Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,419
    I saw this cookie created tonight from a cj merchant and no qksrv or commission-junction cookie came along with it. Kinda funny because this cookie has the same format basically as the qksrv cookie.

    Todd, I'd appreciate it if you can, explain this? Is CJ getting changing their cookie processing?

  2. #2
    Troll Killer and best Snooper!
    I decide when the pigs fly!
    Rhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    New York, USA
    Posts
    6,195
    Poon, I think this is similar to another post in this forum where Todd edited out the cookie name and asked that we not publish that info because, um, well, you know, they can't mess with our cookies if they can't *find* the cookie jar, right?

  3. #3
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,026
    Rhea is right. It is better to keep a few things secret.

    Remember, Norton? Dynamic domain?

  4. #4
    Full Member webpartner's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    317
    When Ben showed the way it was in one situation...
    http://www.benedelman.org/spyware/18...ts-silent.html

    All of a sudden it wasn’t that way anymore...
    http://abw.infopop.cc/eve/ubb.x?a=tp...4556#432104556

    Hard to test it after that...

    It could be that CJ is finally curious as to what may actually
    be happening... I’m not yet convinced that CJ cares...
    But... I think it might be a good idea to wait and see... Shhhh...!
    <Font size="1" color="99000">Never doubt anybody's word for anything... but... Always double check everything... - Grandpa</font>

  5. #5
    2005 Linkshare Golden Link Award Winner  ecomcity's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    St Clair Shores MI.
    Posts
    17,328
    Hey Poon. Does your CookieMonster application show any difference between BHO cookies for the likes of 180Solution, eBates, SAHS and the normal coded network linked cookie. I know the networks have spcialized reporting interfaces for "incent" BHO affiliates to assist them in streamlining accounting for their membership payout liabilities. The network larger incented sales partners, or sales generated by BHOs who they actively recruit into merchant programs, might have a different forced cookie setting routine.

    I assume a huge investment was made to protect the networks BHO partners from the evils of popup blockers, Norton, and the cookie killers out there. The double dipping is immune as the BHO pop serving comes from hijacked system's own hardrive, and is updated via the open BHO trojan horse backdoor.
    Webmaster's... Mike and Charlie

    "What have you done today to put real value into a referral click...from a shoppers viewpoint!"

  6. #6
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,026
    I do not think this cookie has ANYTHING to do with what Ben wrote or what BHOs do.

  7. #7
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,419
    @Ecom, the cookies I've seen generated from bhos didn't appear any different than anyone elses.

    FYI: The networks didn't have to make any investment to protect BHO's against Norton or cookie killers as their software is immume to these issues (affiliate banners served from network domains aren't shown and a cookie is created on every single click) hence if they've washed cookies at startup (where it usually occurs), there is no issue for them.

    As domain bound affiliates get more and more caught up in the middle of these issues and as they propogate, the BHO's model continues to become more attractive to the networks and the merchants are able to pay fewer commissions to their domain bound affiliates.

    I'm guessing from what I saw and this thread is about is that changes are likely coming to attempt to thrwart cookie blocking by apps that block them in real time. The cj cookie not only had a different name, it had a slightly different format as well.

    The changes may impact my ability to detect foul play with automated tsting via CookieMonster. I'd also suggest that if it effects my ability to detect foul play in an automated fashion, it will just as likely impact the networks ability as well.

    I remain hopefull that Todd will respond and shed some light on this subject with me via a PM. CookieMonster has not only served to identify issues with folks autosetting cookies, it has squashed many suspicions from folks requesting testing of urls they were suspicious of.

    Edited to add - I completely agree with KCEdit. Real time blocking of cookies impacts both parasites and domain bound affiliates. This is what this change is about IMO.

  8. Newsletter Signup

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Todd?? I have a question please..
    By Airstrip in forum Commission Junction - CJ
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: November 23rd, 2005, 04:26 AM
  2. Todd A Question
    By Kellie aka Ms. B in forum Commission Junction - CJ
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: May 24th, 2005, 12:05 PM
  3. auto cookie - Todd a question for you
    By Roland in forum Commission Junction - CJ
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: February 10th, 2004, 04:35 PM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: April 29th, 2003, 06:31 AM
  5. Todd - Keep Cookie Option
    By JJJay in forum Commission Junction - CJ
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: March 4th, 2003, 08:12 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •