logo-net.co.uk

[jamie]

Very disturbing - they appear to advertise solely on UK government .gov.uk websites, and to be profiling visitors - according to their webpage:

"LoGo_net is a unique, revenue generative technology set which allows local government organisations to offer personalised service recommendations to citizens. The technology enables dynamic partnering with other public sector organisations serving the same, total e-place.

Recommendations can include sign-posting to private sector, commercial providers offering related services, which generates revenue for the local community.

Our growth has been spectacular. In March, the number of citizens profiled each month exceeded 1 million and continues to increase exponentially.

For further information, please contact: [email protected]"

For those who, like me, like to use the Hosts file as another layer of defence, here are all the logo-net domains I was able to find:

127.0.0.1 logo-net.co.uk
127.0.0.1 d1.logo-net.co.uk
127.0.0.1 dx.logo-net.co.uk
127.0.0.1 t1.logo-net.co.uk
127.0.0.1 www.logo-net.co.uk

[anonymous74100]

Isn't it better to use 255.255.255.0 instead of 127.0.0.1?

[Khrin]

Can you tell on which site have you seen this element?

[jamie]

They've got something at http://www.york.gov.uk/leisure/Libraries/24hour/ - RequestPolicy blocked it but also notified me as to its existence.

Viewing the source reveals the following:

[code]
<div id="logo_net">
<script type="text/javascript">
<!--//<![CDATA[
var m3_u = "http://d1.logo-net.co.uk/Delivery/DBURL.php";
var strPURL = parent.document.URL;
strPURL = strPURL.replace(/&/g, "^");
var T = new Date();
var cMS = T.getTime();
document.write ("<scr"+"ipt type='text/javascript' src='"+m3_u);
document.write ("?SDTID=81");
document.write ('&PURL=' + strPURL);
document.write ('&CMS=' + cMS);
document.write ("'></scr"+"ipt>");
//]]>-->
</script>

<noscript>
<img alt="Advertising Placeholder" src="http://d1.logo-net.co.uk/Delivery/Dnscrpt.php?w=120&h=600" >
</noscript>
</div>
[/code]

[Ares2]

Added: https://hg.adblockplus.org/easylist/rev/9a7b5cb74bf6

Isn't it better to use 255.255.255.0 instead of 127.0.0.1?

What makes you believe that?

[jamie]

Added: https://hg.adblockplus.org/easylist/rev/9a7b5cb74bf6

Many thanks!

[anonymous74100]

What makes you believe that?

A connection to 255.255.255.0 isn't even tried, it gets dropped immediately.