brave-core
uBlock
Our great sponsors
brave-core | uBlock | |
---|---|---|
174 | 2,992 | |
2,303 | 43,007 | |
1.7% | - | |
10.0 | 9.9 | |
3 days ago | 5 days ago | |
HTML | JavaScript | |
Mozilla Public License 2.0 | GNU General Public License v3.0 only |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
brave-core
- GitHub pull request support for Brave Leo
-
Brave's AI assistant now integrates with PDFs and Google Drive
Unrelated but about Brave and interesting to me: I recently found myself having a large upstream project that I need to maintain some custom patches for, and there's a need for deeper customizations and I worry that my rudimentary system of applying .patch files will turn into an unmaintainable nightmare of merge conflicts after every rebase. I was thinking about possible solutions, and it occurred to me that Brave being Chromium-based must have this same challenge but an order of magnitude more difficult, so I looked for their code to see how they solved this issue.
It's pretty interesting! They do basically the same thing for core Chromium, applying a (big) set of patches[1].
Incidentally, I'd be interested to hear any ideas/approaches to this problem. I'm guessing if there was something clearly better, Brave would be doing it, but it seems like there should be a better way even if I can't think of one.
[1] https://github.com/brave/brave-core/tree/master/patches
-
Brave browser simplifies its fingerprinting protections
https://github.com/brave/brave-core/pull/13737
(Incidentally, that PR number is not quite elite. :)
-
Brave appears to install VPN Services without user consent
I disagree that it's lip service Brave has a ton of engine level privacy patches https://github.com/brave/brave-core/tree/master/patches
To my understanding you can't match it with just js extensions.
Only firefox on the highest security mode comes close I think?
Or ungoogled chromium? (brave has most of their patches IIRC)
Are there other options that have this number of patches?
- With the merge of this pull request, Brave Browser disables WebEnvironmentIntegrity
-
Brave cuts ties with Bing to offer its own image and video search results
Chromium is not 100% Google's forever and always, though they do currently lead the way, and with the most used/backed fork.
https://github.com/brave/brave-core/pull/19476
- With merge of this pull request, Brave Browser disables WebEnvironmentIntegrity
-
Brave is a fork, not a Chromium reskinn
They have much more changes than just compile flags. Here's the repo where they maintain their patch set: https://github.com/brave/brave-core/tree/master/patches
-
Brave Ads are back? Even when they're turned off?
Brave Private Ads toggle controls just Push Notification ads at this time. So, if you are still seeing Push Notification ads, that would be incorrect. However, it's normal to still see New Tab Page image ads, and/or other ad formats. We are introducing a new UI that helps you better toggle on/off specific ad units, and removing the "Brave Private Ads" toggle that can be confusing: https://github.com/brave/brave-core/pull/18938
-
brave browser Dark mode in settings not saving on newest LinuxMint
Yes, being fixed. Github at https://github.com/brave/brave-core/pull/18922
uBlock
- Apr 24th is JavaScript Naked Day – Browse the web without JavaScript
- Mobile Ad Blocker Will No Longer Stop YouTube's Ads
-
Some notes on Firefox's media autoplay settings in practice as of Firefox 124
Check out uBlock Origin's per site switches [1]
[1]: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Per-site-switches#no-...
-
Brave's AI assistant now integrates with PDFs and Google Drive
If ads, in particular on YouTube, are the problem, anything Chromium-based is probably only going to get worse and worse (see [1] and [2]). So that basically leaves you with Firefox and Safari.
I work for Mozilla (speaking for myself, of course), so I'll leave you to guess which I'd recommend :P
[1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...
[2] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/09/googles-widely-oppos...
-
X.org Server Clears Out Remnants for Supporting Old Compilers
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock
Or if on mobile, it is well worth it to look up adblock options for the browser you use.
-
Mozilla thinks Apple, Google, Microsoft should play fair
What are the compelling advantages of Chrome nowadays?
Chrome is working to limit the capabilities of ad blockers:
https://www.malwarebytes.com/blog/news/2023/11/chrome-pushes...
Whereas a compelling advantage of Firefox is that uBlock Origin works best in Firefox:
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...
Advertising networks have often been vectors for malware. Using an ad blocker is an important security measure. Even the FBI recommends ad blockers:
https://www.malwarebytes.com/malvertising
https://theconversation.com/spyware-can-infect-your-phone-or...
https://www.ic3.gov/Media/Y2022/PSA221221?=8324278624
-
Brave Leo now uses Mixtral 8x7B as default
> It allows for 30,000 dynamic rules
That is not what we mean by dynamic filters. From https://developer.chrome.com/blog/improvements-to-content-fi...
> However, to support more frequent updates and user-defined rules, extensions can add rules dynamically too, without their developers having to upload a new version of the extension to the Chrome Web Store.
What Chrome is talking about is the ability to specify rules at runtime. What critics of Manifest V3 are talking about is not the ability to dynamically add rules (although that can be an issue), it is the ability to add dynamic rules -- ie rules that analyze and rewrite requests in the style of the blockingWebRequest permission.
It's a little deceptive to claim that the concerns here are outdated and to point to vague terminology that sounds like it's correcting the problem, but on actual inspection turns out to be entirely separate functionality from what the GP was talking about.
> Giving this ability to extensions can slow down the browser for the user. These ads can still be blocked through other means.
This is the debate; most of the adblocking community disagrees with this assertion. uBO maintains a list of some common features that are already not possible to support in Chrome ( https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b... ) and has written about features that are not able to be supported via Chrome's current V3 API ( https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-as... ). Of particular note are filtering for large media elements (I use this a lot on mobile Firefox, it's great for reducing page size), and top-level filtering of domains/fonts.
- uBlock Origin – 1.55.0
-
In 2024, please switch to Firefox
> "Its happened before"
> That's not an argument
It's a subheading to "2. Browser engine monopoly". The subsection's purpose is describing how bad things were during the IE monopoly to reinforce that it's something to be avoided.
> in fact you could counter-argue that IE left a lot of technical debt
That would be agreeing with the article, unless I understand what you mean.
> On top of that, the internet was very different back then.
In a way that now makes it harder for truly new competing engines to pop up due to increased complexity of the web.
> I'm still not convinced, why would I change my browser?
The points made in the article are:
* Increased privacy, opposed to willingly giving your data to an ad-tech company
* Helps avoid a browser engine monopoly which would effectively let Google dictate web standards
* It’s fast and has a nice user interface
Onto which I'd add:
* Content blockers work best on Firefox (https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...), doubly so when Manifest V3 rolls out
* Allows more customization of interface and home page
* UX improvements, like the clutter-free reader mode, aren't vetoed to protect search revenue as with Chrome (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37675467)
-
Ask HN: Is Firefox team too small to do serious security tests?
Advertising networks are vectors for malware:
https://www.cisecurity.org/insights/blog/malvertising
https://www.malwarebytes.com/malvertising
https://theconversation.com/spyware-can-infect-your-phone-or...
So if you're concerned about security then you want the browser with the best ad blocker.
uBlock Origin works best in Firefox:
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...
What are some alternatives?
ungoogled-chromium - Google Chromium, sans integration with Google
VideoAdBlockForTwitch - Blocks Ads on Twitch.tv.
Vanadium - Privacy and security enhanced releases of Chromium for GrapheneOS. Vanadium provides the WebView and standard user-facing browser on GrapheneOS. It depends on hardening in other GrapheneOS repositories and doesn't include patches not relevant to the build targets used on GrapheneOS.
Spotify-Ad-Blocker - EZBlocker - A Spotify Ad Blocker for Windows
iceraven-browser - Iceraven Browser
bypass-paywalls-chrome - Bypass Paywalls web browser extension for Chrome and Firefox.
brave-browser - Brave browser for Android, iOS, Linux, macOS, Windows.
duckduckgo-privacy-extension - DuckDuckGo Privacy Essentials browser extension for Firefox, Chrome.
uBlock-issues - This is the community-maintained issue tracker for uBlock Origin
ClearUrls
fingerprintjs - Browser fingerprinting library. Accuracy of this version is 40-60%, accuracy of the commercial Fingerprint Identification is 99.5%. V4 of this library is BSL licensed.
AdNauseam - AdNauseam: Fight back against advertising surveillance