[S] Videos at IMDb

[zoltan]

(Jun. 30, 2011 04:32 AM)JJoe Wrote:  When "doubleclick" is part of the imdb URL's path, the adpath variable is set to allow access, $SET(1=adpath:0.). Otherwise the distasteful request would be blocked.
When "doubleclick" is absent, the "OR" allows me to specify $SET(0=a_jslink.) without allowing access to adpaths other that "doubleclick".

It's evident that it needs to match more than one item from http://www.imdb.com, but isn't the "or" exclusive, meaning that if doubleclick triggers the adpath exception then the jslink can't be disabled. It has to do one OR the other. If not, I'm misunderstanding "or"

JJoe Wrote:  $OHDR allows access to the request's outgoing headers, http://www.proxomitron.info/45/help/Matc....html#OHDR . In this case, requests to ad.doubleclick.net/ will be allowed when the referer matches http://www.imdb.com/images/a/ifb/doubleclick/expand.html*.

Hmmmm. What's happening seems similar to the model from above, so after learing about that, my thought would have been to use something like this:

Code:

ad.doubleclick.net/(www.imdb.com/$SET(1=adurl_h:0.))

I guess I still don't get why headers need to be specified or how that would be evident when figuring out how to construct this exception.

Is the difference between the two examples above that one involves an imdb path and the other is called from within an imdb html page? I had wondered at times if it were possible to include or exclude a url only in the circumstance where it is associated with another site but hadn't gotten beyond a hazy conception of how the association would matter.

Another thought... If Block Ad URLs was previously not blocking anything, it would seem that inactivating the adpaths/adhosts doubleclick entry would leave a user no worse off than before. I mean, with Block Ad URLs inactive, it's offering zero protection from the sites listed in adhosts/adpaths. Or does activating it somehow deactivate other filters? I've considered just deleting everything in adpaths & adhosts that I've not personally added since sidki's default config doesn't use them anyway

As for whether to allow doubleclick vs confirmations, yes, too many of them could be annoying, so for such sites it seems better to do whatever necessary to allow the content. It's a fairly straightforward choice. If, for example, the purpose of a page is to show a video, and the video is blocked, is a user better off being forced to bypass Proxomitron entirely and reload the page with ZERO filtration (causing the user MUCH more annoyance), or just allow the video's host to be unblocked for that site only? The only alternative is to not use the page. With no filter exceptions, proxomitron is being used as a tool to encourage the user to do just that. I suppose it depends on what a user expects from the program.