cloaker tool for fb and google ads
- Thread starter bikram1
- Start date
These are extremely easy to build, at least for Facebook. Just need a sql database with your IP sets (easy to find online) and Python/Apache to handle the requests. I would highly suggest you build or have built a custom solution so you can change on the fly as things with FB/Google change.
blackworldman
BANNED
- Dec 4, 2024
- 77
- 6
There are some good cloakers available in the market. Some of them are jci, trafficshield, adspect, etc. I tried almost all of them. which one is good totally depends on the the vertical you are working and the scale of your campaign. one thing i'd like to suggest do not go after the marketing as i noticed some are costly but do not work well while some are working so good at a cheaper price. so do a proper research before choosing the one.
Hey, I’ve worked with both Google and Meta running high-risk campaigns (mainly Crypto, Forex, Casino), and I’ve tested a few cloakers over time.
Adspect has been the most reliable for me — especially with Meta. Their filtering is solid, updates are fast, and support is responsive. It’s not cheap, but if you're spending daily and need something stable, it’s worth it. Worked well with both landing and pre-landers in my setups.
NoIPFraud also did a decent job when I used it on Google. Good filtering, though I felt Adspect handled bot waves and AI reviews a bit better on Meta.
As for Fraudlifter, I tried it early on but didn’t stick with it. It worked okay for very basic setups, but I had issues with consistency, especially when scaling. Maybe it's improved now, but I wouldn't rely on it for anything serious.
Just my 2 cents — whatever you go with, make sure the rest of your infrastructure is clean. Even the best cloaker won’t help if the domains or ad accounts are sloppy.
Hope that helps!
Adspect has been the most reliable for me — especially with Meta. Their filtering is solid, updates are fast, and support is responsive. It’s not cheap, but if you're spending daily and need something stable, it’s worth it. Worked well with both landing and pre-landers in my setups.
NoIPFraud also did a decent job when I used it on Google. Good filtering, though I felt Adspect handled bot waves and AI reviews a bit better on Meta.
As for Fraudlifter, I tried it early on but didn’t stick with it. It worked okay for very basic setups, but I had issues with consistency, especially when scaling. Maybe it's improved now, but I wouldn't rely on it for anything serious.
Just my 2 cents — whatever you go with, make sure the rest of your infrastructure is clean. Even the best cloaker won’t help if the domains or ad accounts are sloppy.
Hope that helps!
Apex Gamble Ads
Junior Member
- Feb 23, 2025
- 105
- 19
No tech skill, just run FB cloaking: use FraudLifter or NoIPFraud
or
Advanced setup, want control: Keitaro + custom script
and u can read document and we will discuss further
- Jul 31, 2023
- 351
- 71
Hi, you can use any cloaking for Facebook, there shouldn't be any problems with it. But for Google you need something more serious, for example: Adspect, Cloak IT or the most inexpensive Cloaking House.
I’ve managed a lot of high-risk campaigns (like Crypto and Casino) on both Google and Meta, and I’ve tested quite a few cloakers along the way. TrafficShield has been the most reliable so far — strong filtering, quick updates, and solid customer support. It scales well and works smoothly with both pre-landers and direct landers.
Adspect performs fairly well, especially for Meta, but I found TrafficShield to be more flexible overall. NoIPFraud was alright for lighter Google traffic, but didn’t handle bigger volumes too well.
I gave Fraudlifter a try early on — it was fine for simple campaigns, but once I tried scaling, it couldn’t keep up. Maybe it’s better now, but I wouldn’t rely on it for high-budget campaigns.
At the end of the day, even the best cloaker won’t save you if the rest of your setup is weak. Clean domains, good creatives, and solid accounts still make all the difference.
Adspect performs fairly well, especially for Meta, but I found TrafficShield to be more flexible overall. NoIPFraud was alright for lighter Google traffic, but didn’t handle bigger volumes too well.
I gave Fraudlifter a try early on — it was fine for simple campaigns, but once I tried scaling, it couldn’t keep up. Maybe it’s better now, but I wouldn’t rely on it for high-budget campaigns.
At the end of the day, even the best cloaker won’t save you if the rest of your setup is weak. Clean domains, good creatives, and solid accounts still make all the difference.
I used various cloakers but for FB and Google, TrafficShield has been working well for me — solid filtering, GCLID support, and stable uptime. Easy to set up and not overhyped. As for Fraudlifter, I tried it — decent on Facebook but hit-or-miss on Google lately. Some friends got flagged even with clean setups, so I’d say proceed with caution there.
discreet_advantage
BANNED
- Nov 4, 2024
- 307
- 40
In most cases, you don't need to cloak your website to solve the problem of ad blocking. That's because we run ads on websites selling cannabis or casinos without cloaking. We only mask the ads themselves.
There isn’t really a universal “best” cloaker for FB/Google — it really depends on your GEOs, vertical, and how much volume you’re pushing. Popular ones people mention are Adspect, TrafficShield, JCI, etc.
I’ve personally had better results with The White Rabbit (TWR) — it’s more automated than most, doesn’t require tons of manual filtering, and the pass-through rate is extremely high (99%+ in my experience). That makes a big difference when you’re scaling because you don’t lose traffic to false blocks.
As for Fraudlifter, feedback is mixed. Some affiliates say it works on a small scale, but I’ve also seen complaints that it hasn’t kept up with FB/Google updates and gets detected faster.
My advice: test small with whatever tool you choose, but if you want something consistent and less “hands-on,” TWR has been the most solid option for me so far.
I’ve personally had better results with The White Rabbit (TWR) — it’s more automated than most, doesn’t require tons of manual filtering, and the pass-through rate is extremely high (99%+ in my experience). That makes a big difference when you’re scaling because you don’t lose traffic to false blocks.
As for Fraudlifter, feedback is mixed. Some affiliates say it works on a small scale, but I’ve also seen complaints that it hasn’t kept up with FB/Google updates and gets detected faster.
My advice: test small with whatever tool you choose, but if you want something consistent and less “hands-on,” TWR has been the most solid option for me so far.
marketingotimizacaocam
Newbie
- Mar 26, 2026
- 1
- 0
eumao, pode em auxiliar a mexer ? te pago
There are some good cloakers available in the market. Some of them are jci, trafficshield, adspect, etc. I tried almost all of them. which one is good totally depends on the the vertical you are working and the scale of your campaign. one thing i'd like to suggest do not go after the marketing as i noticed some are costly but do not work well while some are working so good at a cheaper price. so do a proper research before choosing the one.
simobro
BANNED
- Apr 27, 2023
- 82
- 13
Currently, choosing ad masking software depends on your budget and technical skills. You can consider top names like JustControl.it and Adspect, two giants with massive IP databases and powerful bot filtering capabilities for both Google and Facebook. As for Fraudlifter, it's a tool that can filter fake clicks and protect your budget quite well. However, compared to Adspect or JCI, Fraudlifter focuses more on fraud prevention than on deep ad algorithm circumvention
LeadWhisper
BANNED
- Aug 11, 2025
- 20
- 7
Yep, cloakers aren’t magic for FB/GA—net results come from clean routing plus solid post-click flows. Some tools can help, but updates hit hard and results vary by niche. If you’re testing, start super small and be ready to pivot; don’t rely on one tool to carry a weak offer.
Bottom line, you can't make the money you want to make (100k+ / MO) without a cloaking system. These platforms are super-anal. by the book, politically "correct" nerds which don't allow you to be truly creative and stand out from the crowd. Most of these old old cloaking systems just have a lander their ad url comes in, couple of old school look ups, including but not limited to IP / User-Agent etc.... and then redirects to 1 of 2 different urls... a REAL OFFER AD (Lander) or the B.S. OFFER AD (Lander) THIS WILL NOT WORK ANYMORE FOR MORE THAN A COUPLE DAYS, IF THAT. Mine is far more superior than that and which is why it is impossible for them to catch and most likely has the nerds going more bald than they already are by pulling their hair out and smashing head on keyboard. Always looking to help out my fellow BH's... where I can. Feel free to ask questions with PM or on here... etc. There are some things I can't tell you because it is Proprietary knowledge / Design and skeery people wouldn't be happy LOL... but ill help where I can. Cheers.
nahid246
Registered Member
- Mar 6, 2023
- 98
- 12
I've tried ClickCease, AdSpy and TrafficGuard to hide ads or block fake clicks on Facebook and Google, they're currently top choices. Regarding Fraudlifter, I find it quite specialized in blocking fake clicks and filtering bad traffic. Its biggest advantage is its ability to analyze user behavior in real time to effectively block spam IPs, but the interface is a bit complex for beginners. If you're running a large budget, this is a worthwhile investment to protect your money from competitors engaging in unethical practices.