search

uBlockOrigin / uAssets

Resources for uBlock Origin, uMatrix: static filter lists, ready-to-use rulesets, etc.
GNU General Public License v3.0
4.15k stars 773 forks source link

Submitting 23 more entries #5353

Closed DandelionSprout closed 5 years ago

DandelionSprout commented 5 years ago

I admit to be unsure what the regulations and definitions are between "true" and "fake" paywalls, but I'm of the personal perception that all or almost all of the paywalls in the below entries are of the fake variety.

It's established by now that uBlock Filters - Annoyances can deal with forced logins, so I felt it was time for me to up the ante by submitting entries that bypass honest-to-gods paywalls, and see how it goes.

! Lyd og Billede
! https://lydogbillede.dk/test/mobil-tablet/motorola-moto-g7-plus/?hw=1
! Displays entire articles that are behind paywalls
lydogbillede.dk,lydogbilde.no,ljudochbild.se###content:style(min-height:2000px)
lydogbillede.dk,lydogbilde.no,ljudochbild.se##.postteas:style(overflow: visible !important)
lydogbillede.dk,lydogbilde.no,ljudochbild.se##.fader
lydogbillede.dk,lydogbilde.no,ljudochbild.se##.readwhole
lydogbillede.dk,lydogbilde.no,ljudochbild.se##.loginabo
lydogbillede.dk,lydogbilde.no,ljudochbild.se##.aboboxer
lydogbillede.dk,lydogbilde.no,ljudochbild.se##.aboboxerbold
lydogbillede.dk,lydogbilde.no,ljudochbild.se##.abolistbox
lydogbillede.dk,lydogbilde.no,ljudochbild.se##.abomainbox
lydogbillede.dk,lydogbilde.no,ljudochbild.se##.aboinfobunn
lydogbillede.dk,lydogbilde.no,ljudochbild.se##.hidefromgp

! eNotes
! https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/three-enlightenmet-ideas-used-declaration-471209
! Shows behind-paywall question responses on some questions
enotes.com##.hh-box__answer__text:style(filter: none !important; -webkit-filter: none !important; color: inherit !important; text-shadow: none !important)

! HowToLucid
! https://howtolucid.com/how-to-sleep-better/
! Removes a blur that covers most of the tutorial articles
howtolucid.com##.onp-sl-blur-area:style(filter: none !important)

! StudyCOM
! https://study.com/academy/flashcards/europe-flags-list-flashcards.html
! Makes the flashcard tables fully visible without being logged in
study.com##.paywall:style(display: table !important)
study.com##.paywall:after
! https://study.com/academy/lesson/what-is-a-graph-lesson-for-kids.html
! Makes the lesson articles fully visible
study.com###articleMain > div[class=hidden]:style(visibility: visible !important; display: block !important)
study.com##.faded-content:after

! Experts Exchange
! https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/29116980/Read-and-parse-a-flat-file-format-in-Java.html
! Shows the approved answers to the questions
experts-exchange.com##.accepted.answer:style(display: block !important)
experts-exchange.com##.solutionIntertitialWrapper.body
experts-exchange.com##.bg3.interceptBackgroundBlocker.interceptContainer
! Note that the fake bottom answer is still being shown, even when the correct certified answer has been revealed through the above entries. If it is desirable to remove the fake answer as well, add "experts-exchange.com##.interceptBackgroundBlocker" as well.

! Futurestud.io
! https://futurestud.io/tutorials/coreos-platform-introduction-and-components
! Reveals the section jump menu called Moonshoot, which is otherwise behind a paywall
futurestud.io##.spoiler:style(filter: none !important; -webkit-filter: none !important)
futurestud.io##.fs-background.text-center.aside-info

Versions

Settings

Notes

I was clued on to the latter five sites by browsing through r/assholedesign daily for a month or so this winter. However, after that subreddit deteriorated into infinite reposts (e.g. of the Cosmopolitan newsletter insultment) and uneducated comments (Many of which insulted ad-complaining OPs for "How else are they gonna earn money?"), I didn't really want to namedrop them as a credit anymore.

okiehsch commented 5 years ago

A "real" paywall is a wall that is present with uBO disabled, we will not intentionally circumvent it.

DandelionSprout commented 5 years ago

Huh, okay. I recall that Frellwit's understanding of it was that a "real" paywall was one where the content was not loaded for non-paying users, whereas a "fake" paywall would load the content and then use CSS to hide it.

If your explanation differs significantly from his, then I suppose that this issue report could in fact be closed entirely.

okiehsch commented 5 years ago

I agree that such paywalls are not very effective but they are applied indiscriminately to all users, so I think they are out of scope of uBO. Read https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/issues/2317#issuecomment-391851786 and the following discussion.

DandelionSprout commented 5 years ago

If that thread's comments are still accurate for uAssets (as in that they haven't been superceded by another stance in the following 9 months), then it's a fair stance that I'll accept.

jspenguin2017 commented 5 years ago

Everyone has their own definition of fake paywalls. AdGuard believes all paywalls are real, uAssets believes paywalls that are shown to all users are real, and I believe paywalls that cannot be broken by changing browser settings are real.

Can't believe AdGuard decided to cover their wallet instead of fighting this nonsense, apparently you can't legally change your browser settings in Europe anymore.

DandelionSprout commented 5 years ago

Now that you mention it, I learned from https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/issues/5320 that AdGuard even considers forced login prompts to be paywalls, which they in turn don't want to deal with, to which my instinctive reaction is to be very confused.

In addition, I actually live in Europe, and even without looking things up in detail, there are several problems with AdGuard's alleged stance:

1) They're based in Russia, which is not covered by EU/EEC regulations in the slightest. 2) I am not aware of any laws whatsoever that prohibit the changing of browser settings, especially seeing how ABP has been able to fend off lawsuit after lawsuit from the very heart of the EU. 3) A lot of non-Europeans (and even a fair few who are European) misunderstand virtually everything the European Parliament ever does. Although it could also be argued that the European Parliament also misunderstands what the European Parliament does, for the record.

okiehsch commented 5 years ago

apparently you can't legally change your browser settings in Europe anymore.

What do you mean by that? Which EU-regulation prohibits the changing of browser settings.

jspenguin2017 commented 5 years ago

AdGuard is a for-profit company, if they give the finger then they'll lose out on profits.

I don't quite remember the exact details, but it's something like bild.de sued ABP(?) for breaking their CSS-based encryption. https://forum.adguard.com/index.php?threads/policy-on-adblock-walls.26022/#post-155882

A lot of the stuff is not in English, but it looks like bild.de claims that their anti-adblock wall uses encryption. If I disable JavaScript in my browser settings, their "encryption" process will break. Following that logic, changing browser settings is illegal now?!

okiehsch commented 5 years ago

I know the case and Adblock/Plus solution to the potential legal problems, i.e. do not circumvent any anti-adblock wall, is the more consistent policy.

To differentiate between anti-adblock walls that give the option to pay and anti-adblock walls without such an option is nonsensical, if you agree with the premise that circumventing such walls is prohibited by § 95a UrhG. That was the issue in the bild case you mentioned and a regional court ruled against someone who published a circumvention on youtube.

DandelionSprout commented 5 years ago

I'm having some problems trying to read up on all this fast enough, but the recentmost stance of AdGuard and/or the German court system on the matter confuses me:

the court in Karlsruhe said the site owner can setup an anti-adblock page which is some kind of paywall as you can buy your way in back.

Just what on earth kind of anti-adblock wall has paid backdoors? Except arguably if it's a membership system that specifically has ad-free viewing as a perk?

Not to mention all the cases where it's not even anti-adblock walls, but login-mandating walls.

okiehsch commented 5 years ago

The court said the usage is allowed, but the site owner can put up such paywall. Therefore we are not allowed to circumvent it.

They said no such thing, the court said the usage of an adblocker is allowed and the site owner can put up a paywall it did not say anything specific about the legality of circumventing it because that question was not relevant to the case. My guess would be that they would rule it illegal in that specific case. The case is about the possible violation of competiton law by Adblock/Plus.

If you want to practice your german you can read the full ruling.

http://juris.bundesgerichtshof.de/cgi-bin/rechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bgh&Art=en&sid=b9d71af99212eefe3fe2ae964b85d1d0&nr=88498&pos=1&anz=2

😉

okiehsch commented 5 years ago

A lot of the stuff is not in English, but it looks like bild.de claims that their anti-adblock wall uses encryption. Following that logic, if I disable JavaScript in my browser settings, that's going to break their encryption process, which in turn makes changing browser settings illegal?!

Try going to bild.de with javascript disabled.

They claim that circumventing their wall violates

Protection of technological measures

(1) Effective technological measures to protect a work protected under this Act or other subject-matter protected under this Act may not be circumvented without the consent of the rightholder where the person acts in the knowledge or with reasonable grounds to know that circumvention is taking place in order to facilitate access to such a work or protected subject-matter or its use. (2) For the purpose of this Act, technological measures shall be technologies, devices and components which, in the normal course of their operation, are designed to prevent or restrict acts, in respect of protected works or other subject-matter protected pursuant to this Act, which are not authorised by the rightholder. Technological measures shall be deemed effective where the use of a protected work or of other subject-matter protected pursuant to this Act is controlled by the rightholder through application of an access control, a protection process, such as encryption, scrambling or other transformation, or a copy control mechanism, which achieves the protection objective.

which is a part of the german copyright law.

jspenguin2017 commented 5 years ago

Ah, interesting... For some reason I thought disabling JavaScript works. Well, scrap what I said earlier.

okiehsch commented 5 years ago

I would argue that an anti-adblock wall does not violate the quoted section because the mentioned protective measures should "protect a work" the mentioned works like "bild.de" are openly accessible to everybody with a browser, one is only blocked after the site concludes that the user has an adblocker.

If you go to a site with such an “access control” mechanism with your adblocker enabled, you can not access that site. If you go to the same site with your adblocker disabled, you can access that site. If you go to the same site and BLOCK the content and ALLOW the ads you can still access that site. They do not control access to their copyrighted content, they protect the ads.

If a site can’t make me pay, and doesn’t want it’s content to be viewed unless I pay, simply don’t send me the content. If payment is required for access, tell me before I continue to the resource or let me provide proof that I have already paid, e.g. logging in. Just my two cents.

jspenguin2017 commented 5 years ago

Thank to the way ABP defended itself, a lot of stuff are in the gray zone now...

Now back to the initial topic -- what kind of paywalls are "real". I would argue that if the paywall can be broken by changing browser settings, then it's not "effective", and thus "fake".

The questions is, do I want to YOLO or play safe. I'm more inclined to say play safe, so I'll probably carry though with my plan to move fake wall removal rules off NanoFilters.

jspenguin2017 commented 5 years ago

But considering this thing exists...

Tough decisions, touch decisions everywhere...

DandelionSprout commented 5 years ago

I am most definitely in the YOLO camp here. After all, I frequently maintain a list whose entire purpose is to remove login nags (including of uncloseable walls), and I had a dream of getting it included in uBO until not too long ago, when I conceded defeat and began to submit entries from it to uAssets instead.

It does not deal with anti-adblock walls at all, however; and paywall bypasses are merely a bonus.