Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

System-wide open source ad blocker for Mac, Windows, and Linux

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 173 posts

Re: System-wide open source ad blocker for Mac, Windows, and Linux

#31

Post by BowBun »

develatio wrote: post #15
exitzer0 wrote: post #9

It is just not wise to allow some random application to MiTM your SSL traffic.

If you can read the code and asure that the traffic won’t be sent to a malicious third party, why not? What is the concern?

No one will do this, and those that read source code during installation do not review it for every upgrade. It's one of those 'just do this!' arguments that has little to no basis in reality. There's more of them replying to the parent comment: "Just do this! Just compile a thing! Just verify signatures for every update!". Come on... Meanwhile the negatives immediately implicate anyone with access to the executable.

You don't know this person, and I see no personally identifiable information to make me trust them. They could literally be a state actor right now! We've also seen so many large supply-chain attacks over the last decade which could easily target a tiny project like this.

I agree with the parent - not wise.

Re: System-wide open source ad blocker for Mac, Windows, and Linux

#32

Post by themerone »

jmvoodoo wrote: post #22
sedatk wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you know if the binary was built from the code verbatim? How would you know that for future updates?

The build steps are provided as a GitHub action in the repo. You can audit the build pretty easily, or if you're super paranoid you can build it yourself by following the build steps.

Even if the app is trustworthy, it still adds an attack vector to your system. It could have a bug, or the certificate could be exploited by another program.

Re: System-wide open source ad blocker for Mac, Windows, and Linux

#33

Post by anticorporate »

tejohnso wrote: post #16

I'm comfortable with a DNS based blocker (pi-hole) and it seems to work quite well. Bonus: It works across all devices on the network, rather than installing something onto the OS.

I seem to end up regretting anything I do at the network level to block traffic. It always seems to pop up that one weird time I actually do need something from a blocked domain to load, and it takes me way too long to remember that's what I did to block it.

Re: System-wide open source ad blocker for Mac, Windows, and Linux

#36

Post by scosman »

tejohnso wrote: post #16

I'm comfortable with a DNS based blocker (pi-hole) and it seems to work quite well. Bonus: It works across all devices on the network, rather than installing something onto the OS.

+1

I connect to mine over tailscale DNS.

I recommend adding a tray icon that disables it for 60 seconds (super helpful for the odd site that serves something critical from an ads domain… like my bank).

Only downside is apps don’t have to use system DNS and a few mobile ones are wise enough to bypass.

Re: System-wide open source ad blocker for Mac, Windows, and Linux

#38

Post by AshamedCaptain »

newcool1230 wrote: post #23
notfed wrote: post #19

Why would anyone need to block ads outside of the browser? This seems like it's just asking to introduce obscure errors into other apps?

I meaning Microsoft is trying to introduce ads into the file explorer and search centers...

which I really doubt are serving through http(s), making this quite useless for that...

Re: System-wide open source ad blocker for Mac, Windows, and Linux

#39

Post by develatio »

BowBun wrote: post #31
develatio wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can read the code and asure that the traffic won’t be sent to a malicious third party, why not? What is the concern?

No one will do this, and those that read source code during installation do not review it for every upgrade. It's one of those 'just do this!' arguments that has little to no basis in reality. There's more of them replying to the parent comment: "Just do this! Just compile a thing! Just verify signatures for every update!". Come on... Meanwhile the negatives immediately implicate anyone with access to the executable.…

But doesn’t that apply to chromium / firefox as well (or any other big application). Web browsers are insanely huge, nobody is reading the entire code. What makes this different?

Re: System-wide open source ad blocker for Mac, Windows, and Linux

#40

Post by 1231232131231 »

BowBun wrote: post #31
develatio wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can read the code and asure that the traffic won’t be sent to a malicious third party, why not? What is the concern?

No one will do this, and those that read source code during installation do not review it for every upgrade. It's one of those 'just do this!' arguments that has little to no basis in reality. There's more of them replying to the parent comment: "Just do this! Just compile a thing! Just verify signatures for every update!". Come on... Meanwhile the negatives immediately implicate anyone with access to the executable.…

If you really wanted/NEEDED this, you could definitely go through all the code. It would take a bit, but it's doable with determination (lol). Also, you don't have to necessarily review all of the code every update. All you have to do is view the changes/new commits every time you want to update.

The hardest part is determining that you want to go through all of this hassle to replicate something browser extensions already do (for the most part).

Post reply on HN