<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Adgregate Markets Scores Distribution Deal With Google&#8217;s DoubleClick</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/</link>
	<description>Startup and Technology News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 17:22:59 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: D. Dubbya</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2876563</link>
		<dc:creator>D. Dubbya</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 14:47:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2876563</guid>
		<description>+1. I never got past that when thinking about these guys. The level of trust would have to be huge with the consumer. Spoofing this service to grab CC numbers is a very easy and compelling for those who employee such alternate business models. 

Great idea, but think about where these ads are going to be seen. Right next to googlemoneytree.com and &quot;Free iPhone&quot; spots. That&#039;s a tough stigma to get around.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>+1. I never got past that when thinking about these guys. The level of trust would have to be huge with the consumer. Spoofing this service to grab CC numbers is a very easy and compelling for those who employee such alternate business models. </p>
<p>Great idea, but think about where these ads are going to be seen. Right next to googlemoneytree.com and &#8220;Free iPhone&#8221; spots. That&#8217;s a tough stigma to get around.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Economy Bites. Stuff Changes. &#187; RevenueToday</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2724497</link>
		<dc:creator>The Economy Bites. Stuff Changes. &#187; RevenueToday</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:29:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2724497</guid>
		<description>[...] has agreed to offer Adgregate Market&#8217;s transactional ad technology across its display advertising network. ShopAds incorporates e-commerce transaction capabilities [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] has agreed to offer Adgregate Market&#8217;s transactional ad technology across its display advertising network. ShopAds incorporates e-commerce transaction capabilities [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sash</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2691211</link>
		<dc:creator>Sash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2009 09:55:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2691211</guid>
		<description>why so much negativity over this issue ? if someone is going to hack the host site, they can do so irrespective of whether there is a widget there or not.

plus, i believe that credit cards are automatically insured against fraud.

personally i believe these types of widgets will be the standard in a few years, and people will look back on static image banners and laugh.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>why so much negativity over this issue ? if someone is going to hack the host site, they can do so irrespective of whether there is a widget there or not.</p>
<p>plus, i believe that credit cards are automatically insured against fraud.</p>
<p>personally i believe these types of widgets will be the standard in a few years, and people will look back on static image banners and laugh.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Google будет крутить баннеры-магазины</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2690525</link>
		<dc:creator>Google будет крутить баннеры-магазины</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 22:34:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2690525</guid>
		<description>[...] созданием новых форм баннерной рекламы. Как сообщает TechCrunch, результатом заключенного соглашения станет [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] созданием новых форм баннерной рекламы. Как сообщает TechCrunch, результатом заключенного соглашения станет [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Dempsky</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2689957</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Dempsky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 17:21:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2689957</guid>
		<description>Leo, no, I&#039;m happily employed right now, the project just caught my interest yesterday, but thanks for your offer. :P

Yeah, the second link looks to have stopped working around 4:15 AM (Pacific time).  They haven&#039;t fixed the issue, they&#039;ve just blacklisted my IP address from talking to their servers.  Try running the curl commands in my 1:30 AM update if you&#039;re still interested in reproducing it.

Regardless, you seem clueless about how secure software works, so I&#039;m not going to bother following up anymore. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Leo, no, I&#8217;m happily employed right now, the project just caught my interest yesterday, but thanks for your offer. <img src='http://www.techcrunch.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_razz.gif' alt=':P' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Yeah, the second link looks to have stopped working around 4:15 AM (Pacific time).  They haven&#8217;t fixed the issue, they&#8217;ve just blacklisted my IP address from talking to their servers.  Try running the curl commands in my 1:30 AM update if you&#8217;re still interested in reproducing it.</p>
<p>Regardless, you seem clueless about how secure software works, so I&#8217;m not going to bother following up anymore. <img src='http://www.techcrunch.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adgregate Markets and ShopAds Invades Purchase Funnel</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2689938</link>
		<dc:creator>Adgregate Markets and ShopAds Invades Purchase Funnel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 17:09:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2689938</guid>
		<description>[...] TechCrunch: &quot;Adgregate will share revenue with both DoubleClick and the retailer whose goods are being sold in [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] TechCrunch: &#8220;Adgregate will share revenue with both DoubleClick and the retailer whose goods are being sold in [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Leo C</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2689852</link>
		<dc:creator>Leo C</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 16:07:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2689852</guid>
		<description>Matthew,

are you out of job, looks like you spent entire night on trying to validate their widget

by the way your second link does not work either.

let me know if you are looking for a job..
email me at jobsonlyforhackers@matthew.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Matthew,</p>
<p>are you out of job, looks like you spent entire night on trying to validate their widget</p>
<p>by the way your second link does not work either.</p>
<p>let me know if you are looking for a job..<br />
email me at <a href="mailto:jobsonlyforhackers@matthew.com">jobsonlyforhackers@matthew.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Dempsky</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2689393</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Dempsky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 08:55:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2689393</guid>
		<description>Sorry, no, the status message is that they changed from a single static string to a single string that changed every 5 minutes.  I assumed at first it was more secure than that, so I just moved onto more interesting things.

After coming back and realizing it was that simple, I updated the page to automatically fetch the changing string (with instructions) and to refresh every 5 minutes.

As of right now, they&#039;ve changed their validation code to blacklist dempsky.org as a referrer, but the trick would work on any other domain you care to try.  E.g., right now http://70.85.31.66/~matthew/adgregate.html still works.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry, no, the status message is that they changed from a single static string to a single string that changed every 5 minutes.  I assumed at first it was more secure than that, so I just moved onto more interesting things.</p>
<p>After coming back and realizing it was that simple, I updated the page to automatically fetch the changing string (with instructions) and to refresh every 5 minutes.</p>
<p>As of right now, they&#8217;ve changed their validation code to blacklist dempsky.org as a referrer, but the trick would work on any other domain you care to try.  E.g., right now <a href="http://70.85.31.66/~matthew/adgregate.html" rel="nofollow"></a><a href='http://70.85.31.66/~matthew/adgregate.html'>http://70.85.31.../adgregate.html</a> still works.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Leo C</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2689249</link>
		<dc:creator>Leo C</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 06:10:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2689249</guid>
		<description>hey, it doesnt work for me, I see your status message.

Are you just trying to get traffic to that page - I see your status message saying they are updating their security mechanism, any smart company will do that periodically.

I hardly believe you even got it working once. Try some other websites for cheap publicity.

Leo C</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hey, it doesnt work for me, I see your status message.</p>
<p>Are you just trying to get traffic to that page &#8211; I see your status message saying they are updating their security mechanism, any smart company will do that periodically.</p>
<p>I hardly believe you even got it working once. Try some other websites for cheap publicity.</p>
<p>Leo C</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: U lost me</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2688896</link>
		<dc:creator>U lost me</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 01:45:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2688896</guid>
		<description>you lost me as soon as a window popped up..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>you lost me as soon as a window popped up..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: barclay</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2688844</link>
		<dc:creator>barclay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 01:21:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2688844</guid>
		<description>Here is a better way to enable e-commerce in a banner ad:

http://www.lce-com.com/tacoma/banners/lce/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here is a better way to enable e-commerce in a banner ad:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.lce-com.com/tacoma/banners/lce/" rel="nofollow"></a><a href='http://www.lce-com.com/tacoma/banners/lce/'>http://www.lce-...ma/banners/lce/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Dempsky</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2688770</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Dempsky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 00:23:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2688770</guid>
		<description>Wrong:  http://shinobi.dempsky.org/~matthew/adgregate.html (just pretend I actually took the time to make it look like a real widget).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wrong:  <a href="http://shinobi.dempsky.org/~matthew/adgregate.html" rel="nofollow"></a><a href='http://shinobi.dempsky.org/~matthew/adgregate.html'>http://shinobi..../adgregate.html</a> (just pretend I actually took the time to make it look like a real widget).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mesut Darendeli</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2688575</link>
		<dc:creator>Mesut Darendeli</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 22:03:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2688575</guid>
		<description>This is a perfect idea and we should admit that these people worked really hard to make this application work I think. I would say, their strategy was wrong, as you say it is not a good idea to share you cc info with an unknown widget.

They can defend that the site which shows the widget is a second layer and the data gets stored in the main platform which I assume is SSL encrypted. But still... You pay on the widget.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a perfect idea and we should admit that these people worked really hard to make this application work I think. I would say, their strategy was wrong, as you say it is not a good idea to share you cc info with an unknown widget.</p>
<p>They can defend that the site which shows the widget is a second layer and the data gets stored in the main platform which I assume is SSL encrypted. But still&#8230; You pay on the widget.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ur mistaken</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2688572</link>
		<dc:creator>Ur mistaken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 21:56:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2688572</guid>
		<description>only the co can serve a validation message thru https://secure.adgregate.com when someone attempts to validate the ad. if you tried to spoof, you would get a fail message b/c the spoof ad wouldn&#039;t have a unique identifier, which wouldn&#039;t trigger the validation message. duh! unless you are talking about someone trying to hack into a secure server which can be done but c&#039;mon, there are easier ways to make money off fraud.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>only the co can serve a validation message thru <a href="https://secure.adgregate.com" rel="nofollow"></a><a href='https://secure.adgregate.com'>https://secure.adgregate.com</a> when someone attempts to validate the ad. if you tried to spoof, you would get a fail message b/c the spoof ad wouldn&#8217;t have a unique identifier, which wouldn&#8217;t trigger the validation message. duh! unless you are talking about someone trying to hack into a secure server which can be done but c&#8217;mon, there are easier ways to make money off fraud.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Webware Radar: Google adds third-party ad widgets to DoubleClick &#124; Blogging</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2688491</link>
		<dc:creator>Webware Radar: Google adds third-party ad widgets to DoubleClick &#124; Blogging</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 20:56:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2688491</guid>
		<description>[...] Adgregate Markets nor Google would disclose the deal&#8217;s specifics, but TechCrunch is reporting that there will be a revenue-sharing arrangement between the companies. Adgregate Markets&#8217; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Adgregate Markets nor Google would disclose the deal&#8217;s specifics, but TechCrunch is reporting that there will be a revenue-sharing arrangement between the companies. Adgregate Markets&#8217; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: <fb:name linked="false" useyou="false" uid="607188734">Sasha Aickin</fb:name></title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2688459</link>
		<dc:creator><fb:name linked="false" useyou="false" uid="607188734">Sasha Aickin</fb:name></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 20:34:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2688459</guid>
		<description>Yeah, but the validate feature is easily spoofable as well.  See my reply to Hemen Chhatbar below.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, but the validate feature is easily spoofable as well.  See my reply to Hemen Chhatbar below.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: <fb:name linked="false" useyou="false" uid="607188734">Sasha Aickin</fb:name></title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2688458</link>
		<dc:creator><fb:name linked="false" useyou="false" uid="607188734">Sasha Aickin</fb:name></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 20:33:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2688458</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t disagree that Adgregate, when it has not been tampered with, is encrypting the information in between the user and the server.  However, *when the HTML page hosting the ad has been tampered with*, the tamperer can put in a Flash ad that looks EXACTLY like the Adgregate ad but which steals credit card information instead of buying products.

The validation feature on the ad does link to https://secure.adgregate.com, which is good, but any other Flash ad, made by anyone, could link off to secure.adgregate.com in the same way.  This is not a solution.

The point is that Adgregate is telling users to ignore web security and that their product gets a pass on the normal HTTPS rules, and it isn&#039;t true.  And if and when someone loses their CC# info on spoofed Adgregate ads, all of us web developers will suffer because users will think we&#039;re all insecure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t disagree that Adgregate, when it has not been tampered with, is encrypting the information in between the user and the server.  However, *when the HTML page hosting the ad has been tampered with*, the tamperer can put in a Flash ad that looks EXACTLY like the Adgregate ad but which steals credit card information instead of buying products.</p>
<p>The validation feature on the ad does link to <a href="https://secure.adgregate.com" rel="nofollow"></a><a href='https://secure.adgregate.com'>https://secure.adgregate.com</a>, which is good, but any other Flash ad, made by anyone, could link off to secure.adgregate.com in the same way.  This is not a solution.</p>
<p>The point is that Adgregate is telling users to ignore web security and that their product gets a pass on the normal HTTPS rules, and it isn&#8217;t true.  And if and when someone loses their CC# info on spoofed Adgregate ads, all of us web developers will suffer because users will think we&#8217;re all insecure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sam</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2688423</link>
		<dc:creator>Sam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 20:07:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2688423</guid>
		<description>aside from security issues, this presents all sorts of shopper experience issues. first of all the space constraints are non-trivial.

next, there are all sorts of data feed issues from the merchant&#039;s side. reviews, in stock, promotions, related items, etc. 

if you go thru THAT much work to turn your entire website into an ad widget, then you might as well invest that cash in just doing a lot of CPA-ads and offering screaming deals to get people to CLICK ON THE DAMN F-ING Thing.

Let&#039;s not forget, this is an AD after all. And you have this really expensive, high touch, thing called a WEBSITE that is ONLY ONE MOUSE CLICK AWAY!&gt;!&gt;!&gt;!&gt;!&gt;

So why would you spend THIS much energy gilding a lilly when what you really want is to get users to experience the REAL, unconstrained version of the site.

If the user cares THIS MUCH about buying something, clearly they care enough to CLICK ON THE DAMN BANNER. Saving them time inside this super constrained space is a non-starter for most people.

If you got my attention w/ the ad, then you&#039;ve succeeded. So move on. Carrying too much engagement w/in suboptimal spaces actually risks buyer frustration and poor user experience --ON TOP OF the fraud potential.

Clever &quot;concept&quot; -- however, it is not well thought through. This is the classic Silicon Valley shoot before you ask questions company I would expect from a mgt team that has never worked in advertising OR ecommerce for any appreciable length.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>aside from security issues, this presents all sorts of shopper experience issues. first of all the space constraints are non-trivial.</p>
<p>next, there are all sorts of data feed issues from the merchant&#8217;s side. reviews, in stock, promotions, related items, etc. </p>
<p>if you go thru THAT much work to turn your entire website into an ad widget, then you might as well invest that cash in just doing a lot of CPA-ads and offering screaming deals to get people to CLICK ON THE DAMN F-ING Thing.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s not forget, this is an AD after all. And you have this really expensive, high touch, thing called a WEBSITE that is ONLY ONE MOUSE CLICK AWAY!&gt;!&gt;!&gt;!&gt;!&gt;</p>
<p>So why would you spend THIS much energy gilding a lilly when what you really want is to get users to experience the REAL, unconstrained version of the site.</p>
<p>If the user cares THIS MUCH about buying something, clearly they care enough to CLICK ON THE DAMN BANNER. Saving them time inside this super constrained space is a non-starter for most people.</p>
<p>If you got my attention w/ the ad, then you&#8217;ve succeeded. So move on. Carrying too much engagement w/in suboptimal spaces actually risks buyer frustration and poor user experience &#8211;ON TOP OF the fraud potential.</p>
<p>Clever &#8220;concept&#8221; &#8212; however, it is not well thought through. This is the classic Silicon Valley shoot before you ask questions company I would expect from a mgt team that has never worked in advertising OR ecommerce for any appreciable length.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bijal Mehta</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2688311</link>
		<dc:creator>Bijal Mehta</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 18:57:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2688311</guid>
		<description>There is a validate feature that is in place with the widget, users can confirm the authenticity of the widget.

I feel this is a great idea and will definitely work...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is a validate feature that is in place with the widget, users can confirm the authenticity of the widget.</p>
<p>I feel this is a great idea and will definitely work&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hemen Chhatbar</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2688301</link>
		<dc:creator>Hemen Chhatbar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 18:49:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2688301</guid>
		<description>I have used this widget a couple of times and I have never had any issues with my credit card.

There is also a feature on the widget to validate it and confirm if this an authentic widget.

I have tried few different ways to see if the credit card data is passed to their server in plain text but looks like they are encrypting and making it secure.

So, I would recommend that you should test it out before commenting any bull***t 

Hemen</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have used this widget a couple of times and I have never had any issues with my credit card.</p>
<p>There is also a feature on the widget to validate it and confirm if this an authentic widget.</p>
<p>I have tried few different ways to see if the credit card data is passed to their server in plain text but looks like they are encrypting and making it secure.</p>
<p>So, I would recommend that you should test it out before commenting any bull***t </p>
<p>Hemen</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 広告ウィジェットのAdgregate Markets、GoogleのDoubleClickと提携に成功</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2688281</link>
		<dc:creator>広告ウィジェットのAdgregate Markets、GoogleのDoubleClickと提携に成功</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 18:34:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2688281</guid>
		<description>[...] [原文へ] [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] [原文へ] [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: <fb:name linked="false" useyou="false" uid="607188734">Sasha Aickin</fb:name></title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2688187</link>
		<dc:creator><fb:name linked="false" useyou="false" uid="607188734">Sasha Aickin</fb:name></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 17:36:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2688187</guid>
		<description>The first set of commenters are right: Adgregate encourages very bad user behavior that will make users vulnerable to phishing attacks.  I wrote a blog post about this when Adgregate launched:

http://blog.redfin.com/devblog/2008/09/teaching_users_to_get_hacked_or_why_http_forms_are_bad_for_the_web.html

I&#039;m honestly a little amazed that Double Click would do a deal with them when they are actively encouraging users to enter CC#s on insecure, tamperable pages. 

@Phil D.  The communication to get the Flash widget from Adgregate is secure in the sense that it is private, but the HTTP page that hosts the Flash widget is completely tamperable.  So, an evil person could change the HTTP page to point to an evil Flash widget that looks just like an Adgregate widget.  That evil Flash widget could send the CC# wherever the evil person wants.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The first set of commenters are right: Adgregate encourages very bad user behavior that will make users vulnerable to phishing attacks.  I wrote a blog post about this when Adgregate launched:</p>
<p><a href="http://blog.redfin.com/devblog/2008/09/teaching_users_to_get_hacked_or_why_http_forms_are_bad_for_the_web.html" rel="nofollow"></a><a href='http://blog.redfin.com/devblog/2008/09/teaching_users_to_get_hacked_or_why_http_forms_are_bad_for_the_web.html'>http://blog.red...or_the_web.html</a></p>
<p>I&#8217;m honestly a little amazed that Double Click would do a deal with them when they are actively encouraging users to enter CC#s on insecure, tamperable pages. </p>
<p>@Phil D.  The communication to get the Flash widget from Adgregate is secure in the sense that it is private, but the HTTP page that hosts the Flash widget is completely tamperable.  So, an evil person could change the HTTP page to point to an evil Flash widget that looks just like an Adgregate widget.  That evil Flash widget could send the CC# wherever the evil person wants.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pigsaw Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Bookmarks for 7 Apr 2009</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2688154</link>
		<dc:creator>Pigsaw Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Bookmarks for 7 Apr 2009</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 17:01:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2688154</guid>
		<description>[...] Adgregate Markets Scores Distribution Deal With Google&#8217;s DoubleClickA new kind of online ad that allows complete purchasing within the space of the ad itself. The discussion below is interesting, with people asking &quot;who would trust such a thing?&quot; (advertising google shopping ) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Adgregate Markets Scores Distribution Deal With Google&rsquo;s DoubleClickA new kind of online ad that allows complete purchasing within the space of the ad itself. The discussion below is interesting, with people asking &quot;who would trust such a thing?&quot; (advertising google shopping ) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adgregate Markets&#8217; ShopAds available on DoubleClick &#187; Adotas</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2687957</link>
		<dc:creator>Adgregate Markets&#8217; ShopAds available on DoubleClick &#187; Adotas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:30:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2687957</guid>
		<description>[...] will share revenue with DoubleClick and the retailer whose goods are being sold in the ShopAd widget. But the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] will share revenue with DoubleClick and the retailer whose goods are being sold in the ShopAd widget. But the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/06/adgregate-markets-scores-distribution-deal-with-googles-doubleclick/comment-page-1/#comment-2687861</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 13:04:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=54390#comment-2687861</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s not clear to me but is this type of display ad limited to only DoubleClick supported sites or can anyone use it regardless of whom they are using for ad serving?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s not clear to me but is this type of display ad limited to only DoubleClick supported sites or can anyone use it regardless of whom they are using for ad serving?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
