uBlock-Safari
Our great sponsors
standards-positions | uBlock-Safari | |
---|---|---|
178 | 45 | |
597 | 2,752 | |
1.7% | - | |
7.6 | 0.0 | |
2 months ago | over 3 years ago | |
Python | 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.
standards-positions
-
iOS404
You can check why Mozilla and Apple have opted to not support this.
https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/154
https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/28
Neither Mozilla or Webkit are satisfied that the proposal is safe by default, and contains footguns for the user that can be pretty destructive.
-
Show HN: DualShock calibration in the browser using WebHID
FWIW Mozilla updated their position on Web Serial API to "neutral" and clarified that they might be okay with enabling the API with an add-on.
https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/#webserial
Allowing serial but not HID would be really strange. With HID you get standard identifiers that let you filter out devices that are too dangerous for the web. With serial you get nothing. Even if you know a device is dangerous, there's no way to protect users from it.
-
Tailwind CSS v4.0.0 Alpha
Hasn't FireFox been dragging their asses on @scope? https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/472
It took years to just convince them of the need for it. And I'm not sure anyone got convinced vs Chrome had already shipped it and Safari has it planned so they caved in.
Hard to believe FireFox used to be a leader of the modern web.
-
An HTML Switch Control
As mentioned by others, OK idea, but not a fan that this isn't standardized. After a quick search+peruse, these seem to indicate that it's not around the corner either. Happy (/hope) to be corrected.
https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/4180
https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/990
-
Platform issues which disadvantage Firefox compared to first-party browsers
Mozilla's position on these specs is nicely outlined publicly and transparently as part of their standards-positions project: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/100
I'm kinda glad it's not implemented in my browser, to be honest, because the whole thing seems like a security nightmare.
It's a shame it impacts some hobby usecases, but I don't think this outweighs the reasoning set out on the GitHub issue.
-
What Progressive Web App (PWA) Can Do Today
This should have big warnings on it. Some of these are not web standards; they are features implemented unilaterally by Google in Blink that have been explicitly rejected by both Mozilla and Apple on privacy and security grounds.
Take Web Bluetooth, for example:
Mozilla:
> This model is unsustainable and presents a significant risk to users and their devices.
— https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/#web-bluetooth
Apple:
> Here are some examples of features we have decided to not yet implement due to fingerprinting, security, and other concerns, and where we do not yet see a path to resolving those concerns
— https://webkit.org/tracking-prevention/
This is Microsoft’s Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish bullshit applied to the web platform by Google. Google keeps implementing these things despite all other major rendering engines rejecting them, convinces people that they are part of the web, resulting in sites like this, then people start asking why Firefox and Safari are “missing functionality”. These are not part of the web platform, they are Google APIs that have been explicitly rejected.
-
Why Are Tech Reporters Sleeping on the Biggest App Store Story?
Is BLE a PWA requirement? I think they explained their position pretty well here, regardless of whether I agree:
https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/95#iss...
-
Reason to Use Firefox Is Sync That Works
I took a glance at Can I Use what the difference between the last public release of Firefox and Chrome is [1] and they don't really have that big of a difference in the eyes of normal use-cases? Some of these aren't implemented purely because of privacy reasons, the proposals aren't finished yet or complexity [2].
Why would Firefox need to change to Chromium engine? The only websites I notice that don't work with Firefox is because of user-agent targetting or just putting 5-second time-outs in Youtube code on non-chrome webbrowsers [3].
Can you give some examples of websites not working on Firefox?
[1] https://caniuse.com/?compare=chrome+120%2Cfirefox+121&compar...
[2] https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/
[3] https://www.neowin.net/news/youtube-seemingly-intentionally-...
- Mozilla's Position on CSS Scope
-
CSS Is Fun Again
Mozilla are dragging their heels on @scope:
https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/472
https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/ideas/implement-css-scope-rul...
Someone who clearly didn't get it was wasting three years time "well actually"ing everything. The latest news is "it's worth prototyping". Meanwhile Chrome has released it(steam rolled?) and Safari has it in tech preview.
I question if FireFox has the resources to keep up with the pace of the modern web.
uBlock-Safari
- Any way at all to run Ublock origin on any browser for an iPhone?
-
uBlock Origin Lite now available on Firefox
You are mistaken. Safari removed the APIs necessary for an uBlock port (there used to be one), see https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari/issues/158.
Injecting code via Web Extensions is too late for reliable blocking - by then, either the malicious JS you are trying to defuse has already ran (if it wasn't blocked declaratively), or if it hasn't, then the rest of the page's JS depending on it has already exploded and "fixing" it after the fact (by substituting a neutered shim via Web Extensions) doesn't fix the rest of the page.
-
uBlock Origin 1.49.2 Available as Thunderbird Add-On
It has been there but won't ever be again: https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari/issues/158
-
Are there any updates on Safari support?
Better to fork it and maintain as another project, like previous ublock's project on safari: https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari
- Firefox is the last bastion of pirate ad-free hope. Can Mozilla hold out?
-
The Triumph of Safari - 2022 was a transformative year for Apple’s browser
Brilliant move not supporting normal Webextensions though. https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari/issues/158
- Apple Safari browser plugin/extension architecture.
- Is Adguard pro a good safari extension?
-
DuckDuckGo for Mac beta now open to the public
Looks like the answer is no, Safari is not supported.
> ..as of 2022, uBlock Origin’s extension is available for several of the most widely used browsers, including: Chrome, Chromium, Edge, Opera, Firefox and all Safari releases prior to 13.
https://ublockorigin.com/
Explanation of the state of uBlock Origin (and other blockers) for Safari - https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari/issues/158
Apparently, the only WebKit-based browser that can run uBO is Orion browser (beta, Mac only).
https://browser.kagi.com/
-
How can one stop pop up tabs on the website Movies2Watch?
You probably can't. Safari crippled adblockers a while back. Here's a longer explanation from the developers of the best blocking extension.
What are some alternatives?
webcontainer-core - Dev environments. In your web app.
vimium - The hacker's browser.
WHATWG HTML Standard - HTML Standard
webextension-polyfill - A lightweight polyfill library for Promise-based WebExtension APIs in Chrome
wpt - Test suites for Web platform specs — including WHATWG, W3C, and others
firefox-ios - Firefox for iOS
WebKit - Home of the WebKit project, the browser engine used by Safari, Mail, App Store and many other applications on macOS, iOS and Linux.
ghostery-extension - Ghostery Browser Extension for Firefox, Chrome, Opera, Edge and Safari
Fakeflix - Not the usual clone that you can find on the web.
Retroactive - Retroactive only receives limited support. Run Aperture, iPhoto, and iTunes on macOS Sonoma, macOS Ventura, macOS Monterey, macOS Big Sur, and macOS Catalina. Xcode 11.7 on macOS Mojave. Final Cut Pro 7, Logic Pro 9, and iWork ’09 on macOS Mojave or macOS High Sierra.