Sponsor Ref Link Code Question

Discussion Of All Legal Topics Is Fine Anything Goes. Be Respectful of Others. No Personal Information or Attacks.
All Traffic, Link, Banner, Push Notification and Advertising, Offers & Requests Here,.
Domains & Websites For Sale and Requests Here.
Keep One thread per person & No More Than 1 Weekly Bump.
User avatar
tacnet
Board Sponsor
Board Sponsor
Posts: 3641
Joined: February 22nd, 2019, 7:21 pm
Referrals: 9
Contact:

#16

Post by tacnet » August 23rd, 2023, 5:09 pm

Zug wrote: ↑
August 23rd, 2023, 1:15 pm
tacnet wrote: ↑
August 22nd, 2023, 10:33 pm
It shouldn't matter which one you use. Most sites will have a bit of code in their .htaccess that says if the url starts with http:// then redirect to the exact same url using https://

But ccbill dont appear to be doing this. With their links it looks like you HAVE to use http because https simply doesnt work.

Typically, when one site sends traffic to another, information is sent that identifies the originating site as the source of the traffic. So the receiving site can see where the traffic came from. This process stops when traffic flows from an HTTPS site to a non-secure HTTP site. This DOESNT mean you are not getting credited with the clicks because your affiliate details are stored in the URL itself (eg with ccbill links CA=920029&PA=2635627 identifies you as the affiliate)

What it does mean is that ccbill cant tell where the traffic came from. So you could have the same ccbill link on domainA.com, domainB.com and domainC.com but ccbill will have no idea where the click came from (and therefore neither will the merchant). They just know its a click from somewhere with your affiliate ID. Its sloppy and it means their traffic reporting cant be that great but it will work

So for NATs sites, just use whatever link they give you (probably https) but for ccbill, it looks like you need to stick with http
So this would explain why ccbill stats do not show referring urls when you request to see that data.

My question is, even if most sites have that bit of code in their htaccess that forwards to https; does it still cookie the affiliate's referral link? Redirecting to the exact same 'page url' is fine, but, it's no use if it doesn't forward to the exact same url along with the affiliate's referral link code.

All of this would be cleared up if all sponsors would just provide affiliates with the https code instead of providing http codes. However ccbill's processing url is another story.

IMO all sites should be using https. Regardless of whether or not they request personal user data like email or anything else. I have noted some webmasters that do not use https say they don't need it if they are not requesting personal user data.

Paysite owners should all be using https on all their pages and provide affiliates with https links to all of their promo pages. If they don't they should not be allowed to process signups. Yet most pay sites still do forward to https, but some provided affiliate links are only using http. Which, at least to me, makes things a little sketchy.

Times are tough enough as it is without having to worry about this minuscule 'thing' with https from ccbill or any other sponsor program. Regardless if it matters or not. Right is right and fair is fair to all affiliates work and their general viewing traffic Affiliates should not have to worry about this or worry about double checking tracking cookies between http and https links.

Here's another provided affiliate link code that forwards to https:
http://www.gammae.com/blazingbucks/trac ... r=&buffer=

Does it cookie the http then forward to https, or what is the deal? What should affiliates link to? .. I shouldn't even have to ask the question.
ok the way it works is like this :-

You link to ccbill and they set the cookie with your affiliate ID. The cookie can ONLY be read by ccbill.com. In other words, the merchant site cannot see or affect the cookie in any way, its only once the user gets to the check out form (which is also hosted on ccbill.com) that the cookie can be read

So the merchant site can do whatever it likes (eg forwarding you the https or even send you to a completely different site/page) and it wont affect the cookie

The downside is that because you are linking to ccbill via http and not https, ccbill cannot see where the traffic came from. So they cant show you which banners or pages are working best for you. Infact, they cant even see which domain the click came from

The same problem occurrs if you are trading traffic with a site that's on http. Because the referral data doesn't get passed from https to http, there is no way for them to know how much taffic you are sending

Now the IS a way round this but its seen as a potential security risk. In the <head> tag of your page you can add this code :-

Code: Select all

<meta name="referrer" content="unsafe-url">
That tells the browser to pass the referral data even to an http page. But as I said, this can be seen as a security risk

Hope that makes sense

Zug
Banned
Banned
Posts: 418
Joined: February 11th, 2023, 9:19 am
Referrals: 4

#17

Post by Zug » August 23rd, 2023, 5:23 pm

.. So, if what I am making out of this, is, affiliates have to pose potential security risk with using

Code: Select all

<meta name="referrer" content="unsafe-url">
so we can promote http sponsor urls? Is that what you mean?

Would it not just be easier if the sponsors and processing urls being used by affiliates already were using https?




User avatar
tacnet
Board Sponsor
Board Sponsor
Posts: 3641
Joined: February 22nd, 2019, 7:21 pm
Referrals: 9
Contact:

#18

Post by tacnet » August 23rd, 2023, 5:30 pm

Zug wrote: ↑
August 23rd, 2023, 5:23 pm
.. So, if what I am making out of this, is, affiliates have to pose potential security risk with using

Code: Select all

<meta name="referrer" content="unsafe-url">
so we can promote http sponsor urls? Is that what you mean?

Would it not just be easier if the sponsors and processing urls being used by affiliates already were using https?
No not quite. You can still promote http sponsors and you will get credited for any sales. Its just that you wont be able to see where the traffic came from

Your absolutely right though, it would be much easier if ccbill just switched on https. That way everything would flow normally

Zug
Banned
Banned
Posts: 418
Joined: February 11th, 2023, 9:19 am
Referrals: 4

#19

Post by Zug » August 23rd, 2023, 7:30 pm

tacnet wrote: ↑
August 23rd, 2023, 5:30 pm
Zug wrote: ↑
August 23rd, 2023, 5:23 pm
.. So, if what I am making out of this, is, affiliates have to pose potential security risk with using

Code: Select all

<meta name="referrer" content="unsafe-url">
so we can promote http sponsor urls? Is that what you mean?

Would it not just be easier if the sponsors and processing urls being used by affiliates already were using https?
No not quite. You can still promote http sponsors and you will get credited for any sales. Its just that you wont be able to see where the traffic came from

Your absolutely right though, it would be much easier if ccbill just switched on https. That way everything would flow normally
Thank you for explaining that. However, all sponsor programs should be using https. Programs listing http for their promo links are only confusing the matter of proper linkage. Regardless of 'if it matters' or not.

This should NOT be a case of 'I (sponsor processing url) don't mind and you (affiliate link) don't matter'.




User avatar
bestfreeporn
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 2308
Joined: February 20th, 2018, 6:34 pm
Referrals: 1

#20

Post by bestfreeporn » August 24th, 2023, 7:57 am

Do people realize how this is negatively impacting not only affiliates but paysite owners too?




NSWDave
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 1151
Joined: September 11th, 2021, 8:31 pm
Title: Aussie man

#21

Post by NSWDave » August 24th, 2023, 4:23 pm

TheButcher wrote: ↑
August 22nd, 2023, 7:07 pm
I just got off CCBill's live chat talked to an Ivanak and Dragan, the latter gentleman told me he would email his supervisor to see what they had to say, as soon as I hear for them I will update this thread.
What is the latest from them?




User avatar
tacnet
Board Sponsor
Board Sponsor
Posts: 3641
Joined: February 22nd, 2019, 7:21 pm
Referrals: 9
Contact:

#22

Post by tacnet » August 24th, 2023, 4:28 pm

bestfreeporn wrote: ↑
August 24th, 2023, 7:57 am
Do people realize how this is negatively impacting not only affiliates but paysite owners too?
I totally agree. Im shocked that a company like ccbill who is running so many affiliate programs on behalf of others hasn't bothered to implement https.

User avatar
TheButcher
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 17530
Joined: February 2nd, 2018, 11:48 am
Title: I like weekends
Referrals: 1
Contact:

#23

Post by TheButcher » August 24th, 2023, 4:33 pm

NSWDave wrote: ↑
August 24th, 2023, 4:23 pm
TheButcher wrote: ↑
August 22nd, 2023, 7:07 pm
I just got off CCBill's live chat talked to an Ivanak and Dragan, the latter gentleman told me he would email his supervisor to see what they had to say, as soon as I hear for them I will update this thread.
What is the latest from them?

I have not heard a peep form anyone at CCBill

Zug
Banned
Banned
Posts: 418
Joined: February 11th, 2023, 9:19 am
Referrals: 4

#24

Post by Zug » August 24th, 2023, 4:55 pm

TheButcher wrote: ↑
August 24th, 2023, 4:33 pm
I have not heard a peep form anyone at CCBill
Of course you haven't. They do not care about headers and SEO as was mentioned earlier about http ccbill tracking links.

They do not care about it. And those CCBill sponsor users also now offer paypal or epoch as a payment option because of it. Leaving affiliates out of being paid.
Zug wrote: ↑
August 23rd, 2023, 7:30 pm
This should NOT be a case of 'I (sponsor processing url) don't mind and you (affiliate link) don't matter'.
And people wonder why this business is going down. Maybe ask the owners of PornHub. Maybe they bought CCBill out. Who knows? It's dog eat dog .. $$$ is all that matters. People do not matter.




pokerking
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 561
Joined: March 8th, 2021, 1:07 am

#25

Post by pokerking » August 25th, 2023, 9:01 am

Is Ron still the owner at CCbill?




User avatar
DonMK
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 882
Joined: March 1st, 2018, 4:55 pm

#26

Post by DonMK » August 25th, 2023, 7:00 pm

Zug wrote: ↑
August 24th, 2023, 4:55 pm
TheButcher wrote: ↑
August 24th, 2023, 4:33 pm
I have not heard a peep form anyone at CCBill
Of course you haven't. They do not care about headers and SEO as was mentioned earlier about http ccbill tracking links.

They do not care about it. And those CCBill sponsor users also now offer paypal or epoch as a payment option because of it. Leaving affiliates out of being paid.
Zug wrote: ↑
August 23rd, 2023, 7:30 pm
This should NOT be a case of 'I (sponsor processing url) don't mind and you (affiliate link) don't matter'.
And people wonder why this business is going down. Maybe ask the owners of PornHub. Maybe they bought CCBill out. Who knows? It's dog eat dog .. $$$ is all that matters. People do not matter.

If owners of Mindgeek were to buy out Ccbil they would make a formal announcement and get the shit together.




User avatar
TheButcher
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 17530
Joined: February 2nd, 2018, 11:48 am
Title: I like weekends
Referrals: 1
Contact:

#27

Post by TheButcher » August 26th, 2023, 9:56 am

DonMK wrote: ↑
August 25th, 2023, 7:00 pm
Zug wrote: ↑
August 24th, 2023, 4:55 pm
TheButcher wrote: ↑
August 24th, 2023, 4:33 pm
I have not heard a peep form anyone at CCBill
Of course you haven't. They do not care about headers and SEO as was mentioned earlier about http ccbill tracking links.

They do not care about it. And those CCBill sponsor users also now offer paypal or epoch as a payment option because of it. Leaving affiliates out of being paid.
Zug wrote: ↑
August 23rd, 2023, 7:30 pm
This should NOT be a case of 'I (sponsor processing url) don't mind and you (affiliate link) don't matter'.
And people wonder why this business is going down. Maybe ask the owners of PornHub. Maybe they bought CCBill out. Who knows? It's dog eat dog .. $$$ is all that matters. People do not matter.

If owners of Mindgeek were to buy out Ccbil they would make a formal announcement and get the shit together.


Not too sure if i agree with the first part of that statement.

User avatar
vblogger
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 1935
Joined: February 17th, 2018, 2:48 pm

#28

Post by vblogger » August 27th, 2023, 12:32 pm

Let me guess no reply from anyone at ccbill




DeSexGuide
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 1842
Joined: May 4th, 2018, 6:51 pm

#29

Post by DeSexGuide » August 28th, 2023, 10:23 am

vblogger wrote: ↑
August 27th, 2023, 12:32 pm
Let me guess no reply from anyone at ccbill
Why are you surprised?




Zug
Banned
Banned
Posts: 418
Joined: February 11th, 2023, 9:19 am
Referrals: 4

#30

Post by Zug » August 29th, 2023, 6:04 am

DeSexGuide wrote: ↑
August 28th, 2023, 10:23 am
vblogger wrote: ↑
August 27th, 2023, 12:32 pm
Let me guess no reply from anyone at ccbill
Why are you surprised?
I'm not surprised in the least. A good example of a program not caring about proper procedure.

.. Then some wonder why affiliates complain.




Sponsor Ref Link Code Question

Post Reply