Discuss mailing list

[Wil <wil AT lesspheres.fr>]

I’ll try to be short on this.. 

But i think coinhive is not just malware or cryptojacking.. 

Sure, it was and still will be miused as it seems quite easy to do so.

There 30% fees should not be forgotten. 

Just my point of view, but the plateform also try to avoid non user approbation to mine Monero. 

Maybe, just maybe, it could be a solution to also avoid Google Adsense and other ads plateforms on some website with enough trafic. 

But i might also be completly wrong about this. 

Anyway, i had not try it ( yet ? ), and don’t have any real return, but i also don’t want to fall in the easy caricature where minig egal malware. 

Not in a world where users metadata for selling ads is the gold of tech companies (which do not have to be big, by the way). 

Wil. 

Le 16 avr. 2018 à 17:40, Jonah Aragon <jonah AT triplebit.net> a écrit :

Why exactly are you wishing to access a site that literally serves malware to unsuspecting users? Not sure what the purpose of that would be. 

Jonah

On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 2:15 AM Wil <wil AT lesspheres.fr> wrote:

I noticed the ads lists include conhive.com.

$ dig +short coinhive.com @167.99.153.82

167.99.153.82

Don’t want to enter in a long argue/discussion here, but I think it’s too bad… 

Wil.

Moment léger au hasard : 

« Une banque est un endroit où ils nous prêtent un parapluie quand il fait beau et qui nous le reprennent quand il pleut. » Robert Frost

Le 16 avr. 2018 à 04:34, Jacob Bachmeyer <jcb62281 AT gmail.com> a écrit :

Jonah Aragon wrote:

This is a good point, and I was thinking about this myself. I’m not actually sure how those anti-adblocking sites detect adblocking in the first place. I haven’t run into this issue yet, but if anybody does feel free to send me an email with a link and I’ll see if there’s anything I can do about it.

They all ultimately rely on _javascript_.  Block _javascript_ with NoScript or similar and not only are you protected from most (all?) browser exploits, but most ads also disappear.

Server-side anti-ad-block *might* be possible, but browser extensions can defeat it easily by requesting the ad resource and simply not displaying the ad.

Other than that I don’t think there’s any disadvantages, and it’s  probably better than browser extensions from a privacy perspective since nothing gets resolved or downloaded in the first place.

Browser extensions, assuming they implement full blocking, prevent even a DNS query.  DNS blocking only prevents the connection to the ad server.

This is incredibly easy to implement. I doubt we’ll block them by default at the Tier 1 level because it goes against some of our core values of anti-censorship in a way, but it’d be easy for others to setup Tier 2s in a similar manner.

I entirely agree with this.  Also, the problem with letting "a little bit of censorship for a worthy cause" is policing the censors to guard against scope creep and lazy filter list maintenance.  I remember back in school where the site that distributed the Windows port of cdrtools was blocked under the category "Illegal Drugs".  There was nothing of the sort on that site anywhere.


-- Jacob


--------
You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org

--------
You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org

--------
You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org