Manifest v3 update: Vivaldi is future-proofed with its built-in functionality

Ascaris

FWIW, for those who say Vivaldi is too small a team to keep Manifest V2 active in Vivaldi... consider that when Firefox dropped the XUL/XPCOM addon APIs in 2017, Waterfox dev Alex Kontos managed to keep backporting the Mozilla update patches to the Firefox 56 (the last non-Quantum Firefox) code base for five years for Waterfox Classic, as it was renamed) before it became too different from the current Firefox LTS code base for a one-man dev team to handle. Kontos did this while also developing Waterfox Current, which became Waterfox G, which is Waterfox built on the current Firefox LTS base.

The difference between the Firefox code base that completely dropped XUL/XPCOM extensions and one that did not is surely much greater than that between Chromium with Manifest V2 and Manifest V3.

If any other Chromium-based browser that is fully open source does preserve Manifest V2, Vivaldi can simply incorporate those patches directly.

As for the repo that would serve all of the V2 addons... it's not a hurculean task either. For those addons that do not require Manifest V2, the existing Google Web Store will continue to suffice.

There was a third-party addon repo for Waterfox Classic and Pale Moon (which both could use legacy XPCOM/XUL addons after Firefox dropped them) when I last used Classic. Such a repo could (like development of the patches that restore Manifest V2) even be a joint venture between various downstream derivatives of Chromium.

It has always been known that Google does not develop Chromium to serve our needs as web users. They develop it to serve their own needs, and it is likely that this move to limit effective adblocking was part of the goal from the moment they decided to begin the Chrom* development. Chromium is open source, but that does not imply that the development is in any way a community effort, or that anyone's input as to the direction of development will be given an audience.

If Google can simply wave a hand and dictate that maximally effective adblocking is prohibited in Chromium and the Chrome Web Store, and that command is effectively passed on to all of those downstream competitors of Chrome, whether they like it or not, then it really won't matter that the code is open source. Google gets its wish, and they do so while having the handy excuse about Chromium being open source if any government should decide to investigate them for antitrust concerns.

That has probably been the bet from the day they Google decided to make a new browser. They've been playing the very long game here, with the ability to reshape the entire web to serve their corporate interests being the real impetus behind developing Chromium at great expense, then giving it away (in source form as well as in the Chrome product). It's very much the same goal Microsoft had in mind when they developed Internet Explorer at great cost, then gave it away (free as in beer), at a time when it was the norm for browser software to cost money.

Was Google right in assuming that open-sourcing Chromium would not prevent them from having the ability to mould the web to fit their corporate interests? For decades, closed-source shops like Microsoft have acted with total hostility and fear when it comes to open source software, as if even a slight bit of their code being leaked would instantly result in their demise. Google bet on the premise that this is not the case at all, that they could give away nearly all of the source code (the bit that turns Chromium to Chrome is closed source), making them seem like good guys, while still maintaining the same level of control that Microsoft sought decades ago.

Were they right? It's up to devs of Chromium-based browsers to decide.

KaKi87

Adblockers aren't the only extensions affected by the removal of Manifest v2 : Violentmonkey, Redirector, LibRedirect, Hover Zoom+, etc...

So, advertising your adblocker instead of working on preserving Manifest v2 isn't gonna cut it.

supermurs

I have noticed that Adguard is no longer blocking advertisements on YouTube. I have the same filters applied as previously when it was working fine.

If it is working for anybody else, please share what filters you have applied.

What's strange is that uBlock Lite is working fine with YouTube though.

luetage

@supermurs The internal blocker blocks youtube ads successfully too currently. Has been this way for a couple of months.

Catweazle

@luetage, yes, it does a good job, but the difference to uBO is, that the Vivaldi blocker is often detected by YT, which launch it's "adblocker not allowed bla, bla" pop-up. Because this you need also one of the embed redirect scripts to watch the Video.

luetage

@Catweazle I don’t use any of these scripts.

supermurs

@luetage said in Manifest v3 update: Vivaldi is future-proofed with its built-in functionality:

@supermurs The internal blocker blocks youtube ads successfully too currently. Has been this way for a couple of months.

Awesome!

Would you mind sharing the lists you have subscribed to with the internal blocker?

I've tried it but for me the ads still come on YouTube. I'd love to use only the internal blocker with no additional extensions.

luetage

@supermurs See https://forum.vivaldi.net/post/802536 and https://forum.vivaldi.net/post/360089.

supermurs

@luetage

Thanks, I'll give these a try!

Catweazle

You can try also this one

https://oisd.nl/setup/vivaldi

supermurs

@Catweazle

Thanks, I added https://big.oisd.nl and cleared the browser caches.

Catweazle

@supermurs, as said, works flawless, but for YouTube you need to install also the Embed Redirect script, because YouTube discover that you are using an adblocker. In this case you can open the Video embedded in a new tab if it appears blocked.
You can install the script direct as extension, downloading it in a folder and dragging it on the extension page in dev mode. The one from Kraust is the smallest with only 5 lines of code and works fine.

Catweazle

Another nice site for adblock sources, it even permits to generate specific adblock lists

https://blocklist.sefinek.net

supermurs

@Catweazle

Thanks, I installed the script too and will do more testing.

One thing I noticed is that I see links to sponsored videos on YouTube's front page, screenshot below:

Do you know if these could be blocked?

Catweazle

@supermurs, well, adblocking in YT is a continuos battle and not perfect possible with the Vivaldi blocker, but at least promotional videos on the frontpage also don't bother. Annoying are only the ads in the video, which are skipped by Vivaldi.

supermurs

@Catweazle

Yes, blocking the ads on the videos is most important!

crevilla

This post is deleted!

supermurs

I found a userscript which removes those sponsored videos!

https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/523868-youtube-cleanup

fires3as0n

So, starting from June 2025 I should disable my Vivaldi updates to keep myself free from ads? Obviously, all those talks about manifest v3 security is a lie, and its only purpose is to limit adblockers. Since google can not deal with youtube adblockers in any other way.

Hadden89

@fires3as0n you can try ubo lite or adguard which are already mv3.

The native blocker might fail on YouTube and blocking updates is not a good solution in the long term (you will banned from sites)