Klaus's Sig ?

Klaus\'s Sig ?

I was reading a post by CPF member Clause and it listed my IP?, ISP, OS, and browser I was using? Should I be worried that this information is so easily accessable?

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

Nope...you leave that information on the server of every website you visit. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

That info can be left at each server one visits, true, but including the Danasoft.com server in a post gives an unknown and unvouched for third party access to that information.

My question would be "Why would Danasoft want it?"

One of the other communities I belong to, a closed, generally secure, paid-by-credit-card-for-ID "gated community" site would likely ban inclusion of a cute trick like that simply because it allows a third party to know something about who belongs to that gated community. My IP, for example, is a dedicated broadband IP linked directly to me, rather than the more anonymous dialup ...

Anyway, I still have the same question: Why does Danasoft want this information bad enough to provide the bandwidth and server cycles to collect it? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

These information is provided by your browser. There is no way to stop this. Don't worry about it...
But it is a good starter to think about your Computers security.. I strongly recommend the use of a Antivirus-Software, a Firewall and some Caution!
Holger

P.S.: His name is Klaus

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

Of course there is. If you worry about your browser name and operating system there are tens of programs to obfuscate/change this information. Or you could just use Opera and just use the menu "Identify as ..." (mozilla might do the same, too). Or you can use a program like proximotron and use any browser you like.
Most complicated is to hide your ip. For this you should use a proxy (most likely your ISP already has a proxy) or an "anonymizer" service.
Or you could disable the images. Or only the images from some servers (like www.danasoft.com) in many ways:
- from the firewall
- add www.danasoft.com to your host file with a bogus IP
- (my favorite): in mozilla right click on the banner, left click on "block images from this server"

[ QUOTE ]
ho71ko said:
These information is provided by your browser. There is no way to stop this. Don't worry about it...


[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

If anyone has a problem I will remove it - but as was said above a bit of /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/poke2.gif regarding what we leave as traces of our surfing might not be harmful but even do some good.

And as was said already - this information is available to anyone who wants to know it through your browser - no big deal.

Regarding the Danasoft company - I´m not affiliated in any way - but I **guess** they just want to show off their abilities and no hidden agenda / data collection is involved - but I will check on that to see whats going on.

Klaus

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

Klaus, I don't personally have a problem with leaving that information at web-sites I visit, I know it is going to happen, etc.

I've used that sort of information (in fact still do at two of my sites) to figure out where my visitors come from and what software they are using to view my stuff. It helps me in making sure that I meet my visitors needs (the reason I added some Japanese to one of them, for example).

What might bother people is when that information is siphoned off to a site they did not visit for purposes unknown.

Of course this happens all the time with ads and counters grabbing the info and, since they appear on so many sites, being able to track one's surfing.

That's why most of the ad companies set a cookie the first time you see any of their banner ads then read it every time you hit another one. It allows them to assemble a very good list of all the sites "user 4829072" has visited, and often how long they stayed and how many pages they looked at.

Eventually many of those users hit some site where they give up some information (name, address, phone number, e-mail address, whatever) and that can finally be attached to their collected information.

Even if a user never gives up any info, the ad company can still begin shaping an ad strategy depending on their browsing history, and even just that is valuable in selling their services.

I had one client who used this sort of data to track visitors to various adult sites where she had banners, and when she finally got an e-mail address she'd proposition them to visit her pay site. Surprisingly, it worked fairly well, but I always felt like washing my hands after working on her site.

She eventually had money problems (drugs) and left behind a bill of over $6000 /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon23.gif

I told my marketing person to never go after an account like that again even if we starved.

====

Bottom line, I don't mind that Danasoft knows I visit CPF, but some might.

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

Klaus:

There is no difference between your signature and ANY other picture, and ANY linked image (from signature, post or whatever). Even the original poster has a linked image as signature from imagestation. And I think there is no policy here forbidding external pictures. On the contrary, external linking looks to be encouraged; look only at this thread and you can count 5 external servers serving pictures, with only 6 posts.
The way I see it: if somebody has a problem with your signature then it should have a problem with each and every picture. Then if he has a problem with every picture he could just browse without pictures (you can do this in every browser, including IE).
I can't speak for somebody else, but I can bet the original poster is not pissed, only curious.

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

Cute how it cycles through phrases everytime you refresh it- seems to be mostly funny sayings, with a penchant for Matrix quotes

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

This is a perfect opportunity to discuss the subject of siglines in general. And avatars too. I've had to ask several of our members to change their siglines because of the size or animation or inappropriateness, etc. You all don't know this, but it has even been discussed to completely disable siglines altogether. It just seems that some people don't "get it" when it comes to posting something that isn't annoying and/or doesn't take up half a page with only one post!

So where am I going with this? I'll cut to the chase... we need guidelines. Or I'm turning off siglines for everyone. Pictures need to be a certain size (not pixel size but actual inches or centimeters or whatever so that everyone "gets it"), I think all animation (moving) should be a definate "NO!" (sorry Wingerr... I love your wave guys but... ), I think siglines should be limited to two lines... MAX!!... etc.

Here's the thing... If someone posts once on a page, that's fine. But if they post 5 or 10 times and their sigline is flashing and winking and takes up more space than the post itself... well, you get the point. It's rude, it's annoying and why do people think that we want to see that? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif

So help me out here guys... what do you think? And what are some guidelines that we can make policy?

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

Could you be referring to my banners at all? I know I`m not a paying sponsor but my site isn`t a store and I don`t make anything from it. In fact it costs me quite a lot in time and money!

I`ve been running animated banners for about 2 years and have never recieved one complaint about them either here on the Forums or in private, directly or indirectly. Actually, that`s not exactly true - in the beginning one guy objected to my advertizing the original flashlight reviews site when it wasn`t quite ready. I`d only had the banner going for about 2 weeks. He didn`t even have the guts to e-mail me either, just left an anonymous post in my visitor-book.

But no complaints about their size or appearence.


As it happens, I`m planning to shrink my banner a bit soon. Just want the announcement of the Bite Sized reviews to run another week or so, then I`ll switch to a smaller one of around 50x500 with only 2 or 3 frames. Yes it`ll still be orange and brown.


Personal matters aside, I have seen other sigs that I felt were too big and in-your-face, but actually the ones I really dislike are not that big and have no graphics at all. I won`t go into that though as it`s a personal matter for another thread at another time that I won`t take part in.



If you have to limit things, please do it rationally. Please don`t just blanket-ban all graphics. We`re generally a well behaved, self moderating bunch as far as I know, so if a new policy was implemented most of us would try to stick to it, and don`t mind a gentle nudge if we slip at all. I think anything much over the size of my banner is too much (but then, I would! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif ) and fast blinking or scrolling animation should be a no-no too, but mild animating is OK and makes life more interesting. I do think it will be impossible to impose actual size-limits in inches since we all have different monitors and screen resolutions so there will never be a way to control that. 640x480 on a 21 inch monitor will make a 80x80 avatar look absolutely huge in comparison to 1220x1024 on a 12 inch screen for example.

Pixels and file size will be the only real way to do it.

-

I propose, if there needs to be rules on signature and avatar graphics:

Sig graphics no taller than 80-100 pixels and no wider than 650-700. File size kept under around 35K to go easy on dialup users.

Avatars, since they already have pixel size constraints, should not link to images grossly over the current 80x80 limit (ie no 5MPixel photos squeezed in there) and let`s say a file size of around 20K tops?

Any animation used should be fairly discreet. I like the cute waving smillies, they don`t bother me. Things whizzing around or blinking fast with high contrasts do. This one would be more subjective and probably have to be illustrated with examples of what`s good and bad.

-

That`s what I have to say about it. But from someone who primarily relies on a banner to bring people to his little site (I get virtually no hits from search engines), please don`t ban signatures altogether. At least this new software has an optional off-switch for them if the viewer doesn`t like to see them.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

Chris... first, thank you for your input. It is greatly appreciated! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Regarding your sigline banner: To be honest, I don't like it and I never have. BUT!... notice that you still have it and until now, I've never said anything about it. Basically, what bothers me is seeing it ten times on one page as I'm scrolling through. You HAVE to see how annoying that is? The big, bright orange, flashing purple and brown? Seriously Chris... and truly I don't want you to take it personal... can't you see what I mean?

Now your avatar... IMHO, that's PERFECT! That is what I would like to see in siglines. No bigger or flashier than that! People see that. They WOULD see it in a sigline... it's ORANGE! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[ QUOTE ]
At least this new software has an optional off-switch for them if the viewer doesn`t like to see them.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right... but ya know what? I shouldn't have to turn off ALL siglines in my preferences just because a few can't seem to use common sense or restraint. People have to think about how often their sigline can appear on one page. Truly guys... this is my biggest peeve! When you put some gigantic, loud flashing "thing" in your sigline, it's not bad once... but think about how often you post several times on one page! It does reach the point of ridiculous, rude and annoying. And I can't keep going around telling people to change their sigline. I shouldn't have to do that.

Guys... look... I'm not trying to single anyone in particular out. And I am taking into consideration that there are things that annoy me that don't annoy you. That's why Chris still has his sigline. But where do we draw the line? If I allow Chris to have his flashy orange banner that takes up over half the width of my screen, should I allow fighter jets to continuously fly across the bottom of someone else's posts? I think you all get my point... don't you?

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

Sasha, how about my small constuction bar? It's small and thin, and doesn't take up a lot of space. How about it?

Dan

PS: That sig has been the talk of some forums I've been on. It's believed that it's PNG code and changed to a JPG. And there is no mention of it on danasoft, except for a frenzy on their BB.

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

Back to original topic, with Netscape 7, Klaus's sig I.D.s the important stuff correctly. That being my outside I.P. and provider. It however gets the browser slightly wrong (Netscape 5) and completely misses my O.S. (sort of, both are NT based) saying win XP vs vin 2000. So if they are collecting this data for marketing, they are going to have some skewed results.

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

I hear ya - and no, I don`t take it personally. I welcome all feedback whether it be regarding the work I do at my day-job, the work I do on my web sites or my presence here at the CPF. If I don`t know I`m doing something that isn`t liked, how do I know when I need to change things?

I`ll re-consider my future plans for the banners. They`ll still be mostly orange and brown since that is the colour scheme of the Torch Reviews Site, but the normal one will be smaller and I will limit the animation. Might briefly go back to current styles to announce new features, but since new features are not exactly abundent, they won`t be seen too often.
As I said, I need all the help I can get. Average is one hit in a hundred from a search engine, 40% or more comes from right here and I`m still not exactly busy.


Personally the big orangey things don`t bother me, I`ve gotten used to them, and infact are an easy way for me to spot my posts. I have the worst short term memory and my head spins if I stare at a page full of words with no graphical breaks or pointers, trying to find the relavent bit, and I have the worst short term memory and... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif


But, now I know at least one member (a prominent one at that) doesn`t like it, I`ll see what I can come up with to tone it down further than originally planned.


/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif


(edit) wanted to turn it off for this post so you know I`m not just taking the you-know-what, but can`t find the option to do so. The old software used to let me do that... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

I've always ran with disabled siglines...I never noticed until this thread.

I do agree that pictures in siglines should be limited in size- not in pixels, but in memory. Animations would be allowed, but it would be difficult to annoy the user.

As for the bigger issue of user security: just browsing the net will leave a endless trail of cookies and identifying information. Some of these cookies are vital so that sites can store queries, user information, shopping carts, etc.

But in many cases, these cookies are only being used to retrieve information about your browsing habits. They have no benefit to the user. Google is a much-cited offender, since they store every search that you make, and use the maximum cookie expiration time.

Quick solution: don't accept cookies from sites you don't like.

My version of Netscape (7.0) allows me to pick and choose what sites are allowed to store cookies on my computer. Yes, it is a hassle to click the "yes" and "no" button occasionally, and to wade through the menus when you find out you need cookies for a particular site.

My main browser, a very old and obsolete Opera 3.62, is set up for speed and security, with graphics disabled, cookies disabled, and referrer disabled. If the site doesn't work here, I just switch browsers, or decide the site isn't worth visiting. I've been burdened with too many non-compliant HTML sites, horrid Flash sites, and poorly designed sites.

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

I think that rules for size of sig line pictures is a very good idea! I would strongly recommend limiting both size on screen and file size (some small images are actually large files that take a long time to load).

Personally, animations don't bother me so much if the file isn't too large but I also don't really mind if they are banned.

It would also be a good idea to come up with a file size limit for avatars too.

For pics in sig line, pixel size is actually probably the best measurement to use since people have different size monitors set to different resolutions. Pixel size is easy to check (just right click and select properties) and it is consistent.

Now not to pick on ChrisM., I would think sig. pics should definitely be no bigger than his (520 x 70 pixels) and quite possibly a little smaller. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif Maybe a 50 pixel height limit by 500 pixel width.

Pat

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

<font color="800080">Maybe a 50 pixel height limit by 500 pixel width.
</font>

Hmmm, you`ve been reading my mind. Any better now? I`d had this one`s gradient background saved for a while but not tried it until now. The shade of orange isn`t right cos this goes back to TRS development days, but if it`s more accepted I`ll fix it. Betterer or not betterer than the other ones? 50x450, also two frames only, toggling each 3.5 seconds instead of about 6 frames each 1 second.

If only there were a way to remove that big thick HTML link border and make it more discreet. If we were allowed to use HTML code I could do it, but don`t get me started, I understand the reasons why we can`t.....



BTW don`t forget the space in my name! The one without the space is the guy from Wyoming.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

Chris(space)M!!! I LOVE it!!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Re: Klaus\'s Sig ?

Alrighty then /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

I just fiddled it otherwise that off-colour would bother me. I fiddled the text too to make it fit in more with the style of the TRS. Same size but even slower animation now (once per 4 seconds).