GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - Beating zango and cookie overwriting

- Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)

- - Beating zango and cookie overwriting (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=665669)

I posted your first suggested solution few days ago in one of Will's threads as well Smokey...but after discussing it, it only solves part of the problem. ie. it can only stop people bidding on the same site as the original link was for (while it seems many doing the bidding here are not using the same site).

For example, if company A has the highest bid on company B's terms, nothing company B can do code-wise will help their affiliates much (maybe having VERY thorough scripts/traffic reports could detect some of this though) :(

If company B is bidding on their own terms, then instead of messing with cookies and links and trying to detect it, they can simply NOT bid on their terms. However then they will get stuck in the situation above where their competitors will.

I think in the end it will come down to legal action being the only real way to stop soemthing like this. However since there are so many companies similar to Zango, it will take huge sites with the time and resources to pursue to accomplish this (if they'd win; remember, it's not illegal what is happening).

Private label solution I believe are one of the better ways to get through the problem....as the domain name itself can be linked in the database and ignore codes in the URL or cookies to truly credit the affiliate...but even there, once your private label site gets known, people will probably bid on its terms and steal traffic away from it as well :mad:

Quote:

Originally Posted by fetishblog (Post 11072738)

As I've said before, cookie tracking is so 1995. Why not use sessions or url tracking instead? Come on, lets think outside the box and away from crap that's outlived it's usefulness.

I would hope that most companies only use cookie-tracking as secondary to url tracking (ie. for return visitors who don't signup right away). Using cookies as primary is probably costing your affiliates 5-10% of sales already (not sure what current percent of people / browsers not accepting cookies is but I think it's aorund that at least) :2 cents:

bump for this difficult problem

Quote:

Originally Posted by Varius (Post 11072954)

true . it also would bring a new legal aspect to it thoguh

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missie (Post 11072806)

One more thing you should know Paul before you start doing this... many ppc have adware/spyware/malware in their affiliate networks that provide traffic for advertisers. Even if you do find a popup somewhere, it doesn't mean that the affiliate him/herself put it in the scumware application, it might very well come from a ppc campaign. The affiliate may not even know that his/her ad is showing via spyware. That's why I say it's important not to jump to conclusions too fast.

If you don't know how to interperet the data and find the real source, it's very easy to misinterpret what you find. I personally don't have the patience nor the technical knowledge to track all this stuff myself, that's why I rely heavily on affiliatefairplay for this.

Missie

:thumbsup :thumbsup

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham (Post 11072877)

I can see this needs to be done with care and appreciate the advice. Why do you not offer the service of checking sites/links and charge for it.

You need only report the facts as you find them to avoid legal proceedings.

Kellie offers this service, she does private consulting and that's something she can do for you or any other sponsor or any affiliate. She's highly reputable, very well known in the (anti) spyware world and affordable too. Or in your spyware hunt, if you find anything that you don't fully understand, contact her and ask her to interpret it for you. I don't know her rates so you would have to contact her directly about this.

Missie