Re: Do you use HOSTS file ?

From: Programmershouse (spamprogrammershouse_at_yahoo.fr)
Date: 07/30/04 

Date: 30 Jul 2004 01:44:47 -0700

Thor Kottelin <thor@anta.net> wrote in message news:<41093113.339FE93B@anta.net>...
> Programmershouse wrote:
> >
> > Thor Kottelin <thor@anta.net> wrote in message news:<4101429C.C3F47A91@anta.net>...
> > > Programmershouse wrote:
> > >
> > > > I wrote a page about Host File and how to use it.
> > > > http://www.ifrance.com/programmershouse/HOSTS-EN.HTML
> > > > What do you think about it and what else more could I add to it ?
> > >
> > > You cannot know the absolute location of the hosts file.
>
> > Thor, I was talking about the usual location.
>
> I don't remember seeing that on your page.

Thor : Even if it is not written, you should understand it like that.
Otherwise, I would say : be carefull, this is not the default
location. So what I wrote is how things work by default. I dont like
to complicate things like you do.

> > Dont complicate things
> > please.
>
> Well, you specifically asked what people think about your page.
>
> > > It isn't even
> > > on topic for comp.security.firewalls. Follow-ups set.
>
> > Thor, I also asked questions about firewalls and proxies, if you read
> > my message completely.
>
> You should still have set follow-ups instead of continuing to crosspost.
> (This article was posted to comp.security.misc only.)

Ok I post on comp.security.misc only. You mean it is bad to have the
same message on different usenet groups ?

> > What is your solution for blocking ads ?
>
> My solution for a customer would depend on the problem. Advertisements in
> themselves are not often considered a high-priority security issue, if one
> at all; ad blocking seems to be more of a end-user hobby. - In order to
> satisfy my own curiosity, I have tried hosts files, browser plugins, browser
> settings, proxy servers, and others.

It is not a hobby : it is defending privacy. It is security. Like
firewalls are not a hobby. You are really writing nonsense.

> On a related note, I consider blocking visible ads (as opposed to hidden web
> bugs) a little tasteless. Many sites can provide their content to the public
> for free only because they run advertisements which cover their costs.
> Leeching the content while avoiding the ads is taking for free something
> it's owner didn't intend to be taken for free.

NOT TRUE !

I never asked those companies to put ads on their sites and I am not
obliged to see them or even read them. If they decided to get money on
that, thats their choice but noone is obliged to read the ads. Thats
like watching tv : when the ads come, I turn the tv off. Will someone
come and tell me : you should watch it or the adv companies will go
bankrupt ? Are you being serious ? The hosts turn the ads off.

"Leeching containt" bull*** is just a plain lie. Except if you work
for an ad companie which I suppose is the case.

Some sites contain spywares, dangerous cookies which endanger the
privacy, and also pop ups, viruses, trojans, worms, dialers etc.
Hosts and blocking ads are for security and privacy.
If you dont know that, then you are a zero on defending security.

> Thor

Prog