On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 23:49:53 -0800 (PST)
RSean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi guys,
Just curious if anyone has tried regular expressions to handle ads and
banners.
That's what adzap and similar squid filters do.
___
Hi guys,
Just curious if anyone has tried regular expressions to handle ads and
banners.
We have a small network of about 10 users. We use SafeSquid as proxy and
content filter. It supports the use of regex for defining rules.
The URL Filter section has 2 default rules for blocking ads and
Hi,
Nikos Vassiliadis wrote:
On Wednesday 12 December 2007 04:06:01 Erich Dollansky wrote:
There's no clean solutions to getting different lookups per-user that
Both ipfw and pf support tables, which is what you
I would like to avoid having a fire wall running on each machine.
Out of
On Wednesday 12 December 2007 10:05:28 Erich Dollansky wrote:
The beauty is, Internet feels still faster then before.
It has one advantage over all those ad removal tools. It filters what I
do not like. It has nothing to do with censorship, it just gets rid of
all the crap hanging around on
Nikos Vassiliadis wrote:
On Wednesday 12 December 2007 04:06:01 Erich Dollansky wrote:
There's no clean solutions to getting different lookups per-user that
I
The clen solution is hosts.
But hosts is operating system-wide.
Both ipfw and pf support tables, which is what you
Heiko Wundram (Beenic) wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 12. Dezember 2007 13:01:14 schrieb Alex Zbyslaw:
snip explanation
I don't see how a firewall is appropriate for this (hosts.allow,
likewise). The point of the exercise is to never even contact the ad host.
Transparent proxy with squid on
Am Mittwoch, 12. Dezember 2007 13:01:14 schrieb Alex Zbyslaw:
snip explanation
I don't see how a firewall is appropriate for this (hosts.allow,
likewise). The point of the exercise is to never even contact the ad host.
Transparent proxy with squid on the firewall? There's even plugins to
Erich Dollansky wrote:
Alex Zbyslaw wrote:
Erich Dollansky wrote:
Assuming I've understood your initial post correctly, then I do the
same, redirecting some dozen ad sites to a local web server. With a
this is how I started. Then friends did the same. We exchanged the
files. We added
On Wednesday 12 December 2007 14:01:14 Alex Zbyslaw wrote:
but I'm going to spend *forever* before I get all those IP addresses
from a round-robin DNS entry to put into some ipfw table,
No, it's going to take something like 5 minutes.
At least for a 1420 lines hosts file.
and if any of
Am Mittwoch, 12. Dezember 2007 13:38:59 schrieben Sie:
I want to do precisely the opposite. It should affect only a single
machine. It would even be better if it would affect only a single
account on that machine.
Affecting only a single machine/a single account has nothing to do with the
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:31:08 +
Alex Zbyslaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have zero experience of squid beyond reading about it, but it has
always sounded like a major resource hog.
It depends how you use it. I think you can probably get it down to
about 15 MB, if you eliminate memory
Heiko Wundram (Beenic) wrote:
Basically, why I personally rather like the squid (i.e., proxy-based) approach
to ad-blocking is the fact that if you try to do this at a lower level than
the HTTP-level, there's bound to be pages that display wrong/broken, simply
because not being able to fetch
RW wrote:
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:31:08 +
Alex Zbyslaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have zero experience of squid beyond reading about it, but it has
always sounded like a major resource hog.
It depends how you use it. I think you can probably get it down to
about 15 MB, if you
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Erich Dollansky wrote:
If you still see unwanted content, just add a line and it will be gone during
your next visit.
Like AdBlockPlus, only more work.
The beauty is, Internet feels still faster then before.
Like AdblockPlus.
It has one advantage over all those ad
Warren Block wrote:
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Erich Dollansky wrote:
If you still see unwanted content, just add a line and it will be
gone during your next visit.
Like AdBlockPlus, only more work.
The beauty is, Internet feels still faster then before.
Like AdblockPlus.
It has one
Hi,
Warren Block wrote:
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Erich Dollansky wrote:
If you still see unwanted content, just add a line and it will be gone
during your next visit.
Like AdBlockPlus, only more work.
The beauty is, Internet feels still faster then before.
Like AdblockPlus.
It has one
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Alex Zbyslaw wrote:
Warren Block wrote:
Like AdblockPlus.
According to it's web pages *Note*: It is recommended to use at least
Firefox 2.0, Thunderbird 2.0, SeaMonkey 1.1 or Songbird 0.2. Older versions
receive less testing and support for them is likely to be
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:05:53 -0700 (MST)
Warren Block [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It may be possible to use an Adblock subscription to update a squid
setup. That would provide the best of both.
There's no need to do that, you can use a script like adzapper with
squid. It's in ports
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 09:10:15PM +, RW wrote:
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:05:53 -0700 (MST)
Warren Block [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It may be possible to use an Adblock subscription to update a squid
setup. That would provide the best of both.
There's no need to do that, you can use
Am Donnerstag, 13. Dezember 2007 06:52:41 schrieb Gary Kline:
well, thi sounded great until I read squid. Isn't that
something to do with FBSD and Windows? If not, how hard is squid
to install; what does it do?
You're probably thinking of samba, which is an implementation
On Tuesday 11 December 2007 05:18:40 Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
I wonder what the performance impact of the entries in /etc/hosts really
is.
What is your experience?
Google tells me a lot of hosts running FreeBSD but I could not find
anything regarding the hosts file itself.
I use hosts
Hi,
Nikos Vassiliadis wrote:
On Tuesday 11 December 2007 05:18:40 Erich Dollansky wrote:
I use hosts for filtering all unwanted content on my personal machine.
That's not apparent. What are your filtering?
all the sites I personally do not want to see.
and how do your filter using
And it just occured to me that you really
mean /etc/hosts.allow and not /etc/hosts...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007, Erich Dollansky wrote:
This is really what I want. Just avoiding the traffic, the time and the
optical disturbance caused by all those sites.
I would even prefer a method as simple as hosts but linked even to my user
account.
http://adblockplus.org/en/ works fine on
Hi,
Warren Block wrote:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007, Erich Dollansky wrote:
This is really what I want. Just avoiding the traffic, the time and
the optical disturbance caused by all those sites.
I would even prefer a method as simple as hosts but linked even to my
user account.
Erich Dollansky wrote:
But new sites have new stuff I would like to be filtered out. To make
these experiences as rare as possible, I collect from friends and the
Internet hosts files to filter as much as possible.
This resulted in a pretty large file meanwhile.
But the Internet looks much
Hi,
Alex Zbyslaw wrote:
Erich Dollansky wrote:
Assuming I've understood your initial post correctly, then I do the
same, redirecting some dozen ad sites to a local web server. With a
this is how I started. Then friends did the same. We exchanged the
files. We added hosts files from the
On Wednesday 12 December 2007 04:06:01 Erich Dollansky wrote:
There's no clean solutions to getting different lookups per-user that
I
The clen solution is hosts.
But hosts is operating system-wide.
Both ipfw and pf support tables, which is what you
want, large sets or unrelated
28 matches
Mail list logo
