uBlock VS adfilt

Check out uBlock Origin's per site switches [1]

[1]: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Per-site-switches#no-...

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...

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock

Or if on mobile, it is well worth it to look up adblock options for the browser you use.

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

> 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It's a little deceptive to claim that the concerns here are outdated and to point to vague terminology that sounds like it's correcting the problem, but on actual inspection turns out to be entirely separate functionality from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.

> "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)

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...

Keep in mind that neither of those lists are default lists and neither are maintained by the uBlock Origin team. Issues with those lists should be reported to their maintainers: - AdGuard URL Tracking Protection: https://github.com/AdguardTeam/AdguardFilters/issues - Actually Legitimate URL Shortener Tool: https://github.com/DandelionSprout/adfilt/discussions/163

Also, DDG Privacy Essentials, Privacy Badger and SmartHTTPS are redundant, you can remove them. (it's a similar story with ClearURLs if you add the Legitimate URL Shortener list to uBlock Origin)

ClearURLs for uBO (deletes tracking parameters on links and this solves the problem of Google, Amazon links being too long) Actually Legitimate URL Shortener Tool (same) I don't care about cookies (deletes the accept cookies screens and makes it look like you didn't answer the question, and some GDPR-compliant websites may interpret this as "So he/she doesn't want any cookies") If you want to explore more uBO filters you can check DandelionSprout's Github Repository

Also, FYI, ClearURLs for uBo is known to break some websites and even interferes with other similar lists (i.e. Legit URL, AdGuard URL Tracking Protection). If you still want to use this, then please report issues/ask questions at https://github.com/DandelionSprout/adfilt/discussions/163

Fixed in https://github.com/DandelionSprout/adfilt/commit/48d9f519661d996e1f4d09d33cfced391245c5f4. In the future, please report issues with Legit URL at https://github.com/DandelionSprout/adfilt/discussions/163 because: - this isn't an issue with uBo or it's filterlists - it was only luck that I saw this, and Imre (the maintainer) doesn't check Reddit. If you report it there, both of us get notified

It's included in some of uBO's filters, but if you want to add more, the main additional filter people are recommending adding is DandelionSprout's LegitimateURLShortener, which makes heavy use of removeparam. DandelionSprout also ported ClearURLs's rules to a uBO filter, although that one is more experimental.

It's not practical to mess with rules manually, uBO comes with many filter lists included that are not enabled by default, enable them if you want to; These lists are more than enough for most users, only add third-party lists if you need them (This is the only one I recommend).

Ok. If you have any problems, feel free to report them at https://github.com/DandelionSprout/adfilt/discussions/163 and DandelionSprout and me will try to help.

if it is gateway redirected (e.g. wait 5 sec. then click a button to destination) then use https://github.com/DandelionSprout/adfilt/blob/master/LegitimateURLShortener.txt on ublock origin

It's fixed in Actually Legitimate URL Shortener list: https://github.com/DandelionSprout/adfilt/commit/7e6fc4c