They should at least give this a comment!

Interesting thread...

Just thinking, Couldn't this actually be used as fraud protection..
Let's say you have some advare/spyware installed that changes refferal codes.. Now the adware overwrites the cookie with your refferal id, but the extention then overwrites the cookie changing the sale back to you..

That Imo. would be a pretty damn valid reason for overriding the cookie :2 cents:

That's a valid reason, for spyware that changes cookies. But if you weigh it against the shave reason, which is more likely to happen, I don't think it's worth it.
There's spyware that changes form variables directly, then you're pretty much screwed either way :(

CCBill ?

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=429338

i started this one yeasterday, didn't get enough attention.
Basically the same problem but not quite.

So read

Personally I dont see why CCBill should comment in this thread. This is not a CCBill issue, this is a matter of trust between the affiliate and the sponsor.

If a sponsor wants to steal from their affiliates, there are as many ways to do it as there are sponsors and affiliates. Billing companies and affiliate program software companies get jumped on day in and day out by affiliates for any and every little thing, whether or not it's a valid issue.

If you don't like your sponsors, or you can't trust your sponsors, start your own paysites and send your traffic to yourselves. Then you can be sure that you're getting exactly what you should. Oh wait, you still can't be sure, there are trojans, spyware, surfers that delete the affiliate links out of the url and re-type in the site name, and countless other things that can happen to fuck up a sale.

Or better yet, fuck CCBill, go get your own merchant account, custom write your own scripts for your own paysites and change up your link structure (after all it's your own traffic) every day or every week so the spyware thieves can't steal your joins, the billing companies can't steal your joins and the sponsor programs can't steal your joins.

There's your answer.

If it is so easy to find shut the fuck up and stop biching to ccbill about it. Even if they fix this there are always other ways to shave.

At least with this you can find it yourself and then out the program (which you should be doing, by not outing the program you are letting them fuck others)

Sometimes your posts make me a little stiff... :thumbsup

Kimmykim,

Give me a good reason a sponsor should be able to override the cookie and assign a signup to someone else.

Maybe because CCbill's client is the sponsor, not the affiliate!

Plus, unless I missed the memo, they are not the internet police...

CCBill is not the internet police was my rant from yesterday lol ;)

And yes, their contract is with the sponsor. The sponsor contracts with the affiliates through their terms and conditions.

It's all really simple when you get down to it.

And I hope that's not your back that's stiff ;)

So you don't believe in minimizing possibilities to shave?

So far no one has come up with a legit reason for having this "feature".

What part of if you can't trust a sponsor, don't use them, did you not understand?

here is one

when i was running an affilite PPS program, to limit my exposure, i would make deals with affilites (mailers mostly) that during a certain period, i would pay out X amount per signup , up to 80 singups, or 250 signups, or whatever...i told them to keep an eye on the signups and to switch out my codes once that limit was reached, if they oversent, i was able to make the payment adjustment directly in my software, but i can see how people using the ccbill referrer system can do the coding on their end to switch out affilite codes once a # of signups has been surpassed, all with the understanding and agreement of the affilite that this is how it is being done

those look good:)

I asked a question. If you don't have anything to contribute, you know what to do.

I'm not talking about sponsors here, I'm talking about C C B i l l and their way of handling the join process.

My contribution made the most sense of anyones, so if you can't handle it then you know what to do. Just make sure you don't fall off your high horse and break a leg on soap box in the process.

Do you believe in minimizing possibilities to shave?

For the last time, if you can't trust your sponsor, then don't send them traffic.

There is nothing more simple than that.

My question is really simple. You only need to answer YES or NO.

Interesting. That's one use for it.

Did you only host the join page or the whole tour?

Swedguy, you are absolutely correct in this, your goal is honorable and I hpope the people who really need to understand your point catch it - ie, ccbill.

Listen everyone, what he's saying is there is a flaw in the ccbill system that would be extremely easy for them to fix if they chose to. Assuming they decide to fix this, the end result is a cleaner system that is more beneficial to webmasters - unless you run a paysite that uses the technique in question here, you should be 100% behind Swedguy.

I am.

thanks, whole tour, you can really only do so much restrictions without affecting the functionality of a system

are you really going to demand that the 70% or more of programs using the *last cookie set gets the credit* rules change them to something not as effective overall because there is a possibility that they may insert their own cookie on the join page? no, of course not

very nicely said, Wolfy.

I don't have to answer anything any way other than how I want to. I haven't been an affiliate in years, I don't run a sponsor program.

I do happen to know that you don't do business with people you don't trust.

It has legit uses as posted above...... so is it a flaw or a feature that *CAN* be misused? I for one dont see it as a flaw, but rather a feature that *CAN* be misused. I can think of at least 10 more uses for it other than what has been mentioned. CCBill is the processor, they provide tools to their clients. How their clients use those tools is up to them.

150 proven ways to shave....

If it can be misused, that's one thing. If it IS being misused, it should be stopped, and ccbill has the power to do so.

The question is, do you think they should put a stop to it? I do.

i agree 100% with that, do not do business with people you can't trust.

I also think that the goal of this thread is to help ccbill become even better, which is entirely possible. We should all be able to agree on something that makes our online business more secure.

If it is being used then those programs doing it should be called out. However, you cry for them to remove this entirly. So those that use it correctly will be punished. Do you want to loss functionality because it could be misused or should it be regulated so its not misused. In that case give up your bank, credit card, house, car, guns, personal property, and everything else cause as it can be misused and has been at some point of time in history. Under your theory they shouldnt even have an affiliate system cause it could be misused. Dont use a boulder to kill a fly, there is no proof of its misuse, just that it could be.

Not at the cost of sacraficing something useful.

Here is my official 2 cents.

CCBILL needs our help. For the most part ALL PROCESSORS need our help.
What we have today are amoung the last solid processor's and we need to protect them, report exploits, report abuser's of the system.

Cuz if a processor takes a bullet odd's are it will go like a house of cards fucking many Companies accross the board. As hard as they try, we as a community must as well.

I commend CCBILL for taking an active rle in the community and posting on these boards and other boards. It takes balls to come out and address situation's and it is far easier to hide beneath a veil like so many others have opted to do in the past.

You see somthing fucked up, get behind the scenes and send info to the right people, take a part in protecting these guys and the remaining processor's.

True true... So then a simple and effective solution would be ccBill adds a rule to their terms, and allows webmasters to finger any sponsor that chooses to use that particular option in ways that rob hard working webmasters of their rightful earnings.

Anybody see a problem with this solution?

I say bump this thread untill that becomes a reality. I am only here because I saw the same thing with a ccBill sponsor a long time ago, chose not to use them, and have since forgotten which sponsor it was. It may even be the same sponsor that Swedguy ran into for all I know - the point is, there's no excuse to allow a sponsor to rob a webmaster and if this thread makes a good system better then we should make it happen.

(Edit-AlienQ, we typed at the same time :P)

Sponsors will always find a way to shave unless of course processor's step up and begin a stance of "No Shave" policies for any programs under the processor TOS.

But really think about that for a second.
Its akin to a fire breathing dragon on a rampage of glossy accusations and finger pointing by other parties. Dumb people rule the earth the smart ones watch and cut the brush where the fire does not need to go.

I've had quite a few ex girlfriends tell me I live with my head in the clouds and my dreams and goals were completely unrealistic, because I chose to believe that i could make my business work and become successful. Maybe I'm living with my head in the clouds right now -

But I say ccBill is as good a place to start as any :thumbsup

We all live with our heads in the clouds dude...

The day you wake up is the day you die.

The difference will always be that ccbill has a dedicated interest in keeping the affiliate program open and honest. Exploits, when found (like the famous # of rebills limit) will be fixed and made public. If anyone can defeat the program ccbill looses money.

Compare that to a closed program offered by a sponser. There is no transparency, no audit of the shave engine, and nobody knows what makes it tick. Its basically a promise not to cum in your mouth.

I promise I won't cum in your mouth. :winkwink:


Where the hell did Swedguy go, he's the one who's supposed to be taking action. Swedguyyyyyy... Swwwwweeeeeeeeeeeeeeedguyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy....... ...