Facebook’s Watergate- Flyer Exchange Breaks Into Cubics Code
Written on October 8, 2007
If Facebook developers are looking for Deep Throat, they’ve got him. His name is Adam Stamper and he came forward with some fascinating information:
You might want to look closely at the ads delivered by ‘Flyers Exchange’. When I checked the source of their flyers I noticed some unusual code which seemed to be placing 10 Cubics ad blocks far off the page, 5000px to the left.
Flyer Exchange is, of course, the newest ad network on the block . And Cubics is the secret, infrequently covered stronghold for most developers seeking to monetize their apps. Recently, Cubics has been plagued by service outages, while Flyer Exchange, after using some dubious tactics, has managed to grow significantly. Led by Henrick Shyu, the cost per click network constantly updated developers about its status and offers.
Until Deep Throat came forward. Shyu has yet to respond to developer complaints, even though he’s been hyperactive on message boards in the past. The charges? Shyu hid ad code for another network in his own, and took all the profits. His application not only siphoned revenue from developers, but also created huge (and unnecessary) demand on Cubics’ servers. Cubics has been the secret resource of developers, and Shyu did his best to cripple it (not only through sketchy code, but through forum posts, fake accounts, and other bad business).
The take home point from all this? First, it’s that developers won’t be fooled easily. But more importantly, it demonstrates the lack of sophistication in Facebook ad networks and the vulnerability of developers. Facebook ad platforms are still the Wild West- and they aren’t tame yet. Both Flyer Exchange and, to an extent, Cubics, fell pray to amateurish tricks that would struggle to pass on the rest of the web.
Will acts like these encourage Facebook to jump in and create an ad network? Will the site take action? And, crucially, will developers be willing to work with systems that a few good “plumbers” can break into?
UPDATE: Obligatory (and irrelevant) pseudo-denial here.

