Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by rmi_ 3600 days ago
I am really interested in the technical details. I think we have yet to see a working (and practical) approach to this.
3 comments

I can think of a few simple tricks already. One: Host from the main facebook.com domain, either inserting it in the basic html page response from the server, or from an API / content location that cannot be predicted. (ad calls should be indistinguishable from 'normal' content calls). Two, do the same with content locations, so no 'div id="ad"' or anything like that. Should be easy enough.
"Host from the main facebook.com domain..."

If true I believe that this would actually be an important improvement. This removes some plausible deniability regarding malware and other abuse; Facebook (or whomever else adopts this scheme) must guard more carefully against abuse when the content is coming from their own domains, as opposed to some third party.

Must they? The uninformed layman probably already things the ads come from Facebook[.com] as that's the address site they're visiting.

I expect them still manage to hide behind "common carrier" arguments.

As far as I am aware, all ad creative is hosted and served exclusively by Facebook anyway.
The efforts I've seen so far from other websites include randomized IDs and class names, and base64 encoded images inlined so the file path/hostname can't be used as a parameter for blocking.
Me too. This is clearly a cat vs mouse game or more like a lion vs mouse and that's what makes it interesting to me.