Adblocker vs usernames

Achterstraat

Achterstraat

Verified User
Joined
Mar 21, 2015
Messages
82
Location
Netherlands
L.S,

Using a username that partial is listed by an adblocker results in..

1655458304423.png



I guess it's usefull to add a little notice about any possible active adblocker?
 
that's not an adblocker problem... I have already reported this bug weeks ago.
 
Definitely it is @apogee, if a part of a username is added as wildcard on the adblocker list.. ..you can't even login with that username! Other usernames are working and disable adblocker will work!

1655460089168.png


POC: Add a user named "adman" and try to login with a adblocker..
 
Last edited:
then it is just a coincidence that the username of the user appears in the BL of the addblocker, but this is not a DA problem... just use a different username.
 
Indeed, but.. ..DirectAdmin can advise a admin/reseller by creating a new user by change the username if it's listed on a BL or ABL as a service? :)

preg_match_all('#/(.*)/\*#', ..
 
Everterstraat said:
cause FF has a build-n adsblock!
Click to expand...
I think you might be mistaken.
Firefox has a Tracking Protection feature that is enabled by default in Private Browsing mode.
That is during Private Browsing and that is not an adsblock.

I have never seen a notice about using or configuring any adsblock. I'm using uBlock Origin for that reason in my Firefox.
 
If I use a brand new FF installation, I do see ads and can login at DirectAdmin with a username as adman.

If I install a adsblocker plugin like uBlock, I don't see ads and can't login at DirectAdmin with a username as adman.

I don't get it wrong, is exactly as I described above!
 
Everterstraat said:
I don't get it wrong, is exactly as I described above!
Click to expand...
Yes you did. You described this:
Everterstraat said:
cause FF has a build-n adsblock!
Click to expand...
which isn't true and that is what I was responding to. There is no build-in adblocker in FF.

However, when using Ublock I certainly believe you that it might not be possible to login as adman. But I always disable Ublock with the button on important sites, so I never have that issue and no ads either because AD has no ads.

So this is still not a DA issue and something you can easily fix by pushing the button to exclude that site.
 
You're right, in said "built-in" but means "addon" (plugin), excuse me! :) I thought did correct myself but browser (Chrome) was hanging when typing..

I know that people can disable by (sub/wild)url or use another username but the idea is to warn a admin/reseller when they choose a username that's on a adsblockerslist, not everybody is smart enough to think about a ABL problem when seeing a message that says "contact administrator" or logout..

Edit: with a little JS snippet on :2222/index DA can detect if a ABL is enabled and suggest to turn it of? Is it disabled, show contact administrator!
 
Well... lets see if your suggestion will make it. I personally won't vote for it, because not always all blockers can be detected and this can also work confusing. And I never had 1 customer complaining about something like that in my existence. So if it happens they will mail me anyway. :)
However it's good to know this can happen, so a good find anyway! (y)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top