100% WORKING SOLUTION !!!

[Znotrovitsk]

Is there an existing issue for this?

• [X] I have searched the existing issues

I'm submitting a ...

• [ ] bug report
• [x] feature request
• [ ] support request --> Contact me over mail for support https://github.com/MShawon

Description

Hello Beloved Friends! finally i found a solution for drop views issues the overall problem is with google chrome user agent i start using firefox user agent and is working (same using chrome browser the problem is only chrome user agent) 100% no drop for me

Thats all good people i hope this can help.

:)

Environment

- OS : 
- Python : 
- Script version :

config.json

:)

[taran0026]

Since I did not push the updated code which fixes the latest chromedriver download issue, install earlier Chrome versions from here #572 and place the extension in the extension/custom_extension folder

If views stay from my testing with this extension I will push the new code

Is testing going on already? If yes, how many days into testing?

[CBZAS]

Hi @taran0026 I'm using 1000 IPV6/HTTPS proxy from https://proxy-seller.com

Make sure for only use good proxy dont public or tor proxyes

If you will choose a plan use this promo code for earn discount and support me: ZTWKST_633912

Thx

How often are you changing proxies? it's better to get ipv6 proxies or residential?

[mercuryin]

After a few days testing, my views are being deleted. Using IProyal 5G/4G Mobiles Proxies + Chrome 109 + Random UA Generator Extension. So waiting for a solution for now.

[LatteMill]

Same to me

[MShawon]

After a few days testing, my views are being deleted. Using IProyal 5G/4G Mobiles Proxies + Chrome 109 + Random UA Generator Extension. So waiting for a solution for now.

@mercuryin try with royal residential proxies and set TTL to 10 minutes

[eugenee93]

After a few days testing, my views are being deleted. Using IProyal 5G/4G Mobiles Proxies + Chrome 109 + Random UA Generator Extension. So waiting for a solution for now.

@mercuryin try with royal residential proxies and set TTL to 10 minutes

I am using static residental Proxies + Chrome 109 + Random UA Generator Extansion. Got the same problem.

[JijaProGamer]

After a few days testing, my views are being deleted. Using IProyal 5G/4G Mobiles Proxies + Chrome 109 + Random UA Generator Extension. So waiting for a solution for now.

@mercuryin try with royal residential proxies and set TTL to 10 minutes

Hey MShawon, no hate, but your statement is flawed. You should never use rotating proxies based on per-request or on TTL.

Once YouTube detects a IP change, they will invalidate the video. So with a TTL of 5 minutes, and the IP changes while the video is playing (Which will happen 99% of the time), the view gets invalidated.

My bot's users have had this issue before too. You should only use static proxies, or proxies that change when the video changes (using some API or some kind).

Also use firefox instead of chrome. Considering google made chrome, ofc they easily detect you as a bot.

We can talk more in a discord DM or in my discord server if you'd like.

[abhishekdeshkar]

@JijaProGamer Let's say I have 1k proxies and if I hit one video many times with these 1k proxies with different user agents and headers, because I have only 1k proxies, and if I hit 10 times, will youtube show it as 1k views or 10k views ?

[JijaProGamer]

@JijaProGamer Let's say I have 1k proxies and if I hit one video many times with these 1k proxies with different user agents and headers, because I have only 1k proxies, and if I hit 10 times, will youtube show it as 1k views or 10k views ?

Either 0 views or 1000 views. YouTube will remove spam views from the same IP. You should never use the same IP on the same video more than 2 times.

[abhishekdeshkar]

@JijaProGamer got it. I will try to integrate Firefox driver in my existing python script. Let's see how it goes.

Can you also share your Discord username ?

[Znotrovitsk]

hi guys, im later sorry i think the problem here is not the script but the proxys, after i changed IPV4 proxys for IPV6 i dont face any problem with drop views (same using last chrome version and old script) try to test only with IPV6 proxy @MShawon

[AeroMonkie]

Where did you buy your IPv6 from?

[Znotrovitsk]

@AeroMonkie I buy from https://proxy-seller.com/

If you will choose a plan with they use this promo code for earn discount and support me: ZTWKST_633912

Thx

[AeroMonkie]

@AeroMonkie I buy from https://proxy-seller.com/

If you will choose a plan with they use this promo code for earn discount and support me: ZTWKST_633912

Thx

So how many days has it been since you sent those views? Has it been over 7 days?

[Znotrovitsk]

@AeroMonkie 30 days

[CBZAS]

@AeroMonkie 30 days

Can you boost multiple videos on the same channel with the same ipv6 proxies without youtube detecting it? and for how long you rent these proxies?

[Znotrovitsk]

@CBZAS Yes can boost multiple videos in the same channel. What has working good for me is 4-5 views per proxy in the same video every 50 hours. I rent for 90 days.

[techkick]

hi guys, im later sorry i think the problem here is not the script but the proxys, after i changed IPV4 proxys for IPV6 i dont face any problem with drop views (same using last chrome version and old script) try to test only with IPV6 proxy @MShawon

can you please share your complete setup chrome version, os version and other essential details? please...

[Znotrovitsk]

@techkick74 I'm using last chrome version 117.0.5938.62 - Win 10 - and random UA extension with firefox user agent. But i tested the script in old version and worked without drop using IPV6.

I really think the problem is only with the proxy IPV4 because in the past the script works 100%.

Today all ISP provide IPV6 for their customers looking for that way youtube can add some code in the backend for look suspicious for IPV4 they can think that is a bad IP potentially a bot or a bad subnet not a real user IPV6 being a real people.

I just assume that but makes a lot of sense for me.

[techkick]

@techkick74 I'm using last chrome version 117.0.5938.62 and random UA extension with firefox user agent. But i tested the script in old version and worked without drop using IPV6.

I really think the problem is only with the proxy IPV4 because in the past the script works 100%.

Today all ISP provide IPV6 for their customers looking for that way youtube can add some code in the backend for look suspicious for IPV4 they can think that is a bad IP potentially a bot or a bad subnet not a real user IPV6 being a real people.

I just assume that but makes a lot of sense for me.

why i am getting this issue with chrome v116 #589 check this ...

[Znotrovitsk]

You tried to use old chrome version and stop auto update in regedit?

[Znotrovitsk]

Try to create a new user in your desktop and download chrome <115v, if dont work wait for mshawon

[techkick]

You tried to use old chrome version and stop auto update in regedit?

yes i block auto-update.

[taran0026]

@Znotrovitsk I tried ipv6 proxies(from proxy-seller) and used the UA extension and 90% of my views dropped after 48 hours. Chrome version 104.

[kattstof]

for the record -- I'm under the impression that Znotrivitsk is talking out of his arse. a chrome extension shouldn't work with this script as the code doesn't load chrome extensions by default you have to specify it with flags -- but the source doesn't do that -- hence why it shouldn't work and from my testing doesn't work.

simply put -- unless you set the flags yourself the script as is doesn't tell selenium to load any extensions -- therefor no extensions should be loaded

[Znotrovitsk]

@kattstof Look #592 i think the problem is that. What you think?

[kattstof]

No as i've said the problem is using chrome (its easier to detect than firefox) and the lack of properly rotating useragents

i've got my own script using firefox geckodriver with a personal curated list of useragents i've not had a view depleted since testing it a month ago

as i've been saying to fix properly you would ideally switch from chrome to firefox and then properly switch useragent and proxy per webdriver

but for some reason no one listens when i'm saying exactly HOW to fix it.

[Znotrovitsk]

Can you explain why you think its easier detect than firefox?

[kattstof]

google owns chrome and youtube it's kind of self explanatory

[Znotrovitsk]

2 years ago this script worked 100% without drops, If your theory would be right, it would be impossible to create a bot view using Google Chrome, right? lmao

[kattstof]

google since they own chrome can add flags in place to help youtube differentiate between webdriver and legitimate instances with little to no effort. which is what is sounds like happened since the new chrome update is what bricked this script. firefox could do this too to some extent but they have less of an incentive to do so.

[abhishekdeshkar]

@kattstof I have 1k AWS EC2 instances. I tried to run this script in each instance with their own IPv4.

It didn't work. Any reasons ?

[techkick]

No as i've said the problem is using chrome (its easier to detect than firefox) and the lack of properly rotating useragents

i've got my own script using firefox geckodriver with a personal curated list of useragents i've not had a view depleted since testing it a month ago

as i've been saying to fix properly you would ideally switch from chrome to firefox and then properly switch useragent and proxy per webdriver

but for some reason no one listens when i'm saying exactly HOW to fix it.

can you please give me your script?

[AeroMonkie]

@kattstof I have 1k AWS EC2 instances. I tried to run this script in each instance with their own IPv4.

It didn't work. Any reasons ?

I think YouTube flags IPs from Virtual Machines.

[snackye]

hello is this bot working currently? does it offer high retention and different internal souces working?

[AeroMonkie]

The fact that this bot was even on GitHub to begin with is ridiculous. YouTube devs crawl this site all the time. We are just showing them what the exploits are and how they can patch them.

[kattstof]

This isn't an exploit LMAO it's not even a loophole in a technical sense. The ways people automate things like this have been known for literal ages. there's nothing to patch, as its not an error to be exploited. it's literally just making the browser seem as legitimate as possible for traffic. It's not even a youtube thing (what an idiotic assertion srsly; educate yourself better.) the techniques used in this script are the same ones you would use to scrape search engines, automate interactions on social media sites, and a host of other things. what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.