Hacker News Reader

Comment by minaguib | Hacker News Reader

I work in ad tech, and indeed some areas and experiences are less-than-optimal, especially in RTB.

Unless the site owner is selling highly-custom take-overs, skins or other non-standard formats, ad interference with site content and layout is almost entirely eliminated via the use of iframes.

View on HN

Even better throw the sandbox[0] tag on it and then, allow scripts only if there is no other option.

[0]http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/security/sandboxed-if...

I consider iframes to be basically the most egregious ad insert.

You are being downvoted because you can make iframes seamless[0]. Unless you are looking at the source you won't even know it's an iframe.

https://jsfiddle.net/yms8ftyw/1/

seamless="seamless" doesn't do anything in any browser.

Thanks, I saw it in a Stackoverflow answer and while it did nothing in Chrome or Firefox I thought It might of been there for IE or something.

According to http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4804604/html5-iframe-seam... the attribute is still in draft and isn't implemented in any browsers yet.

Why? It is safer, doesn't block loading of main page assets and causes way less breakage when things go wrong.

You're forcing me to make a request to the ad suppliers server. I understand this isn't unique to iframes but I'd much prefer that any ad content is proxied by the server I'm actually looking at. I go on a lot in comments about the invasion of privacy that ads represent and I think iframes go a long way to perpetuating that poor privacy 'deal' so reject them with aggression. I often find I'm forced to use the mouse to grant them any focus (which is frustrating for me because I don't like using mouse pointers but I imagine it causes all sorts of havoc with accessibility).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com