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

How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

ctrl.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 326 posts

Re: How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

#81

Post by kodablah »

kbwt wrote: post #79
kodablah wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which code are you looking at? I see it uses https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/components/url_pattern_... . Also, from what I gather from their docs, this is only for the ad-block-filter formatted lists. For their own super-secret-better-ads list, they use safe browsing lists which use a hash-some-then-phone-home approach IIRC [0]. I mean, even Mozilla that uses the safe browsing lists says at [1] that the interna…

This is the call stack I'm looking at: #0 https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/components/url_pattern_... #1 https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/components/url_pattern_... #2 https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/components/url_pattern_... #3 https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/components/url_pattern_...

Ah, I didn't dig, but I'd contend that URL length limits would apply and the worst you could do is slow down a client's browser in the same way you could just by multiplying the number of attempted requests to a blockable URL.

Re: How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

#82

Post by paulie_a »

firebender6 wrote: post #55

This is still not going to help with websites that force you to disable adblockers to access their content. It's especially annoying when after disabling the site looks like a cluster of ads with information hidden in between. It's an abusive relationship.

That is fine... personally those sites go on my mental block list to avoid in the future.

Re: How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

#83

Post by Bitcoin_McPonzi »

chaz6 wrote: post #20

I wouldn't trust a burglar to install my security system. I won't trust Google to block ads.

The ADT company hired and trusted convicted serial killer Dennis Rader to install alarms. He'd then defeat the alarms and go in to the houses to bind, torture, and kill his victims.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Rader#Early_life_and_ca...

Your analogy is good. Google and Chrome Adblocker is just like ADT and the "BTK Killer".

Re: How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

#84

Post by afandian »

jacquesm wrote: post #67
afandian wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love to see the original claim. Got an archive link?

https://marketingland.com/once-deemed-evil-google-now-embrac... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paid_inclusion#History_of_paid... References directly the founders letter, I do not have a link to that but I am not making this up.

Thanks. I don't think for a secnd you're making it up! It's just the halflife of information is almost as short as principled decisions...

Re: How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

#86

Post by Consultant32452 »

mastax wrote: post #65
kodablah wrote: post #26

Which is it, the super secret consortium that won't even let you download the full list of bad sites, or Easy List/Privacy? Why don't they just use EasyList and report offenders there instead of this new consortium? The answer to that rhetorical question will let you know why I'll remain on uBO. They didn't need to build this in, but they did and gave the current ad-blocking community the finger instead of support.

>Which is it, the super secret consortium that won't even let you download the full list of bad sites, or Easy List/Privacy? Why don't they just use EasyList and report offenders there instead of this new consortium? The lists serve different purposes. EasyList is a lit of ad-serving URLs to block. The uh, consortium list is a black/white list of which sites don't follow the standards. The standards are not about bad…

That's very kind of them to provide a convenient "white list" of ad-serving URLs for me to block.

Re: How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

#87

Post by bitcurious »

d2wa wrote: post #59
kodablah wrote: post #26

Which is it, the super secret consortium that won't even let you download the full list of bad sites, or Easy List/Privacy? Why don't they just use EasyList and report offenders there instead of this new consortium? The answer to that rhetorical question will let you know why I'll remain on uBO. They didn't need to build this in, but they did and gave the current ad-blocking community the finger instead of support.

Read the article. They do use EasyList + EasyPrivacy.

They use EasyList+EasyPrivacy but only websites that they judge as having intrusive advertising. You can't manually enable adblocking on any website, nor add for example "youtube.com" to the blacklist.

Re: How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

#89

Post by mabbo »

I think there's good intentions by Google here. That said, let's talk about the worst-case scenario, the thing that Google could actually do that is entirely anti-competitive.

Step 1: Google finds a large number of competitors who are doing pretty well playing by their rules. Google finds some trait they all have in common. Google then modifies their own ads to not have that trait.

Step 2: Google declares the given trait "not meeting the Better Ads standard", "clarifies" the standard (or their implementation of it), and blocks all their competitors ads. Their own ads of course are still meeting the new set of rules, as they knew the change was coming. If the Coalition for Better Ads disagrees or won't be bullied by the Goliath of advertising, Google will go form their own version of it claiming to be more strict, "for the sake of the users".

Step 3: After a few weeks or months, the competition will modify their ads and eventually everything will be back to normal. That's when Google goes back to step 1.

The final Step 4 is the opposite. Find a trait that none or few competitors have in their ads but would potentially increase click-through rates. Modify the rules to say that doing this thing is okay, and oh hey Google ads are doing that thing as of right now.

Why all of this? Because Amazon is growing in the advertising business and is ruthless. "Your margin is my opportunity". So Google needs an arsenal of dirty tricks up their sleeve.

Do I really believe this is the plan? No. I think Google are legit trying to meet a user need that exists. But I also know they're a publicly traded company with growing competition in a fierce industry. It's not what they plan to do that worries me, but what they can do when up against the wall.

Re: How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

#90

Post by kodablah »

falcolas wrote: post #80
kodablah wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EasyList is also a list of ad-serving sites to block and a list of elements to hide. Can you help me understand why the blacklist can't be just placed in a normal ad blocking list like EasyList? If it's by site anyways, I'm not sure the actual difference for the blocker itself. It's not like the EasyList standards can be automatically enforced by software either. I think "serve different purposes" could be rephrased…

They don't want to block ads on sites, unless the site is on the other list. That is, if site foo.com and bar.com both serve ads, but foo.com is on the "blacklist", the ad blocking will be enabled on foo.com. However, ad blocking will remain disabled on bar.com. It's not Google's intention to block all ads on all sites - only ads on "bad" sites. If they can reduce the number of adblock installs by reducing the overal…

Ah, I see now, EasyList is selectively applied after first determining whether the site "deserves" it. That's an evil use of the hard work of EasyList maintainers IMO. I wonder if I can find a way to make Chrome think every site is "bad". If not, uBO still for me.
Post reply on HN