Comments on: Confirmed: ISP modifies Google home page

By: Wayne Jr.

Wayne Jr. — Sun, 18 Sep 2011 01:23:16 +0000

The line must be drawn somewhere, not anywhere. Your personal “OK” with this is a very slippery slope and could be the thin edge of the wedge.

I also think it is uncool and tacky for pages to be shown in the frame of another site. Which happens a lot more.

If they wish to show a message, email the person and/or allow the customer to CHOOSE a method.

By: Mike

Mike — Sat, 24 May 2008 07:31:38 +0000

Wow, I never thought this was possible. I’m sure google would penalise companies in their rankings for this type of behavior.

By: Ben @ Discount Resale Shop

Ben @ Discount Resale Shop — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 01:56:47 +0000

Isn’t it just a warning that the user is or is about to go over their bandwidth limit for the month?

By: Big Red Mark

Big Red Mark — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 22:12:22 +0000

Gotta completely agree with Phil Karn (and disagree with Brett) on this one:

What if the end-user had been running some research application that was analyzing the web, and all of a sudden their data is biased by having Rogers code injected in it?

What if the Rogers code exposes the end-user to an XSS attack of other browser flaw, that the user would not normally expect to be vulnerable to? There are a number of security and compatability issues that come up with the Javascript they are using. Maybe these issues will not bother 99% of the users, but is it fair to the 1% who are?

The bottom line is that this is an abuse of technology, plain and simple.

It is an abuse of technology in the same way that Sony using a rootkit to implement DRM was a severe abuse of technology. In both cases, you have a creative way of solving a problem. With Sony, it was enforcing copyright protection on digital media without having an encrypted format. With Rogers, it’s notifying customers in a short timeframe before their service gets suspended.

What Brett doesn’t understand is that in neither case does the ends justify the means!!!

I’m pretty sure that Rogers knows they’re in the wrong here. Of course, since this is Canada we’re talking about, I doubt that anyone is going to scream loud enough to get them to change their ways.

All I can say is that the people using Rogers HighSpeed Internet now might as well be the same as the people who were using AOL in the 90′s. Both companies think their users are dumb and have a tendancy to subvert established Internet standards.

By: Andrew Goodman

Andrew Goodman — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 04:35:12 +0000

Sorry, but I disagree with the “cool” position.

http://www.traffick.com/2007/12/did-rogers-hijack-google-home-page.asp

By: Dog

Dog — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 19:56:07 +0000

This is funny but IMO there is nothing to be overwhelmed about since this is not an ad or promotion. It’s just a framed message to the users.

By: Sambo Johnson

Sambo Johnson — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 05:40:12 +0000

It looks to me like Matt is just practicing link baiting.

By: Jesus

Jesus — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 20:55:00 +0000

Is google more worried about trademark infrigment or Copyright?

By: Generic

Generic — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 13:58:03 +0000

That is really an abuse. Manipulation like that makes me angry, and when i get angry.. that means it was a bad public relations move on the part of the ISP
Nothing worse than bad PR it can really sting

By: John

John — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 02:33:05 +0000

yes, i have the same experience. My ISP use a frame to display some ads in IE. but it not happen always, just 1-2 times a day. no problem for the firefox.
they do not add html code to the original web page, just use the frame.
i hate that!
John