What is LJ doing to my links?
What is LJ doing to my links? Part 2
What is LJ doing to my links? Part 3
Expect this post to be update through the day as I find out more and come up with a good summary.
ETA: No good summary, but I feel like I should say code got taken down, etc etc, business as usual.
March 4 2010, 22:40:06 UTC 2 years ago
March 4 2010, 22:44:18 UTC 2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
March 4 2010, 22:51:06 UTC 2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
March 5 2010, 13:56:16 UTC 2 years ago
http://community.livejournal.com/no_lj_
since you are not still answering to my support request that apparently was the first to make you aware of the problem?
Thank you, Elisa Rolle
2 years ago
March 4 2010, 23:21:21 UTC 2 years ago
March 5 2010, 12:17:17 UTC 2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
March 5 2010, 00:10:01 UTC 2 years ago
March 5 2010, 00:22:04 UTC 2 years ago
March 5 2010, 00:27:12 UTC 2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
March 5 2010, 03:13:54 UTC 2 years ago
*/dRev.jsinstead. Other sites serve up this tripe too.March 5 2010, 01:45:15 UTC 2 years ago
March 5 2010, 01:48:57 UTC 2 years ago Edited: March 5 2010, 01:49:30 UTC
http://kylecassidy.livejournal.com/5855
And yeah, apparently the script has been gutted of all code.
Deleted comment
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
Deleted comment
2 years ago
Deleted comment
2 years ago
2 years ago
March 5 2010, 10:35:52 UTC 2 years ago
*Growl*
Just when I was considering sticking the occasional blog post up here again...As far as I understand it, there's sites that'll give you cookies if you refer people to them. (Like, "I just bought this great book at WeSellBooks.com" and this is the link...) and if you stick a number in, then WeSellBooks.com will know it's you and hand you a cookie.
LiveJournal wants a cookie, too.
So they remove your number and substitute their own. Hence, they get a cookie and you don't. So their script stole your cookie. The intended behaviour was to add their number to the list of cookie-worthy people, presumably so you wouldn't mail WeSellBooks.com going "Where's my cookie, bitch?"
They screwed up.
As I understand it, their Javascript changes the behaviour of your browser from "Follow this link", to "Follow this other link instead, modify the original slightly, then follow it." Words cannot express my loathing of this technique. For them to modify links in situ while even faking the link indicator in your browser when you hover over it, is pure and undiluted evil. Malware sites do this. Attack sites do this. And now LJ does it. Just what piece of excrement in LJ management decided this was a good idea, we'll never know.
Now all I was intending to post here was a few links to my fun and entertaining WoWfic (no link - it's up at wow_ladies if you want it). Which uses no affiliate links and is as static as HTML gets. No ads, no nothing. Terribly uncool URL with a ~ in, but that's a small price to pay for not having your stuff interfered with.
I probably still will go ahead and post weekly links, but I'll be watching them like a hawk and if I see anything strange happen, like, oh, Javascript appearing in my web pages where no Javascript should be... I'm out of here. Again. Damn it.
March 5 2010, 15:20:29 UTC 2 years ago
Re: *Growl*
"As far as I understand it, there's sites that'll give you cookies if you refer people to them.""Cookie" may not be the best term for this because it has a very different technical meaning in the context of the Web. What these sites generally give you is money.
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
March 6 2010, 05:13:39 UTC 2 years ago
Re: *Growl*
This.This really nails why I don't like i. Adding something that changes the behavior of the browser WHILE covering tracks... No. That goes beyond advertising and that's not a policy that any company should be employing. Not if they expect people to trust their site enough to use it and click links provided on it.
March 5 2010, 16:50:15 UTC 2 years ago
http://www.livejournal.com/support/see_
they were so good in making me believe that it was a spyware problem from my side (!), and maybe helped in this by a bad past experience with Amazon, that I wrote to the support center for the Amazon Associate.
I gave to them (Amazon), my Associate ID and the Associate ID "5336432744-20" of who was stealing my referral fees. Now I have no way to know the name behind "5336432744-20" and neither I have a way to see how many referral fees he is doing, but Amazon can, and he knows who "5336432744-20" is... so what if Amazon, after my request, and maybe other similar requests, noticed that suddenly "5336432744-20" was making a lot of money? and what if Amazon maybe wrote to "5336432744-20" asking why suddenly all the links of a lot of Associates were redirecting to him?
For once I don't believe that LiveJournal changed its code since we asked him to do that, I think they changed the code since, for mistake or with intention, they realized that what they were doing was not legal.
Now, I'd like from LiveJournal that they declared how many money they did in the last month (with Amazon they can know that, it's one of the report Amazon gives to the Associate) and use that money to refund the people they damaged. They know who they are, I suppose there are a lot of open support request.
March 5 2010, 22:28:16 UTC 2 years ago
Syndicated feed accounts
I read a number of bookbloggers. Many of them post affiliate links. Other bloggers post charity affiliate codes &c.Being skint, haven't personally bought anything recently, but I'm guessing others have.
It's not just LJ users that have lost out, it's bookbloggers who's feeds are syndicated here. Some of these people won't even know of the existence of the syndication.
Explaining to some bloggers that an LJ feed is just like a Google Reader pickup is hard enough as it is, this pretty much tips it over the edge.
I cannot believe they did this without testing it to make sure it worked as advertised.
March 5 2010, 22:31:27 UTC 2 years ago
Re: Syndicated feed accounts
You're right, I didn't even think about that!2 years ago
March 6 2010, 23:56:25 UTC 2 years ago
Also, I (and probably many others) had set the opt-out way back when and forgotten about it. So those munged links would have looked fine to Support volunteers looking at the relevant requests, if they had also set and forgotten the opt-out. That would have hampered the investigation as well, especially if no-one involved knew about the hinky code.
None of which excuses the whole stinking mess, but it might go some way to clarifying a couple of details :)
March 7 2010, 00:19:39 UTC 2 years ago
March 28 2010, 18:01:47 UTC 2 years ago
I use Opera, have a permanent account. And yet, some entries that I've opened today (in paid journals) execute a script that makes the browser go through a wd.sharethis.com link (it appears in the browser's back button history) via a googleadservices.com link. (The latter appears in my browser's history.)
I've never used the "Share this!" javascript link that has replaced "tell a friend". I don't think it's right that I should be made to visit googleadservices.
I don't know if this is another case of a script doing what it wasn't supposed to, an Opera bug or what. I was hoping to enlist specialised web detectives like you for this. ;)
One possibility is that I came to those paid journals via a plus community, but now that I've blocked those sites I see this page trying to reload too (and failing because of blockages), and I can't imagine something less "plus" than this community.
March 28 2010, 20:59:17 UTC 2 years ago
http://news.livejournal.com/123520.h
April 30 2010, 07:55:27 UTC 2 years ago
For people who are tired of LJ stunts like this
Please feel free to contact me for an Inksome journal creation code.April 30 2010, 08:52:06 UTC 2 years ago
Re: For people who are tired of LJ stunts like this
Although prospective Inksome members should read this beforehand.