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

Firefox is now the last major browser that still supports uBlock Origin

pcworld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 752 posts

Re: Firefox is now the last major browser that still supports uBlock Origin

#571

Post by jimmydorry »

inigyou wrote: post #455
jimmydorry wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're saying that because Google didn't completely up-end the security model and break almost every extension in the one-go, we should have no-progress towards a more secure extension model? uBlock Origin via declarative blocks is almost as powerful as the original. While I would trust gorhill with almost unfettered control over my browser, I don't trust EVERY extension owner (no do I trust uBlock Origin in perpe…

We should have the option to limit an extension to certain tabs or websites or at least windows, and extension authors should also have the option to specify that. An adblocker, by its nature, needs to access *. But Return YouTube Dislike could statically specify that it will only run on youtube.com, and that's fine. But the option to enable access to * is essential.

>An adblocker, by its nature, needs to access *

Well that's what is in contention. Does everything claiming to be an adblocker really need access to *? Is Adblocker5++ (totally not malware) entitled to as much access as uBlock Origin? You can declare upfront all the URLs you don't want accessed (which on top of security gives a substantial performance boost), and who's to say someone won't figure out a better way of working within these constraints?

Re: Firefox is now the last major browser that still supports uBlock Origin

#573

Post by antics9 »

2b3a51 wrote: post #337
zaik wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> move to a shack in the woods That's what gemini:// is for.

And Dillo is the equivalent of a shepherds hut in the back garden.

It’s remarkable functional.

I’ve gone weeks using no other browser than Dillo. Usually also disable CSS for most sites.

Built in custom CSS for all sites is also a treat.

Re: Firefox is now the last major browser that still supports uBlock Origin

#574

Post by jimmydorry »

simonra wrote: post #371
jimmydorry wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a big step forward, towards a better security model, was overall a good thing, even if it meant that a good extension no longer had unfettered access to everything your browser saw. I don't think this change is ridiculous at all. And I don't want them to stop here either! v4 should close more of the avenues that malicious extensions are abusing! Extensions should declare everything up-front, so it's easy see…

How do you secure against the system vendor (in this case the browser) limiting what the consumer/user can or can't do (alone or with the help of third parties) with the product after acquiring it though? After all security for individuals against commercial and otherwise organized interests is one of the, if not the most important security after life and health. Even if one values the market overall for financial re…

>How do you secure against the system vendor (in this case the browser) limiting what the consumer/user can or can't do (alone or with the help of third parties) with the product after acquiring it though?

If you don't like what a browser is doing, then move to another one? You're acting like you have spent a tonne of money on buying Chrome. Even if that was the case, it's not a clear case of an anti-user behaviour. There is a good reason to deprecate the webRequest API, and we'll see more browsers move towards that in the future (Safari has had declarative blocking for many years now, I believe).

>preventing modifications (and thus also repairs) is anti-competitive

There is nothing stopping someone from forking a manifest v2 version and maintaining it. I'd argue this can't be compared to any company actually doing anti-competitive things (e.g. tractor company, printers, ice cream machine companies, etc.)

Re: Firefox is now the last major browser that still supports uBlock Origin

#575

Post by jimmydorry »

AnonymousPlanet wrote: post #437
matheusmoreira wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Then they had to make up some reasons to justify that Hate to be the one to defend Google here, but the reasons weren't that unreasonable. I want my browser to prevent random extensions from directly reading web page data. The declarative API idea is pretty good. It's just that uBlock Origin is so insanely useful, important and trusted, it should get full access to the entire browser regardless. Honestly, it should…

If you look at all the threat vectors of a browser from a user perspective, a rogue extension is well at the lower end. If you look at the threat vectors for the revenue of a company like Google, extensions that aren't limited by the browser are pretty much number one. This should tell you everything you need about the matter.

If you've run a site with CORS reporting enabled, you'd see that a significant fraction of your userbase have malware extensions running (prior to manifest v3). I was absolutely shocked when I looked at the logs a decade ago, and I bet the problem is far worse these days with the proliferation of malware buyouts of legit extensions.

Google has no shortage of options for serving up ads that can't be blocked by normal ad blockers across all their properties (youtube, search, etc.). They in-line the ads these days! And if they really cared about the fraction of a fraction of a percent of people that even install any kind of adblocker, they could make the served ad content un-blockable by serving it the exact same as the content.

Re: Firefox is now the last major browser that still supports uBlock Origin

#576

Post by brycewray »

Macha wrote: post #412
ololobus wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m a huge fan of Mozilla and Firefox specifically, but I don’t think that the way classical adblock extensions are made is the right way. Instead, it should be done as Apple/Safari do it [1]: the browser provides an API to hook/set a block list of identifiers that should be blocked, it could be resource hostnames, html signatures, need to think how to improve the API, but this way it’s completely safe, extension has…

One of my biggest annoyances about my iPad is how much less effective the content blockers on Safari are than on real Firefox and ublock origin that I have on my Android phone and had on my previous windows tablet. Also iOS “Firefox” can’t run any adblockers, whether ublock origin or iOS content blockers so I have to use Safari and put up without consent-o-matic or tab sync For example, ublock origin is able to patch…

You might want to try wblock (https://github.com/0xCUB3/wBlock).

Re: Firefox is now the last major browser that still supports uBlock Origin

#577

Post by dismalaf »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #43
avaer wrote: post #32

What's funny is that extensions were supposed to be a way to let you do the things the browser didn't want you to do. Guess that was a bit too much freedom for Google to accept, so they had to make a store with a gate, and destroy the APIs so that they're useless. Then they had to make up some reasons to justify that and ram it through the pipeline despite everyone's objections, and the frog got boiled. Now we're bac…

> Then they had to make up some reasons to justify that Hate to be the one to defend Google here, but the reasons weren't that unreasonable. I want my browser to prevent random extensions from directly reading web page data. The declarative API idea is pretty good. It's just that uBlock Origin is so insanely useful, important and trusted, it should get full access to the entire browser regardless. Honestly, it should…

> Honestly, it should be literally built into the browser instead of being a mere extension

Aaaand that's why I'm using Vivaldi over here (which has a built-in adblocker).

Re: Firefox is now the last major browser that still supports uBlock Origin

#578

Post by bossyTeacher »

The title misses something more important: Firefox is and has been for a very long time the only browser who wasn't made by people trying to extract profit from you.

Everything follows from this. Edge people, Chrome people have been living in a fairytale for believing that the keepers of their portal to the web were offering a product as complex and expensive as a browser without asking for anything in return.

Anyone knows that any company that gives you something for free will eventually want something from you. You accepted a free browser from a for-profit entity and paid nothing. Now, Faust has come to collect your soul.

Re: Firefox is now the last major browser that still supports uBlock Origin

#579

Post by AstralSerenity »

inigyou wrote: post #151
rwz wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean sure, but there's a bit of a difference between "sells data to no one really knows who" and "sells data to no one really knows who AND PALANTIR" which the original commenter seem to be flagging as a problem.

"no one really knows who" is probably also Palantir or someone who resells to Palantir.

From what I know personally, Firefox truly is responsible with user data. Though -- to steel man your point -- all the data Firefox sells is through their subsidiary Anonym, which goes through great lengths to anonymize all user data that can't be tied to any individual.

Example: selling market preferences of a town rather than the individual people in it.

Re: Firefox is now the last major browser that still supports uBlock Origin

#580

Post by thisislife2 »

Larrikin wrote: post #183
swed420 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You know you can make a browser based on Firefox's core If you want to inherit all of Firefox's flaws, I suppose. > and don't need to make a new one from scratch that'll never get past Cloudflare? Considering Cloudflare is a sponsor of Ladybird, something tells me they're going to grant an exception for it.

What flaws exactly? People on here love to moan about Firefox because Mozilla did one thing at some point in the existence of the company they didn't like. But then just cede the Internet to Google and chromium clones because at some point when they were a crappy junior JS dev, Chrome had some better tooling over Firebug so they just got used to testing in one browser. Maybe they also like to remember how Firefox, a…

> What flaws exactly?

It's not modular, for example. You can't just use the Gecko engine in your project. To do so, you have to deal and hack through the whole codebase of the Firefox browser.

Post reply on HN