Sweden’s publishers scheme to block adblocker users.

Apple open the flood gate to adblocking on its mobile Safari browser.

An adblocker blocker cooked up by somebody from Google who heard the enormous sucking sound of lost revenues.

That’s hardly surprising, given the beeeeeeeeelions!! that adblockers supposedly cost publishers. Some 78% of Naked Security readers have told us that they’d stop using a website that required them to disable adblockers, for the very good reasons listed above.Īs it is, the rise of adblockers have sparked a bevvy of ways to strangle them.

Protection from being compromised by malvertising from ad networks that deliver malware.

Faster and less annoying web experience.

Safeguarding our privacy from ads that track us across the web.In other words, Brave is promising these kind of protections, for which cautious users have turned to adblockers: Instead, the company makes money through an “acceptable ads” program, by charging big advertisers for “whitelisting” ads that meet a murky set of standards.īrave, on the other hand, was launched with a business model that involves blocking some “bad ads” and replacing them with ads from advertisers that pay to be on Brave’s own advertising network of “clean ads” that meet its standards of not slowing down page load times or tracking users. Like the hugely popular Adblock Plus, Brave is also a for-profit adblocker.Īdblock Plus doesn’t make money from the millions of people who use its desktop and mobile browser extensions (like so much on the web, Adblock Plus is “free”). The browser was launched by former Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich in January.

The Brave browser has a new idea: it’s going to line your pocket with Bitcoin in exchange for viewing ads. Online content publishers, for their part, have been trying to squirm out from under adblockers since they hit the scene. Adblocking users want anonymity, privacy and security.

Brave no ads