I'm currently running Fedora Core 2 and am attempting to block ads coming from the many doubleclick sites, particularly the Microsoft 'Get the facts' ad that are served with every linuxtoday pageview. I've tried using entries in /etc/hosts and Firefox with Adblock and the following entries in the Adblock filter section:
*doubleclick*
doubleclick.net
ad.doubleclick.net
http://*.doubleclick.net
with no luck. So I added the following section to my /etc/hosts file with the ad still getting through:
# doubleclick
127.0.0.1 3ad.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.3au.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.au.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.br.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.ca.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.de.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.es.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.fi.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.fr.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.it.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.jp.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.n2434.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.nl.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.no.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.pl.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.se.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.sg.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.uk.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.ve.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.za.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad2.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 doubleclick.com
127.0.0.1 doubleclick.de
127.0.0.1 doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 exnjadgda1.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 exnjadgda2.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 exnjadgds1.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 exnjmdgda1.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 exnjmdgds1.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd1.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd10.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd11.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd12.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd13.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd14.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd15.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd16.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd17.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd18.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd19.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd2.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd20.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd21.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd22.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd23.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd24.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd25.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd26.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd27.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd28.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd29.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd3.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd30.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd31.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd4.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd5.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd7.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd8.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 gd9.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 iv.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ln.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 m.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 m1.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 m2.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 m3.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 m4.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 m5.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 m6.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 m7.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 m8.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 m9.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 n479ad.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 optimize.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 rd.intl.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 uunyadgda1.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 uunyadgds1.doubleclick.net
What am I missing?
In case it helps, the following URL using Firefox with Adblock still displays the d*mned MS ad...just pisses me off (maybe I should just quit going to linuxtoday ;-)
http://www.linuxtoday.org/
The offending HTML references doubleclick as follows:
<<tr>
<td><div id="mscnavi" style="width:345px"><a href="http://ad.doubleclick.net/click;h=v2|347D|0|0|%2a|p;11381666;2-0;0;10368124;31-1|1;7381392|7399288|1;;%3fhttp://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/analyses/indaudit.mspx"><b>Veritest: Independent Audit Measures Swifter, Easier Deployment for Microsoft Windows</b>
<br>
"Microsoft Windows Small Business Server 2003
vs. Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES 2.1 Deployment" says that in time
and complexity, Windows is easier and faster to deploy.</a></div></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><div id="mscnavi" style="width:345px"><a href="http://ad.doubleclick.net/click;h=v2|347A|0|0|%2a|s;11381666;0-0;0;10368124;31-1|1;7328817|7346713|1;;%3fhttp://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/analyses/entcost.mspx"><b>Yankee Group: Large Enterprises: Switching from Windows to Linux "Prohibitively Expensive, Extremely Complex, Provides No Tangible Business Gains"</b>
<br>
This two-part, non-sponsored report calculates that
a major Linux deployment or switch from Windows is four times more
expensive and takes three times longer than a Windows upgrade.</a></div></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><div id="mscnavi" style="width:345px"><a href="http://ad.doubleclick.net/click;h=v2|347D|0|0|%2a|j;11381666;0-0;0;10368124;31-1|1;7381390|7399286|1;;%3fhttp://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/analyses/metamigrate.mspx"><b>Meta Group: Windows Server Offers Compelling Advantages over UNIX
as ERP Hosting Platform.</b></a></div></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><div id="mscnavi" style="width:345px"><a href="http://ad.doubleclick.net/click;h=v2|347D|0|0|%2a|z;11381666;1-0;0;10368124;31-1|1;7381391|7399287|1;;%3fhttp://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/analyses/tcoadvan.mspx"><b>IDC: Lower Windows Staffing Costs Provide TCO Advantage over Linux</b></a></div></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><div id="mscnavi" style="width:345px"><a href="http://ad.doubleclick.net/click;h=v2|347A|0|0|%2a|i;11381666;1-0;0;10368124;31-1|1;7328818|7346714|1;;%3fhttp://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/analyses/opencost.mspx"><b>Forrester: Detailed Financials Show Total Linux Costs Higher Than Windows Costs by 5 to 20 Percent</b></a></div></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><div id="mscnavi" style="width:345px"><a href="http://ad.doubleclick.net/click;h=v2|347A|0|0|%2a|y;11381666;2-0;0;10368124;31-1|1;7328819|7346715|1;;%3fhttp://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts/analyses/comparable.mspx"><b>Bearing Point: Despite Perceptions, Licensing and Support Acquisition Costs Comparable for Windows Server, SUSE Linux, and Red Hat Enterprise Linux</b></a></div></td>
</tr>
</table>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>