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

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

  • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    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.xyzEnglish
      1·
      3 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.worksEnglish
        1·
        1 day 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.xyzEnglish
          1·
          8 hours ago

          ublock has many tools to defuse tracking mechanisms (…)

          Fair. What I still don’t understand is the level of impact this has. Considering I’m not being tracked in any noticeable way, or that I’m not seeing any ads, I just don’t get why people in this post are acting like uBO being blocked is a significant downgrade to the user experience.

          I’m starting to think that you might be not arguing in good faith.

          Sounds like someone not arguing in good faith would say, if anything. How is me trying to understand the impact of the mechanisms used by uBO vs those used by, say, Ghostery, "arguing in bad faith? WTF are you talking about?

          you should look up the wast documentation of uBlock Origin and you will get all the answers

          I will not. Because I get the technical details, a bunch of people already talked about them here. But nobody was able to tell me what do these features actually do compared to other adblocks.