MVPS Hosts File - Detrimental or Advised?

[Deleted133263User]

Is using the MVPS Hosts File detrimental to the nexus sites revenue gain from Ads?. Or, on the other hand would the site recommend use of such protection measures.

 

The guys that have been working on that list have been around for a long time and are very well respected. Its a proven good security layer for a lot of ills on the internet. It also does the same job AdBlockPlus does I think more effectively (unless the hosts file becomes compromised of course) because you do not need another plugin slowing down/complicating your browsers functions.

 

Main point - They also have to be careful and mind their P's and Q's with regards to who they include in the hosts file. I believe not just to make sure they are not blocking the wrong people but also for legal reasons.

 

See this section of the site for Criteria used when decisions for inclusion in the hosts file are made

 

Whilst using this, I do not see ads on any nexus sites (even the new necessary video feeds before a download commences, I see a blank space and the countdown in the pop up window for each download)

 

 

Further question to the topic title ... Are the Ads served via Nexus sites not as carefully scrutinised as MVPS list is (obviously if I am not seeing any of them here, the hosts file is blocking everything you have set up to gain revenue from free users), I realise you cannot ever be as expert in the same field as they are.

 

Which leads me onto my final question - What percentage of people does the site consider acceptable to be potentially subject to the multitude of tricks associated with utilising ads connections (potentially with malware) and the resulting damage/loss of personal software/equipment/time, who are currently subject to all those connections currently deemed bad news by the MVPS team?

 

I would like to support the site and its 'methods' and drop the hosts file, however the criteria which blocks the same as noted above seems pretty comprehensive, and well researched on a regular monthly basis to keep on top of shifting targets. And I visit far more sites than just nexus, so I consider not using it a very bad option, especially when we have advanced ransomware lurking out there just waiting for a mistake/window of opportunity to encrypt our hard drives rendering them useless - I cant afford to lose my machine.

Edited February 15, 2011 by Guest

[JimboUK]

Any adblocking will be detrimental.

[Deleted133263User]

:biggrin: I like the Vilja quote

[evilneko]

Given that most if not all ad networks would fall under one or more of those criteria, use of it will without doubt be detrimental not just to Nexus but any ad-supported site you visit.

 

On the flip side, it is a sad truth that ads are a huge and possibly the leading vector for malware attacks on the web. You can make it safer by blocking Flash and javascript, but Flash-blocking even by itself can be detrimental to the site as some ad networks serve Flash regardless of whether it's blocked meaning no ad is shown at all, and javascript blocking often prevents any ads from showing at all as well. Obviously, blocking Flash but allowing javascript is not as safe as blocking both, or even just javascript alone.

 

There is no easy answer (aside from premium) unfortunately. Removing the ad-blocking layer from your security setup and relying on alternatives like Norton SafeWeb and similar products has its own problems, like the time tesnexus and fallout3nexus got blocked by such products. (I personally really, really hate the way they work. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater is all they do)

 

Actually, scratch that. There is one: executable white-listing. Products like Faronics AntiExecute put your most-used programs on a white-list and allow only those to run, rather than blacklisting the bad guys and let everyone else run.

[Deleted133263User]

Yes, I think I have drawn the same conclusions as you evilneko, its a sad state of affairs and the problem lies I think with how ad vendors have become the hungry dog eat dog buccaneers of the world, how they operate, and how honourable they are (or rather aren't).

 

Obfuscated methods of intruding on our digital lives are always going to be the same avenues less desireables will use.

 

Bit of a 'rock and a hard place' problem really, money being the root of all evil. And I guesse anyone trying to answer the questions in the OP in any official capacity will be a bit un-comfortable really.

 

At least we in the PC world have a minor reprieve recently, I understand the trend for malware is moving fast over to clueless mobile users installing shiny apps as fast as marketing can push them on their more capable but less secure communication devices, lots of ID content up for the taking. :pirate:

Edited February 15, 2011 by Guest

[Deleted133263User]

Five years on from the OP and the site is finally realising that the advice by the guys at MVPS hosts may actually have something :facepalm:

 

http://www.nexusmods.com/games/news/12805/?

 

 

posted by Dark0ne Site News

While I wouldn’t normally divulge such information publically in a news post due to the “unsexy” nature of talking about advertising, and because most of it happens behind the scenes anyway, I thought I would be remiss if I didn’t update people on this topic.

A little under two months ago we announced and released our new ad reporting functionality. The idea was to provide a very easy method to report bad ads that might come up on the site. Most importantly, for us, it was a way of gauging just how bad a problem bad ads were on our provider. Bad ads being defined as ads with auto playing sound, redirects, pop-ups or, worst of all, malware or viruses. I had an inkling, but I had no official figures to back it up.

Over 8,500 reports later on 115 specific ad placements (in under 2 months)...I have a very, very good idea. I was abso-bloody-lutely livid when the extent of the problem was revealed and sent regular emails expressing my disgust to my provider. Here’s just a snippet:

QUOTE

We're a part of the problem! We're the reason more and more people are turning to adblockers to secure themselves against this crap. And I think what annoys me most is it's taken me having to waste my coder's time creating an ad reporting system...to even know there was a problem in the first place! It's diabolically bad, and I'm ashamed I'm serving these ads to my users and ashamed I've let it go on for so long.

ENDQUOTE

While I won’t go into the internal politics that happened behind the scenes that involved me exerting pressure to try and improve the situation, I’m writing this news post today to let people know that as of this Saturday, we will be moving to a new provider. It is my hope that moving to this new provider should provide higher quality, more targeted advertising that is far more reliable and safe for users of the Nexus.

We’ll rework our reporting system to work with the new provider’s system and I will continue to monitor the situation closely. If it doesn’t work out, we will move again (and again, and again, if necessary) until we find a provider we can truly rely on. Even if it means taking a hit on our ad revenue to ensure the security is correct.

I wanted you to know that this stuff is important to me and I take it extremely seriously. We work hard to secure our site as much as we possibly can, and it frustrates us that our work is undermined by external attack vectors outside of our direct control that we rely on in order to survive.

So, from this Saturday, it is my utmost hope that the advertising situation improves considerably. I will update you accordingly, especially in regards to the new “tiered membership” incentivised system I mentioned in the earlier news post linked at the beginning of this article.

Once we’ve gauged the reliability of the new ad provider we’ll be in a position to launch that system and provide some benefits to those of our users who help to support the Nexus by turning their ad blockers off (or not using adblockers at all) on the Nexus.

 

 

Good to see anyway Dark0ne :thumbsup:

 

Also good to see advertising buccaneers are amazingly also getting a clue ..

 

http://adcontrarian.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/can-ad-industry-can-save-itself.html

 

 

Can The Ad Industry Save Itself?

I am still hopeful that we can save ourselves.

We are in very deep trouble, but there may be a strategy to rescue ourselves from the hole we have dug.

Let's start by defining the problem. The problem is that everyone seems to have lost confidence in us.

Our clients don't trust us. In fact, the Association of National Advertisers is conducting 2 investigations into our practices. Additionally, many clients are leaving and doing their advertising work in-house.

Consumers don't trust us. 200 million people worldwide are actively engaged in not allowing us to reach them.

Our most important human resource - talent - is fleeing at frightening velocity.

Why is all this happening? There are several reasons:

First, online advertising has turned us into liars. We pretend that we don't know about the astounding amount of fraud and irregularities. We pretend that the numbers we present to our clients are reliable. Constant lying -- either by commission or omission -- eats away at our fiber.

Next is the rancid quality of online advertising. The aesthetic lineage of online advertising is not "Madison Avenue," it is the maddening tackiness of junk mail direct response.

Third, we have become crime enablers. Very large and malignant crime networks are built on the skeleton of online advertising and marketing.

Perhaps most appalling of all, by our constant surveillance of consumers (we call it "tracking" but let's not s*** ourselves) we are undermining personal privacy -- one of the principles that is foundational to a democracy.

The sad part of all this is that the problem is not actually advertising.

The problem resides in what we call "ad tech" -- the tracking and hounding of consumers and the warehousing and selling of information about consumers to third parties.

There is no reason why advertising cannot be successful online. There is no reason why people should hate online advertising as much as they do. There is no reason for us to be liars and crime enablers.

None of this is necessary. All other forms of advertising succeeded for decades without tracking and so can online advertising. It simply is not necessary. We just have to get rid of tracking and use the web like we use all other advertising media.

If tracking had proven to be exceptionally effective maybe we could justify it on an "end justifies the means" argument. But it has not. As I wrote recently...

So far this has been a spectacular failure. Each of us is currently inundated with dozens, if not hundreds, of online messages a day -- banner ads, emails, social messages, etc -- that are assumed by marketers to be particularly relevant to us and reflective of our individual purchasing needs and behaviors. We pay almost no attention to any of them.

The big picture is this. Most people have no love for advertising. They are willing to tolerate it because of the free entertainment and information it provides them. But online advertising has crossed a line. It has dismantled an edifice of reasonable trust between us and the rest of the world.

There is no reason for us to continue to allow ad tech to pollute the soil of our business. If we get rid of it, we will be happier, consumers will be happier, and, in the fullness of time, our clients will be happier.

Facebook and Google may not be happier, but you know what? I'll worry about them some other time.

 

 

Jaw hit the floor when I first had a good read of that, they are waking up to shooting themselves in the foot

 

 

Anyway, a point to note here, if you are looking for weeding out bad providers, see the link in the OP, the hosts file is very well researched, has a good set of criteria to determine which sites go in the hosts file to block ( keeping them legal ) .. And is the biggest basis for most AdBlockers lists ( You dont really need one when using this ). It is still being maintained many years after it was conceived ( at time of writing Updated April-01-2016 ), and shifting sites are weeded / refreshed as necessary when bad sites are no longer extant ( sometimes within days after they were created ).

 

I get that I could have Premium / Supporter - But I dont trust online payment methods to keep my details secure

So I contribute by providing content to the site, generating lots of views and thousands more visitors to the site ( thats fair enough isnt it ?, free hosting for files I created which attracts more revenue views for the site, thats the deal as I understand it for mod authors )

( I also enabled the support the author buttons, unfortunately the Donate to author buttons paying for Supporter status on my behalf have not worked in my case thus far :sad: )

 

.. Aaanyway !, Told you so :tongue:

Edited May 11, 2016 by Guest

[Deleted133263User]

Third party IFrame redirects will be getting blocked in Chrome v64 onwards

 

https://blog.chromium.org/2017/11/expanding-user-protections-on-web.html

 

About time, but coming from google its a pleasant surprise.