[HN Gopher] uBlock Origin 1.48 adds readiness status, code viewe...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       uBlock Origin 1.48 adds readiness status, code viewer, and other
       fixes
        
       Author : rc00
       Score  : 303 points
       Date   : 2023-03-21 16:28 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
        
       | gred wrote:
       | var internetExperience = uBO ? Experience.NICE :
       | Experience.DIE_A_LITTLE_INSIDE;
       | 
       | var internetSafety = -10;
       | 
       | internetSafety += windows ? -5 : 3;
       | 
       | internetSafety += uBO ? 4 : -9;
       | 
       | internetSafety += uMatrix ? 13 : -99;
        
         | 0l wrote:
         | uMatrix is redundant with uBO Dynamic filtering:
         | 
         | https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dynamic-filtering:-qu...
        
           | yborg wrote:
           | I just wish it used the uMatrix UI, which I think was easier
           | to parse, at the cost of much more space of course. But I
           | have plenty of room on my desktop display.
        
       | VWWHFSfQ wrote:
       | why on earth would they add their own beautifying code viewer to
       | the extension. this thing has become bloat city
        
         | gorhill wrote:
         | This is an auxiliary tool, it does not affect uBO's efficiency
         | when not using the auxiliary tools (logger, viewers, etc.) You
         | won't find a leaner content blocker than uBO CPU- and memory-
         | wise, by quite a good margin, and this new auxiliary tool
         | changes nothing about this.
         | 
         | Being a volunteer filter list maintainer is a thankless and
         | time-consuming task, and when I myself investigate filter
         | issues, I repeatedly have to go through the same steps which is
         | looking at the source code of pages and JS resources, which
         | most often are minified, and it's also difficult to navigate
         | between the different resources back and forth. If you want to
         | understand the benefits, I suggest you regularly try to
         | contribute to filter lists.[1]
         | 
         | * * *
         | 
         | [1] https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/issues
        
           | throitallaway wrote:
           | You help make the Internet more usable and less dangerous for
           | countless people every day. This isn't to mention the real
           | world impact of less power usage due to fewer assets being
           | transferred and rendered (or executed.) Thank you!
        
           | oriettaxx wrote:
           | Thank you soooo much!
        
           | ycombinete wrote:
           | Thank you for everything that you do with Ublock Origin.
        
           | beardog wrote:
           | Thank you for all your efforts!
        
       | joshspankit wrote:
       | With the Code Viewer, uBlock may (un?)intentionally win a
       | separate war: one where pages are acting against users who open
       | the inspector.
       | 
       | Source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35235732
        
       | clircle wrote:
       | Pro tip: if you are concerned that you are spending too much time
       | reading the internet, just uninstall ublock. You'll be so
       | disgusted by the current state of affairs that you'll want to
       | spend as little time online as possible.
        
         | vmoore wrote:
         | I've been using uBo since the start. Went to use the web
         | without it and it was like using the web naked. It didn't feel
         | right.
        
         | kgwxd wrote:
         | Every time I setup a new OS and forget to install uBO, I'm
         | instantly reminded when I go anywhere but HN. Then I feel like
         | I have to wipe the harddrive again just to be sure I'm not
         | infected with something after the exposure.
        
         | A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
         | My work does not filter anything ( it won't let me use some
         | websites, but will happily let me see ads for new yard gizmos )
         | so the few times I actually am forced to look for something on
         | work PC, it is a quick reminder why I bother doing all the
         | things I do.
        
         | shuntress wrote:
         | Pro Tip: That's why you need to pay for what you read.
        
           | yieldcrv wrote:
           | I bit the bullet and subscribe to Bloomberg, WSJ and NY Times
           | which is a good mix of center, moderate-right and left
           | 
           | and this is far improved my experience. it makes me sad that
           | people arent/cant get these articles and have this other
           | rage-bait experience, but I'm glad I opted out of that crap
        
             | petodo wrote:
             | anyone visiting HN should be able to install Bypass
             | paywalls chrome clean and uBlock origin
        
               | yieldcrv wrote:
               | none of which work for the default mobile browser, or
               | those service's associated mobile apps
               | 
               | and there's an experience beyond archive.is
               | 
               | moving on
        
           | Kye wrote:
           | I'm not going to subscribe to some random regional newspaper
           | to read one article. And some of the most egregious
           | advertising implementations don't come with a way to pay to
           | make it go away, like Fandom.
        
         | agumonkey wrote:
         | ad agencies: caring about you since -oo
        
         | samstave wrote:
         | HOLY CRAP! this is a good statement.
         | 
         | As someone who has sat in front of a computer daily for nearly
         | 30 years, this really hit me.
         | 
         | I am REALLY good at maintaining a no-ad/no-spam experience for
         | my self with high-density-information content, that I almost
         | never see ads.
         | 
         | My viewing is clean, I have never been accidentally rick-
         | rolled, I have never seen TG1C, TubGirl, etc... no Ogrish or
         | other crap...
         | 
         | I am my own 'curator'
         | 
         | -
         | 
         | But yeah - if you dont take time to set mental-health-
         | boundaries against the internet - then the internet is the same
         | as the experiments when they just plugged in a machine (win98?
         | xp? cant reacall) - pwnd in matter of minutes.
         | 
         | Thats the same as your mind.
         | 
         | put mental firewalls up.
         | 
         | Be open to positive content, but destroy negative impacts on
         | your mental health with impunity.
        
         | warner25 wrote:
         | Yeah, I've said before that whenever my wife wants to show me
         | something from the web on her laptop, I blown away by how bad
         | it is. The experience in her browser (Chrome with all defaults,
         | usually on ad-supported social media or puzzle or pop culture
         | news sites, or shopping sites) is like being assaulted to me.
         | 
         | Of course the other thing that's been happening is that most of
         | it isn't "reading the internet" anymore; it's all watching
         | short-form videos (also laced with ads).
        
           | nicoco wrote:
           | Not installing ublock on your wife's laptop? Why are you so
           | cruel?
        
             | medo-bear wrote:
             | i think that is grounds for divorce
        
             | jjoonathan wrote:
             | The real difficulty hurdle isn't installing it (or having
             | someone install it), the real hurdle is when it breaks
             | something important and you have to realize that Ad Block
             | belongs on the suspect list and you have to know how to
             | disable it, reset cookies, and try again.
        
               | 12345hn6789 wrote:
               | This basically never happens if you're using default
               | config uBlock origin
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | thrwy_ee_custmr wrote:
               | Happens occasionally. It is uncommon but happens enough
               | to ruin the day of unsuspecting users.
               | 
               | For example, go to https://community.ee.co.uk/t5/My-EE-
               | app-and-website/EE-Site-... and search for "Adblocker" in
               | this page. You will find a story where their mobile
               | service provider blacklisted their IP because they
               | clicked on a button on the website while their adblocker
               | was enabled.
               | 
               | Exactly the same thing happened to me with the same
               | mobile service provider except that I was using uBlock
               | origin when my mobile service provider blacklisted my IP.
               | 
               | Bank websites sometimes breaking in the presence of an
               | adblocker is a common occurrence in many parts of the
               | world.
               | 
               | You live in one geography and you visit websites that you
               | need in your life. Do not assume everyone else is having
               | the same experience as you. Websites breaking in the
               | presence of adblockers is a real thing that sometimes
               | makes us hesitate to install it on the browsers of our
               | friends and family who may not be as tech savvy as we
               | are.
        
               | Shared404 wrote:
               | My no contract phone provider is broken by adblock, and
               | will shadow ban my IP temporarily if I forget to entirely
               | disable it and then grant all permissions the site
               | requests.
               | 
               | I still install uBlock Origin on most of my friends
               | computers, but make sure they know to open any sites that
               | break in a private tab.
        
               | kleiba wrote:
               | Yeah, except that has never happened to me in 20+ years
               | of using ad blockers.
        
               | ktta wrote:
               | Never? So many news websites detect adblocker use and
               | stop you from reading the article till you disable it
        
               | 411111111111111 wrote:
               | It depends on how strongly you filter.
               | 
               | The default rules probably won't cause issues, but you'll
               | still see a lot of ads. As you optimize these away,
               | things start breaking
        
               | hiccuphippo wrote:
               | I feel like it's not that it never happens to me but that
               | I quickly leave and forget the site that blocks me. Non-
               | survivorship bias.
        
               | bennysonething wrote:
               | I just use Firefox with unblock for general browsing.
               | Chrome if I'm trying to buy something and I need the page
               | not to break.
        
             | warner25 wrote:
             | I've offered, but she declined. She really likes sales and
             | coupon offers, extensions for cash-back that are based on
             | tracking, etc. Someone else said it best about their spouse
             | on another thread:
             | 
             | "...whenever a website doesn't work for any reason I get an
             | earfull about my 'damn adblocker'..."
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30150762
        
               | vuln wrote:
               | x3
               | 
               | "I like the ads." - Wife
        
           | nvr219 wrote:
           | I would highly recommend installing pihole at home.
        
       | sciencesama wrote:
       | wish we can use ublock as a proxy to do a network wide adblock !
        
         | oriettaxx wrote:
         | I love this one https://github.com/pi-hole/pi-hole
        
         | skrause wrote:
         | I used https://www.privoxy.org/ around 2002-2005, before
         | adblockers as browser extensions existed. Proxy based
         | adblocking was much easier when basically no website used SSL.
        
       | shoffmeister wrote:
       | uBlock Origin is what makes the Internet usable.
       | 
       | I am saddened that I do not know how to best express my gratitude
       | towards gorhill, and the filter list maintainers, for their
       | incredibly valuable, tireless work, so "Thank you, so, so much!"
       | will have to do here.
       | 
       | It's only thanks to uBlock Origin, I believe, that my parents (of
       | rather old age) are able to make positive use of the Internet. A
       | world without uBlock Origin would see them drowning in an
       | onslaught of noise, attacks, flashing attention-grabbing spam,
       | none of which improves the quality of their lives.
       | 
       | So, thank you, thank very very much, gorhill, and the filter list
       | maintainers!
        
         | vmoore wrote:
         | uBo is great, but can sometimes break sites who ask you to
         | 'disable your AD blocker to view this page'. That's rare
         | though, but it does happen.
        
           | gorhill wrote:
           | By default we defuse such anti-blocker. If it happens, it's
           | just a matter of reporting it to filter list maintainers. The
           | more people report issues, the better the default filter
           | lists get.
           | 
           | Also, a common cause of such anti-blocker walls is the use of
           | other content blockers beside uBO, as this often breaks uBO's
           | own anti-blocker mechanisms -- we often resolve such issues
           | by asking people to disable other content blockers.
        
             | kgwxd wrote:
             | My solution is to leave the site :) and then add the domain
             | to an add-on I made for myself that hides any links to it,
             | on any page, any where.
             | 
             | I was hoping uBO would eventually get a dedicated feature
             | like that, I don't think it's possible with filters. I
             | tried pretty hard. I think knowing anyone could decide to
             | completely erase a domain from their entire internet
             | experience, down to the link level, would motivate sites
             | not to do stupid things like this.
        
               | mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote:
               | I would totally use that add-on if you were interested in
               | maintaining it as a publically available add-on.
               | 
               | Does it just strip out the <a> tag?
        
               | kgwxd wrote:
               | It is in the official extension repository [1]. I had to
               | put it there because of how difficult/impossible it is to
               | run a local extensions. But it's definitely not designed
               | for general use. I'll be glad to guide you if the tiny
               | amount of help I've included isn't enough.
               | 
               | The source [2] is available too.
               | 
               | The actual idea of the extension is "Style stuff using
               | regular expressions". So you specify a regex; what to
               | search, attributes and/or text (text can cause a lot of
               | undesired results so I don't use it much); and css styles
               | to add to the elements containing matches. I only really
               | use it to apply visibility: hidden to any element with an
               | attribute matching one big regex that's basically just a
               | bunch of domains regex |'d together. The example in the
               | options UI is what I'm still using years later, I've just
               | added more domains.
               | 
               | EDIT: I just realize the example has "searchText" set to
               | true, you'll probably want to set that to false.
               | 
               | To give you some idea of how user unfriendly it is,
               | configuration is JSON in a textarea and the regexs are
               | defined in a string in that JSON, necessitating the use
               | of many backslashes for escaping from both regex and
               | strings. It's basically brainfuck :)
               | 
               | I originally started with just taking out tags but that
               | idea was quickly shot down. Lots of links aren't <a>
               | tags. Sometimes the domain being linked to is buried in
               | some JS in a onX event attribute, or some data-* attr
               | that the UI framework uses and a bunch of other oddities.
               | So the code searches all attrs. It's not super efficient
               | but I've never noticed it causing a slow down.
               | 
               | Another problem is, often, the original request doesn't
               | even contain the links, they're loaded after. So it uses
               | a MutationObserver and looks at the new elements for
               | matches.
               | 
               | [1] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ssure/
               | 
               | [2] https://github.com/7w0/ssure/blob/master/content/cont
               | ent.js
        
               | gorhill wrote:
               | > I don't think it's possible with filters
               | 
               | We constantly create filters for detection issues[1].
               | Filter list maintainers have a lot of experience on how
               | to work around such issues, with solutions that are often
               | not obvious to people that are less familiar with
               | filtering capabilities and syntax. The only way to know
               | for sure whether it can be addressed is by reporting it.
               | 
               | * * *
               | 
               | [1] https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/issues?q=is%3
               | Aissue+...
        
         | BystanderX wrote:
         | Donate to the filter list maintainers if they accept it.
         | 
         | https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Why-don%27t-you-accep...
        
         | unity1001 wrote:
         | > I do not know how to best express my gratitude towards
         | gorhill
         | 
         | Them opening a Patreon and you patronizing them would work
         | great. And ensure the continuity of the project.
        
       | foepys wrote:
       | I somewhat wished that when Chrome switches to manifest v3,
       | uBlock Origin would stop supporting Chrome and its clones.
       | 
       | Firefox is the only browser where uBlock Origin is actually
       | working as intended, Chrome on the other hand (even in manifest
       | v2) is blocking so many features that uBO isn't actually able to
       | work as a privacy and anti-malware tool. CNAME uncloaking is
       | essential because websites can counter any filter rule by just
       | aliasing the Google Analytics domain but Chrome doesn't have an
       | API for that. Instead you need a gigantic list of filter rules,
       | one for each domain, making loading web pages slower.
       | 
       | uBO is even slower in Chrome because Chrome doesn't allow
       | extensions to use wasm.
       | 
       | https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...
        
         | sharps1 wrote:
         | uBlock Lite is already in testing.
         | 
         | https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ublock-origin-lite...
         | 
         | EDIT: Discussion from 6 months ago
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32911640
        
           | tyingq wrote:
           | I wished it had been named "uBlock Neutered" or something
           | that more strongly highlighted the relationship to uBlock
           | Origin.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | bornfreddy wrote:
             | Or uBlock Chrome Edition. When it doesn't work as good as
             | uBO on FF, let it be known whose fault it is.
        
               | dpkirchner wrote:
               | uBlock Reduced Functionality exclusive to Chrome
        
               | favaq wrote:
               | Chrome will still be faster even if ublock doesn't block
               | as much as FF does. In fact the new declarative filters
               | will most likely be faster than the current ones.
        
               | tyingq wrote:
               | In the same way that a car is faster if you make it
               | lighter by removing parts that aren't technically needed
               | to drive down the road :) Airbags, ABS, Crossmembers?
               | Meh.
        
         | therealmarv wrote:
         | There is a solution for Chromium based browsers:
         | 
         | https://github.com/brave/adblock-rust
         | 
         | but you will only have it built-in in Brave currently.
        
         | charcircuit wrote:
         | >CNAME uncloaking is essential
         | 
         | >Chrome doesn't have an API for that.
         | 
         | It rolled out a year ago.
         | 
         | https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=115104...
         | 
         | >Chrome because Chrome doesn't allow extensions to use wasm.
         | 
         | Chrome doesn't allow loading remote web assembly in mv3
         | extentions. You can't run remote javascript either. It's fine
         | if you bundle the wasm with your extension.
        
       | jhoelzel wrote:
       | I can not even thank the existence of this project enough!
       | 
       | the simple improvement in internet speed is well worth it, even
       | though i do too have a pihole running.
       | 
       | Sometimes when i visits friends i barely recognize sites that i
       | use frequently.
        
         | pkulak wrote:
         | I just run AdGuard Home network wide and have never seen a huge
         | need to run a browser blocker as well. What are you getting out
         | of using both?
        
           | kgwxd wrote:
           | The ability to leave the house for one :)
        
           | babypuncher wrote:
           | DNS-based ad blockers only block connections to domains known
           | to serve ads.
           | 
           | A browser-based blocker is able to block ads served by the
           | same domain as the content you actually want, without
           | blocking said content. They are also able to apply fixes to
           | pages that break or have bad layouts when ads fail to load
           | in.
        
           | tedivm wrote:
           | UBO catches things for me that Adguard doesn't, so having
           | both is pretty useful to me.
           | 
           | UBO also blocks harmful elements inside of a page, not just
           | page loads. I've used it to automatically remove the annoying
           | paywalls that are just an element over the text I want to
           | read.
        
           | asdff wrote:
           | I block all sorts of stuff thats not even ads. Stuff like
           | "suggested for you" sidebars on websites I frequent I will
           | just right click and block. All sorts of stuff. If I don't
           | use it, no need to load it next time, so out it goes.
        
           | ycombinete wrote:
           | Is Adguard better than Pihole? I always thought that adguard
           | were baddies, but maybe I'm conlflating them with another
           | product...
        
             | zwog wrote:
             | Maybe you are confusing AdGuard with AdBlockPlus? The
             | latter[1] and the parent company Eyeo GmbH have some points
             | of criticism.
             | 
             | AdGuard is basically pi-hole, just with different pre-
             | configured filter lists and especially child and parental
             | control settings. IIRC, some services can also be blocked
             | there directly, Instagram for example.
             | 
             | 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adblock_Plus#Controversies
        
           | throitallaway wrote:
           | A concrete example here is YouTube. I also run AdGuard Home,
           | but that does nothing for YouTube ads. Firefox + uBlock kills
           | them.
        
       | Dwedit wrote:
       | Unfortunately, uMatrix (the other gorhill project) has bad bugs
       | on Firefox.
       | 
       | When you navigate to another page, it will sometimes get the host
       | for a web request wrong, causing it to apply the wrong rules for
       | that request. This can cause you to lose your login cookies. And
       | since uMatrix has been discontinued, so there's no more central
       | repository to collect bug fixes.
       | 
       | A fork is available called nuTensor which does resolve the cookie
       | clearing problem, but I often see hosts that are not part of the
       | current page (they were from the page I was previously viewing)
       | appearing on the grid.
        
         | yborg wrote:
         | >This can cause you to lose your login cookies
         | 
         | Huh, so that was why that was randomly happening. Sigh, I
         | totally understand gorhill not wanting to have to support
         | another overlapping tool, but uMatrix is unparalleled for
         | visualizing the sheer mass of privacy vampirism on the modern
         | Web. I've learned a lot from using it on sites, and am now kind
         | of a cottage expert on CDNs thanks to determining the minimum
         | whitelisting to get a site's basic functionality to run.
        
         | Semaphor wrote:
         | Do you have an example of how one can test that? Or be more
         | specific? I don't remember ever encountering any issue like
         | that, but that might simply be because I didn't know about that
         | bug.
        
         | userabchn wrote:
         | I believe uMatrix development was discontinued a few years ago,
         | so it is not surprising that it doesn't work reliably anymore.
        
           | eshack94 wrote:
           | Correct, it was discontinued awhile ago, sadly. I loved that
           | project.
        
             | tgv wrote:
             | Me too. I still use it.
        
       | msla wrote:
       | This is uBlock Origin. uBlock is, sadly, a separate project.
        
         | codetrotter wrote:
         | Yep. Title should be: uBlock Origin 1.48.0 Adds Readiness
         | Status, Code Viewer, and Other Fixes
         | 
         | uBlock Origin is the good one
        
           | baal80spam wrote:
           | I knew uBlock Origin was "the good one" but I didn't know its
           | repo is called uBlock, it's quite confusing. Can you rename
           | repos in github?
        
             | Arnavion wrote:
             | >Can you rename repos in github?
             | 
             | Yes you can, and GH sets up an automatic redirect from the
             | old name to the new name (as long as you don't create a new
             | repo with the old name).
        
             | Atlas22 wrote:
             | If i recall correctly, they have the same name because they
             | were once the same project. Renaming would likely break
             | many workflows/bookmarks that people use to tell the
             | difference. Maybe mirroring the existing repo to another
             | with origin in the name would be a compromise?
        
             | masfuerte wrote:
             | It is confusing. I find it easier to remember that gorhill
             | is the good guy.
        
               | dizhn wrote:
               | To make things even more confusing gorhill is actually
               | the creator of the original ublock too.
        
               | codetrotter wrote:
               | The way that I recall it is like this:
               | 
               | gorhill created uBlock.
               | 
               | After some amount of time gorhill found that the uBlock
               | project was taking up too much of his time.
               | 
               | gorhill handed over the uBlock project to someone else.
               | 
               | That other person or other group of people took the
               | uBlock project in a direction that gorhill did not agree
               | with.
               | 
               | gorhill decided that because of this, he should continue
               | to maintain a version of uBlock.
               | 
               | Thus was born uBlock Origin.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Ah ok, we've put Origin in the title above. Thanks!
        
       | princevegeta89 wrote:
       | Does anyone know if there is a way to sync settings/filters
       | across multiple uBlock Origin installations? I use a ton of
       | browsers and find the manual export/import to be a hassle.
        
         | rmkrmk wrote:
         | I think there's a setting to enable cloud storage, so as long
         | as you're logged into Firefox Sync/Chrome it can be synced but
         | has to be triggered manually to sync/merge the filter lists.
        
           | princevegeta89 wrote:
           | Is it possible to sync between Firefox, Chrome, Brave, Edge?
           | I assume we're limited to the same browser only though?
        
             | gorhill wrote:
             | Yes, same browser since uBO just uses the
             | `browser.storage.sync` API.[1] The sync storage is quite
             | limited but uBO compresses the data to make the most of the
             | limited storage.
             | 
             | * * *
             | 
             | [1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Add-
             | ons/Web...
        
           | frereubu wrote:
           | I've got that set up, but it doesn't seem to work:
           | https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Cloud-storage I've
           | followed the steps carefully a coupe of times, but still no
           | luck. The page does include the caveat "Cloud storage
           | services offered by specific browser vendors have limitations
           | and quirks and are out of the control of uBO" which seems to
           | be the case for me.
        
             | neurostimulant wrote:
             | Your list/filters is probably too large.
             | 
             | > If syncing is enabled, the data is synced to any Chrome
             | browser that the user is logged into. If disabled, it
             | behaves like storage.local. When the browser is offline,
             | Chrome stores the data locally and resumes syncing when
             | it's back online. The quota limitation is 100 KB approx, 8
             | KB per item. Consider using it to preserve user settings
             | across synced browsers.
             | 
             | https://developer.chrome.com/docs/extensions/reference/stor
             | a...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-03-21 23:01 UTC)