Well, taking this as a learning experience (I know very little PHP, and I am trying to learn more), now I know how to take things in my proxy and replace them :)
This could be useful for a lot of stuff, not all illegal.
Printable View
Well, taking this as a learning experience (I know very little PHP, and I am trying to learn more), now I know how to take things in my proxy and replace them :)
This could be useful for a lot of stuff, not all illegal.
Well in this case it is illegal because google doesn't allows that. And it should not be allowed on any of these networks.Quote:
Originally Posted by nux
Would you like someone else replacing the ads from your sites? No one would, it's your content, your website so the ads should never be replaced for someone trying to make a couple bucks more.
When I say illegal I mean illegal - against the law. Not against their ToS/AuP/whatever else
When the traffic transits your network (in this case, your proxy), you gain the legal right to modify it.
Some of the major ISP's have tested ad replacement and similar content-shifting technologies.
It's legal, even if it's not nice.
A bit of expansion on my previous post, because someone asked about this topic privately.
British Telecom tested ad replacement with Phorm.
Charter Communications and Redmoon were testing ad replacement with technology from a company called NebuAD, but NebuAD failed and is no longer in business.
Rogers was testing content manipulation for ad insertion in Canada.
Fotino is another ad replacement technology. It was created and marketed by a company known as MeltingPoint, but MeltingPoint is also no longer in business.
The Google Toolbar uses content manipulation to rewrite 404 pages to get more traffic to Google.
Web Tripwires is a tool designed to "catch" ISP's and others doing content manipulation -- and the have "caught" a lot of people.
The legal angle of content manipulation is sort of like buying a book, changing parts of the book you don't like, and then selling the book at a garage sale. It's probably not going to make the book seller exceptionally happy and it's probably not going to make the book buyer happy, but it's not technically illegal.
LoL, I live for the days like these.. Controversies are really so gripping. And when it's about people outsmarting you it is really spicier than any other topic :rofl:
The new Glype owner is no good. I am pretty sure he is just capitalizing on the Glype fame for his own dirty needs. And moreover he ain't no split personality. Cos this guy runs both pro and against proxy scripts at the same time !!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulzripper
I second that
damn. thanks for the alert buddy.
I think I'll second that too. The previous owner "nick" was way better. This new owner I doubt is even working on the script. As of now the Override Javascript parsing option is broken in Internet Explorer 8. That means the main.js file needs a update and Im not going to bet my lucky stars that the new owner will fix it. I also wont be giving donations to Glype project anymore, or would rather direct them to Nick but there is no way to confirm who he is or contact him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulzripper
I'll second that too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulzripper
Personally I think the whole issue was a quick trick to monetize his purchase of Glype. Thinking that his change to the script was so minor that it would go un-noticed.