Google making Chromium block adblockers?



  • It does not matter - 30k or 150k.


  • Moderator



  • @Gwen-Dragon I would only believe/trust that google info [aka, propaganda?] if & when Devs like Raymond Hill give it the thumbs up... & i am not holding my breath.


  • Moderator

    @Steffie Yes, for me this Google mis-information is more to calm the angry users 😞



  • @Gwen-Dragon I don't see any misinformation.


  • Moderator

    @luetage Google says, the changes are for Privacy. But adblocker extensions like uBlockOrigin do not disclose information. That is what i mean by mis-information.



  • @Gwen-Dragon The changes in manifest version 3 overall are said to be for security and privacy. The netrequest api is only one of these changes. We may not like it, but it can't be said we are being misled, because everyone knows exactly what's going on.


  • Moderator

    @Gwen-Dragon Technically, Google was correct in what they posted, and it's certainly true that the webRequest API can be abused by bad actors. The misinformation is that they paint an overly rosy picture of Declarative Net Request and don't make any mention of the powerful capabilities that they will be taking away from content blockers.

    Sure, DNR still allows you to filter out content that you don't want. However, extensions that use wR (such as uMatrix) are powerful because they give you the ability to whitelist only the scripts that enable the site to run while also blocking tracking scripts, web analytics, pings, beacons, hyperlink auditing and other nasty stuff that can't be blocked reliably with DNR.

    So, Google's argument (that they're doing this to make us more safe) is totally bogus. Google is still allowing enterprise users to use webRequest so that they can be more safe... but Google is also not (as) interested in tracking the habits and activities of those that are only using the Internet for business purposes.



  • @dalinar youtube-dl + emby



  • There are approximately 5-6million users of ublock origin and if google makes the wrong decision then they will choose other non chromium browsers.Because google couldn't care less about it's users i expect firefox will gain a lot of extra users in the coming years.

    Having an adblocker within the browser will not cut the mustard because it will not have the great features ubo has.

    This proposed implementation is a clear anti-user stance and it's the google way or the highway.



  • So eventually people will be forced to use Hosts files to block ads, which is a pain, because those do not take wildcards.



  • The new API just limits the filterlist numbers.



  • i would gladly remove google too even from my tablet but i need some of their services that are all in one place, there isnt something else alike around, unfortunately.



  • @Priest72 said in Google making Chromium block adblockers?:

    The new API just limits the filterlist numbers.

    The problem with the new API (not finalized yet, though, if I'm not mistaken) is not the entry limit number, but crippled down algorithm.

    The developer of Ublock Origin, Raymond Hill, said (emphasis mine) [1]:

    "Key portions of uBlock Origin and all of uMatrix use a different matching algorithm than that of the declarativeNetRequest API. Block/allow rules are enforced according to their specificity, whereas block/allow rules can override each others with no limit. This cannot be translated into a declarativeNetRequest API (assuming a 30,000 entries limit would not be a crippling limitation in itself).

    There are other features (which I understand are appreciated by many users) which can't be implemented with the declarativeNetRequest API, for examples, the blocking of media element which are larger than a set size, the disabling of JavaScript execution through the injection of CSP directives, the removal of outgoing Cookie headers, etc. -- and all of these can be set to override a less specific setting, i.e. one could choose to globally block large media elements, but allow them on a few specific sites, and so on still be able to override these rules with ever more specific rules.

    [1] https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=896897&desc=2#c23



  • @JohnConnorBear said in Google making Chromium block adblockers?:

    Limiting the entries in the list is not a big deal because blocking by keywords is outdated.

    Exactly.

    Clever PR play from Google though, increasing the rule limit from 30 000 to 150 000 after the initial commotion. Masses (the "average users") understand numbers. "Google listens to their users, limits have been raised, all is well, no need to worry" 😁



  • @samuvuo This continues to be my abiding concern as well. IMO anyone focusing merely on the numbers has let themselves be gamed by gargle, coz that is simply missing the point. If the day comes that i can no longer use uMatrix in V & my other chromium browsers, then that'll be the day i uninstall them all & use only Firefox-Nightly... which of course itself is approaching a different kind of existential crisis. Sigh.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Vivaldi Forum was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.