Why we introduced Ad blocker to Vivaldi browser
-
Do not even think about that, doing that would place you in much greater danger than a lack of specific content blocker would.
This is the common narrative "update or bad things will happen". Stop saying this. It is only 1/2 thrue if not less.
-
@jrucki said in Why we introduced Ad blocker to Vivaldi browser:
Do not even think about that, doing that would place you in much greater danger than a lack of specific content blocker would.
This is the common narrative "update or bad things will happen". Stop saying this. It is only 1/2 thrue if not less.
At a minimum, you must update according to those of Chromium to avoid "Browser outdated" messages, to correct reported bugs and incompatibilities, close security holes (daily there are more than 80,000 new viruses and exploits reported on the network) ....It is certainly not a catastrophe of not updating frequently, but highly necessary and recommended. Not to do so, apart from increasing the security risk, may worsen performance and with this the user experience.
Same with all soft and OS. -
@jrucki said:
This is the common narrative "update or bad things will happen". Stop saying this. It is only 1/2 thrue if not less.
Agree.
Plus it is definitely less, when you have a normal security setup in the browser (for the browser) and in the OS (for the rest, and generally). And in the own head ofc.@catweazle said:
Same with all soft and OS.
LOL, sorry dude but I disagree, you should say that to those who are using software that is no longer developed or the SW that has become shit/degraded in the newer versions, as well as to all the happy users of the beautiful and the best Windows version (Windows 7) who are detesting the ugly and the insecure/non-private/buggy Windows 10.
-
@Agych said in Why we introduced Ad blocker to Vivaldi browser:
@jrucki said:
This is the common narrative "update or bad things will happen". Stop saying this. It is only 1/2 thrue if not less.
Agree.
Plus it is definitely less, when you have a normal security setup in the browser (for the browser) and in the OS (for the rest, and generally). And in the own head ofc.@catweazle said:
Same with all soft and OS.
LOL, sorry dude but I disagree, you should say that to those who are using software that is no longer developed or the SW that has become shit/degraded in the newer versions, as well as to all the happy users of the beautiful and the best Windows version (Windows 7) who are detesting the ugly and the insecure/non-private/buggy Windows 10.
Wrong, Windows 7 is very good, true, Windows 10 by default has many functions that detract from privacy, it is also true. But, although it is not so easy to remove all these functions, it can and I have done it, now having Windows 10 with a much better and safer OS than 7, to start with the sandbox system that has to prevent malware from Affect the system, added with a Defender at the height of the best AV.
-
@catweazle said:
it can and I have done it
It can be done indeed, but not completely, only partly, since all this bunch of useless crap is in the heart of the OS.
I'm not even speaking about the ugly primitive flat UI which is also very hardly customizable in comparison to Windows 7 (where I actually don't need it that much, as the Aero and the 3D-style of everything looks beautiful already out of the box).
Oh, the forced uncontrollable windows updates - no comments, just facepalm.
All in one - "well" done M$.@catweazle said:
now having Windows 10 with a much better and safer OS than 7
Completely disagree.
It can be your opinion, but my opinion is strongly the opposite.
W7 is better in all aspects. Minor stuff W10 has better than W7 (task manager, copy-paste-move-delete dialog, etc) doesn't count here, given all the flows and deteriorations W10 has in comparison to W7.
And a lot of ppl think the same, as I've seen on the internet.@catweazle said:
added with a Defender at the height of the best AV.
Are you serious?
This is one of the worst AVs!
Both generally as well as privacy-wise (Windows 10!).
I would understand if you said that about Kaspersky or Bitdefender, but W10 Defender? O_o
That's an unexpected surprise to hear this i gotta say..
Btw AV is just one major security component, another one equally (if not more) important for privacy and security is a decent Firewall (like Outpost FW for example).
But this part requires skills/knowledge/experience to properly set it up use it and continuously update its config, therefore the vast majority just skips this part and sticks with the stock crappy Windows firewall in auto-mode, which is very bad and mostly useless. -
@Agych https://www.av-test.org/en/antivirus/home-windows/windows-10/february-2020/microsoft-defender-4.18-200515/
Windows 10 updates are fully configurable, when and what
-
@catweazle said:
@Agych https://www.av-test.org/en/antivirus/home-windows/windows-10/february-2020/microsoft-defender-4.18-200515/
Ok it might have been improved to some extend.
But:-
We should be (at least partly) skeptical about all these AV tests.
-
Even if we go with this site, check this:
https://www.av-test.org/en/antivirus/home-windows/
I counted 5 AVs scoring at 6 in all three aspects. And 13 with Protection score at 6.
MS Defender is in neither of those, so still not "at the height of the best AV", right? -
(Plus again, the Privacy flows, and given that Privacy is a "subset" of Security, it brings MS Defender even lower!).
-
-
@Catweazle said in Why we introduced Ad blocker to Vivaldi browser:
Wrong, Windows 7 is very good, true, Windows 10 by default has many functions that detract from privacy, it is also true. But, although it is not so easy to remove all these functions, it can and I have done it.
The thing is with W10 you can't be ever sure that you 've done enough so having to live with that thought alone makes it not worth using it. In other words I don't want my OS to oppress me if you get what I mean.
-
Results vary from month to month, both in the Defender and in others. The new Defender from Windows 10 was always in the group of the best. Adding the Sandbox system that adds even more security. MS has undoubtedly learned from the past as the main target of viruses.
-
@npro said:
The thing is with W10 you can't be ever sure that you 've done enough so living with that thought only makes it not worth using it.
Agree. One more point, to a whole collection of points heh.
-
@zakius: Too difficult. Look at the enormous amount of work gorhill has put into developing uBO over a period of years, and there are still fixes and enhancements being made on a daily basis. That would be a "side project" for Vivaldi that approaches the amount of effort expended on the main project (Vivaldi).
What they've done (with modest improvements over time) is likely good enough for most normal people.
-
@rseiler , Vivaldi adblocker is quite efficient at blocking advertings, where it still lacks is blocking trackers. At the moment I have parked uBO, but kept Privacy Badger for this reason
-
@Catweazle Even with your choice of three privacy-oriented blocking lists?
-
@rseiler at least with the Vivaldi adblocker I have not seen an ad until now, not even on YT and not on other sites either. The same at Vivaldi Mobile
-
From previous statements I was under the impression that Vivaldi would try to keep the old API alive. From this blog post now I have to conclude that this is not the case any more. I am not opposed to Vivaldi offering a built-in solution, if it provides the full level of control that I get with uMatrix:
- discriminating by type of request e.g. cookies/css/media/script/etc
- discriminating by domains
- user defined global rules
- user defined per site rules (with intuitive interface)
- visual aid (e.g. red background) warning of known trackers when selecting sources
so that i can e.g.
- globally disable cookies and script and all non 1st party domains
- per site: add domains and content/type combinations to make the site work
I am afraid that when Vivaldi disables the old API and uMatrix stops working, the built-in solution will not offer that level of control. Sadly I will have to change to Firefox then.
-
@CaptainD , I do not think it is necessary, it is true that the Vivaldi blocker is still in development and there are still extensions that you can use apart from the aforementioned Privacy Badger, Trace or ultimately CyDec, which turns Vivaldi into a Sherman tank. Blokada in Android also do a good work.
-
My main browser on Android is Firefox Beta with new UI + Ublock Origin.
I have also two Vivaldi versions installed and I am waiting for the Ublock Origin support.
-
@Stardust, even if Vivaldi Mobile in the future accepts uBO, I will continue to use Blokada as well, because the problem on Android is the same trackers at home from the installed apps (some of them - well, Google territory) and Blokada also cuts these, not only online .
-
Enabled the "Block trackers" already for a few days, and this is what I notice:
- The tracker protection often (almost always?) seems to result in blocking ads as well
- dnes.bg (a local Bulgarian news site) has 6-8 trackers blocked
- bbc.com has 6-8 trackers blocked
- cnn.com has 33 (!!!) trackers blocked
- One site told me "it seems you have an ad blocker, consider donating to us"
Is this "ad-devastating" effect really the one expected for "Block trackers"?
-
@vladimirg Yeah, it's expected. The ads being blocked are tracking ads, which come from blacklisted domains. In case of CNN it's likely that a single request is being blocked repeatedly over time and therefore the count goes up. You can see similar behaviour on many sites.