posts

Re: EasyList is in trouble and so are many ad blockers

#311

Post by pests »

Macha wrote: post #157
LinAGKar wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A filter list is definitely not HTML

The minimal spec valid HTML5 document is currently: a Practically, browsers will accept omitting both of these, and the spec even allows for omitting the title "if it is provided by a higher level protocol" So it's not that crazy an argument that a plain text file is a html document

Too technical.

They serve websites to browsers for people to view. This file (be it properly formatted .html or .txt) is not a website people go to in their browser - its used internally by an application. This is the key point.

Re: EasyList is in trouble and so are many ad blockers

#312

Post by Spunkie »

manigandham wrote: post #286
thayne wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it any different from a json file used by a web app (or mobile app, or desktop app)? And there is no reason a web app couldn't read data from a txt file instead of a json file.

It's not for displaying a webpage but to power a separate application. Just because you can serve any kind of file over HTTP doesn't mean it's for serving a website. There's a reason Cloudflare doesn't allow large video files either - even though that probably counts even more as "web content". This is a very straightforward interpretation of the terms and it's strange to see such pushback based on a pedantic technic…

> It's not for displaying a webpage

The majority of of legitimate traffic to these txt files are by browsers(extensions) for the express purpose of displaying websites to a users specifications(without ads in this case).

A reasonably low estimate is that 20%-30% of global internet users are behind some kind of adblocker, almost all of which are default subscribed to easylists. So this txt file is potentially responsible for the way a BILLION+ internet users see and interact with near every single website.

Cloudflares claim that this isn't web content is full on reality warping. It only makes any kind of sense when masked under layers of abstractions and lawyer speak.

---

None this should even matter though, someone seeing the big picture at CF should have done the napkin math and realized that the easylist bandwidth pays for itself.

Ignoring the soft cushion of the huge amount of globally distributed caching of these files, if easylist suddenly stopped working for a week then global bandwidth usage could see a spike. A pretty little chunk of which CF may be on the hook to absorb at no cost.

Re: EasyList is in trouble and so are many ad blockers

#313

Post by memorable »

ThunderSizzle wrote: post #282
kaushikc wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sponsorblock has saved me hundreds of hours from watching youtube ads and other time wasting bullshit. The devs deserve to be paid for making this awesome application.

Were you sponsored to say that?

I'm not the OP, but if I said that line, I'm 100% sure I am not being sponsored. It's just that good.

Re: EasyList is in trouble and so are many ad blockers

#314

Post by renewiltord »

GekkePrutser wrote: post #249
r3trohack3r wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn’t sound like bullshit to me. Serving a static text file that is primarily used by applications is not in line with their terms of service. Cloudflare provides a significant service to the free and open web by subsidizing the hosting costs of static content for websites. They give that away for free under what appears to be reasonable terms.

But it is web content, really. A txt file renders fine in every browser. Many websites also push text through HTML as part of AJAXy stuff. If they actually enforced this for all sites, their service would no longer be usable.

Sadly, despite my arguments in the same direction, Cloudflare refuses to host a base64 encoding of the new Flubber.

Re: EasyList is in trouble and so are many ad blockers

#315

Post by angch »

ff7c11 wrote: post #218

Easylist should serve the Indian browser (based on user-agent) with a giant file (expensive), a corrupt file, or some response which causes the app the crash. If the browser crashes on every startup due to a malicious response from the Easylist server, users will likely delete it.

Just a separate rules file that blocks .in and other popular domains for India will probably work just as well.

Re: EasyList is in trouble and so are many ad blockers

#316

Post by codalan »

laundermaf wrote: post #305
codalan wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They didn't get banned. They got an email from CF support saying that they cannot cache TXT files and that they'd need to disable the proxy. This does not mean banned.

EasyList is a txt file. If they can’t host it on CF, it means they can’t use CF for EasyList. They didn’t ban the whole organization, but effectively told them to stop. I don’t see a difference.

To me, getting banned is when the provider locks out (or just deletes) your account and prevents you from using their service entirely.

CF didn't do this. They sent them an email telling them that what they were doing was a violation of their TOS and to cease doing it. They did not kill off their account. They still have the option to comply and continue with CF, which seems to be what they are going to do at the moment.

Hopefully, CF will grant them amnesty on this one. At the end of the day, an HTML file is just a text file, so I don't see why this would have even mattered to begin with.

Re: EasyList is in trouble and so are many ad blockers

#317

Post by YoshiRulz »

Macha wrote: post #250
rapind wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From https://docs.github.com/en/pages/getting-started-with-github... --- > GitHub Pages sites have a soft bandwidth limit of 100 GB per month. > In order to provide consistent quality of service for all GitHub Pages sites, rate limits may apply. These rate limits are not intended to interfere with legitimate uses of GitHub Pages. If your request triggers rate limiting, you will receive an appropriate response with an…

I wonder how e.g. NixOS or Homebrew deal with this

NixOS wouldn't be affected by that quota because it doesn't use GitHub Pages as far as I can tell.

Re: EasyList is in trouble and so are many ad blockers

#318

Post by yellowapple »

manigandham wrote: post #309
yellowapple wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's a reason Cloudflare doesn't allow large video files either - even though that probably counts even more as "web content". And that's just as nonsensical. Bytes are bytes; the rationale should be based on bandwidth, not on arbitrary micromanagement of the format of the data consuming that bandwidth. If I encode that video in a giant self-contained blob of JavaScript that feeds the pixels into a canvas or som…

No. It is about excessive resources/bandwidth usage. The customer service response reply isn't great but the context itself is clear because this file is clearly not for displaying any part of the web presence of the easylist site. Again this is that "pedantic technicality" - why such a fuss when the actual issue is straightforward, and also clearly understood and reiterated by the easylist team themselves in the pos…

> It is about excessive resources/bandwidth usage.

Then the policy would focus on that rather than micromanage the format of the data using those resources/bandwidth. Again: bytes are bytes.

> why such a fuss

Because a policy as nonsensical as "no non-HTML files allowed" artificially limits the usefulness of CloudFlare for precisely zero legitimate reason. I ask again: does wrapping a video in a blob of JavaScript fix the bandwidth issues associated with hosting videos? If I have a 10MB MP3 downloaded 1,000 times v. a 1MB HTML/CSS/JS static site downloaded 10,000 times, what difference does it make?

Re: EasyList is in trouble and so are many ad blockers

#319

Post by cimnine »

Several opensource projects, especially Linux distributions, have solved this problem long ago by setting up a web of volunteer mirrors. They docs and scripts to quickly set up an additional mirror.

The central HTTP server of easylist could then hand out 302s to fetch the actual file from one of the mirrors. Alternatively to 302s, a modern scriptable DNS server, that uses the mirror list, responds with different IPs, round-robin (or even better if it's geo-aware).

DNS TXT records could maybe be used to serve a digest of the file, do that mirrors can't modify it without that being detected.

Re: EasyList is in trouble and so are many ad blockers

#320

Post by Phelinofist »

runlevel1 wrote: post #166

1. Add a ToS to the EasyList website that prohibits this sort of abuse. (I don't see any currently.) 2. Send a cease and desist letter to the app creator. 3. If they don't respond, also send a C&D to Google demanding they cease distribution of the malware responsible for the DDoS. Anyone can send a cease and desist -- it's just cautionary letter. You aren't obligated to follow through with the threatened legal action…

Would someone in India care about a C&D letter sent from someone, say, in Europe or the US? I don't think so
Post reply on HN