Just FYI I spoke with a few of the people there, they're doing some internal testing now and if it works well they won't sell it. Well, I tried.
So let me get this straight, they were only going to sell the product if it doesn't work? Otherwise they are going to keep it under the radar and steal as much as they can? Fuckin' awesome.
Shouldn't you put their info out there regardless so people can start fucking with them, they sound like dicks either way.
I think the keyword is "works well". There is a difference between something working, and something working well.
Just FYI I spoke with a few of the people there, they're doing some internal testing now and if it works well they won't sell it. Well, I tried.
If they release it I'm sure you all will have a field day with em. Hint: their information really isn't too private...
As for how it's going to look in the statistics for networks, the networks won't have a clue. It's replacing the ID before the traffic is sent, so they'll get clicks and no conversions as well. In other words, networks will be clueless - it's almost impossible to track from a network level.
So let me get this straight, they were only going to sell the product if it doesn't work? Otherwise they are going to keep it under the radar and steal as much as they can? Fuckin' awesome.
Shouldn't you put their info out there regardless so people can start fucking with them, they sound like dicks either way.
So let me get this straight, they were only going to sell the product if it doesn't work? Otherwise they are going to keep it under the radar and steal as much as they can? Fuckin' awesome.
Shouldn't you put their info out there regardless so people can start fucking with them, they sound like dicks either way.
Question: Couldn't networks cross-check the popular sites traffic flow against which affiliate ID's are benefiting from the leads? Then one could reasonably deduce that the guy with the minimal amount of traffic coming from a known affiliate ID's site is the scammer? (Wouldn't work for people masking their links, but not everyone does it. Besides, the thief would be targeting any website indiscriminately so it wouldn't matter and he'd eventually reach one with unmasked traffic source and get caught)
Network Suggestion: Create a system where the affiliate ID of incomming traffic could be 'locked in' to a specific user account, to prevent the hijack from ever happening? Even though the packets are manipulated the affiliateID/traffic source are linked server side, thus unalterable.
Probably not the easiest thing to implement, but at least affiliates of said networks would feel safe knowing even IF the packet manipulation happens, they'd still get credited for the lead.
I imagine every network worth their weight in paperclips has already banned E.P. They still have a whole lot more throttling back to do.they're throttling it back a lot.
^^^ Hence the boldness / privacy sloppiness.They are just some young punks from NYC.
I imagine every network worth their weight in paperclips has already banned E.P. They still have a whole lot more throttling back to do.
^^^ Hence the boldness / privacy sloppiness.
Report them to there hosting company for violating their AUP: abuse@newservers.com
PPC/PPV traffic will primarily get routed through some kind of tracker so the aff ids won't be visible to replace on the infected machine.
Since this an open forum that gets indexed, I'd suggest that maybe explaining how networks catch fraud publishers isn't such a good idea.
The way I understand it... it would literally replace their whole <a> tag, right? How it knows its an affiliate link... I have no idea. Maybe it clicks the link and records the headers while watching for common affiliate networks/subids/etc..?