Firefox says it will keep supporting uBlock Origin even as Microsoft Edge and other Chromium browsers phase it out under Manifest V3.

  • black0ut@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    At a lower efficiency than before, and a lot of stuff now won’t get blocked because of the limit in definitions.

      • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        only ads on big sites or ads by big providers are blocked. cookie prompts and other annoyances much less, because there is a great variety of them. data mining and hardware fingerprinting cannot even be thwarted anymore.

        sure, if you only care about ads, but not at all about your privacy, it does not mean much to you. personally I would rather see ads (topic based) than give up my privacy, and the complete uBlock Origin is very useful for privacy too.

        • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          only ads on big sites or ads by big providers are blocked

          This is false.

          cookie prompts

          Not part of any adblocker. Some, like Ghostery, have a separate mechanism to auto-reject these. I switched from uBO to Ghostery because uBO wasn’t doing anything against those.

          data mining and hardware fingerprinting cannot even be thwarted anymore.

          That’s not an adblock feature and there are hundreds of other extensions that handle that, like PrivacyBadger. Ghostery says it also handles trackers, but I haven’t verified that.

          I would rather see ads (topic based) than give up my privacy, and the complete uBlock Origin is very useful for privacy too.

          Look up tools made specifically for it, then. Also: privacy related stuff is not affected by Manifest v3, no?

          • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            Not part of any adblocker. Some, like Ghostery, have a separate mechanism to auto-reject these. I switched from uBO to Ghostery because uBO wasn’t doing anything against those.

            this is false. and instead of just claiming so, here is proof: there are built-in (but disabled by default) blocklists specialized for cookie prompts and such

            That’s not an adblock feature

            and as I said, uBO is not just an ad blocker, so saying xy ad blocker can replace it well is false.

            and there are hundreds of other extensions that handle that, like PrivacyBadger

            except that not really. Because again, the required browser APIs were removed, and even before that, privacy badger was not so effective

            Also: privacy related stuff is not affected by Manifest v3, no?

            everything is effected that:

            • needs to block network requests, including loading of certain site scripts
            • depends on an up to date list of things to block
            • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              this is false. and instead of just claiming so, here is proof: there are built-in (but disabled by default) blocklists specialized for cookie prompts and such

              Let me rephrase then: cookie prompt blocking capabilities are not tied to the Manifest version (clearly, as exemplified by things like Ghostery). uBO could easily switch to Mv3 and still do those things.

              and as I said, uBO is not just an ad blocker, so saying xy ad blocker can replace it well is false.

              But we’re discussing the ad-blocking features, because these are the ones affected by Mv3, no?

              All these other features exist and are perfectly fine in other extensions.

              except that not really. Because again, the required browser APIs were removed, and even before that, privacy badger was not so effective

              Define “not so effective”. What’s “effectiveness” in this case?

              everything is effected that:

              • needs to block network requests, including loading of certain site scripts
              • depends on an up to date list of things to block

              OK, but again: what’s the difference for the end-user? Does it impact resources utilisation? Website loading times? Reactivity? I don’t see a difference in how my uBO browser behaves vs how my Ghostery browser behaves, so what am I losing because of the Mv3 switch?

              • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                15 hours ago

                Let me rephrase then: cookie prompt blocking capabilities are not tied to the Manifest version

                never said otherwise.

                But we’re discussing the ad-blocking features, because these are the ones affected by Mv3, no?

                no. that is not the only feature affected by Mv3. it is just the most noticeable feature affected.

                Define “not so effective”. What’s “effectiveness” in this case?

                ublock has many tools to defuse tracking mechanisms. it can fake browser mechanisms, it can stop scripts when they do a certain thing, it can replace entire javascript functions. it can modify outgoing network requests and incoming responses to them in many ways, which privacy badger does not implement. I don’t want to include multiple pages of text here, so please go through the wiki pages of the uBlock Origin github repository, because it details all the capabilities and technical details.

                but as even the main uBlock Origin maintainer says, the addon wouldn’t be worth anything without all the community sourced filter lists with quick fixes and specific blocking instructions for lots of websites. compared to that, privacy badger does not use filterlists. it can only do things that can apply to any website without breaking it, and that limits the options a lot.

                OK, but again: what’s the difference for the end-user? Does it impact resources utilisation? Website loading times? Reactivity? I don’t see a difference in how my uBO browser behaves vs how my Ghostery browser behaves, so what am I losing because of the Mv3 switch?

                I’m starting to think that you might be not arguing in good faith. but it is certain that we are going in circles and I’m wasting my time. you should look up the wast documentation of uBlock Origin and you will get all the answers, if you are genuinely interested. there are probably even technical comparisons between uBO and lite from the maintaners

        • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          Well, considering I’m using a different adblock and I just… Do not see any ads on the web, how do you measure the efficiency of uBlock to be better? Resource consumption?