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

µBlock dynamic filtering: default deny

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 87 posts

Re: µBlock dynamic filtering: default deny

#41

Post by gorhill »

wnevets wrote: post #32
mbil wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the "options" page for the Chrome extension there's a whitelist tab.

Does that whitelist the entire host? I would like to block everything but a specific JavaScript file on specific host. This is very easy to do with ghostery

> a specific JavaScript on specific host. This is very easy to do with ghostery

I don't see any feature to accomplish this with Ghostery. You can block hosts from its pre-built library of hosts, not more, and not at a higher granular level then whole hosts.

uBlock will report all hosts encountered on a page, not just those part of an internal database.

Re: µBlock dynamic filtering: default deny

#42

Post by kmfrk »

username223 wrote: post #33
kmfrk wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ghostery breaks so much stuff, I don't know how people can bother. I've found that Privacy Badger does a great job of blocking third-party tools in a way that rarely breaks anything - in which case it's easy to turn off. That and Ad Muncher for Windows.

The only really noticeable impact I've seen is that it blocks Disqus, which too many people seem to use for comments. That's usually not a problem, and I can always disable it in the rare cases where I really want to comment on something. What sites are breaking for you?

It's been a long time since I used Ghostery, but the most common problem were JS trigger events from clicking a button that didn't fire. It made it a bit of a pain to debug.

Re: µBlock dynamic filtering: default deny

#43

Post by gorhill »

lawl wrote: post #34
maxerickson wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a tiny little + by the "Requests Blocked" label on the Button panel. Click that. Then red the left side of the top five boxes (images and scripts and the like). If I understand correctly, it's not really a mode, it's just several broad filters. 0.8.5.7 on Firefox doesn't have an 'all' that I can see.

Oh, I see. I was under the assumption that these settings were still site specific, got it, thanks! Edit: Would be nice to be able to set those global settings once and not have them pop up on every page. And/or have a visual distinction between global and site specific rules, right now there is no option to globally disable images and then whitelist on a per site basis, right? I can just whitelist a domain which wil…

> right now there is no option to globally disable images and then whitelist on a per site basis, right

Yes you can, it's in the quick guide[1]:

> First column: what is to be dynamically filtered

> Second column: global dynamic filtering rules

> Third column: local dynamic filtering rules

[1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dynamic-filtering:-qu...

Re: µBlock dynamic filtering: default deny

#44

Post by ordinary »

lawl wrote: post #16

Okay, I'm probably stupid. This would allow me to throw away NoScript, Disconnect and Adblock. But I can't figure out how to enable deny by default mode?! (Yes I have advanced mode enabled)

I don't know if uBlock works the same way RequestPolicy does, but RP is not a replacement for NoScript. You may want to load images from a host but not allow that host to run Javascript or Flash: https://www.requestpolicy.com/faq.html#faq-noscript

Re: µBlock dynamic filtering: default deny

#45

Post by maxerickson »

bhouston wrote: post #29
gorhill wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using EasyPrivacy results in piwik being blocked, yes, regardless whether EasyPrivacy is used in uBlock, ABP, or whatever other blocker. I suggested you to bring the issue to EasyPrivacy maintainers if you think it's wrong[1], but by all appearances your grudge is solely aimed at uBlock. [1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues/564#issuecomment-70...

Easy privacy is not included as the defaults in other tools like abp. Thus ublock does differ here in a big way. By default ublock blocks piwik and abp doesn't. That is a major difference. Edit: why is a factual response down voted?

I downvoted you before you edited out the axe grinding.

Re: µBlock dynamic filtering: default deny

#46

Post by [deleted] »

bhouston wrote: post #29
gorhill wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using EasyPrivacy results in piwik being blocked, yes, regardless whether EasyPrivacy is used in uBlock, ABP, or whatever other blocker. I suggested you to bring the issue to EasyPrivacy maintainers if you think it's wrong[1], but by all appearances your grudge is solely aimed at uBlock. [1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues/564#issuecomment-70...

Easy privacy is not included as the defaults in other tools like abp. Thus ublock does differ here in a big way. By default ublock blocks piwik and abp doesn't. That is a major difference. Edit: why is a factual response down voted?

[deleted]

Re: µBlock dynamic filtering: default deny

#47

Post by vanderZwan »

Redoubts wrote: post #37
username223 wrote: post #14

Denying 3rd-party resources by default is nice, but definitely experts-only. Pages will break in weird ways when half their rat's nests of JavaScript are missing, and it will take some coding knowledge to figure out which parts are necessary. I may switch to this myself, but I think I'll keep telling friends and family to use Ghostery

Reminds me a lot of the first time using NoScript. Figuring out which domains added functionality, and which just unleashed another tree of third party domains that may or may not unlock the content. Fun, for certain definitions of the word.

It's really satisfying to see the websites load and render faster after you get it all set up though

Re: µBlock dynamic filtering: default deny

#49

Post by bmcd87 »

kmfrk wrote: post #24
username223 wrote: post #14

Denying 3rd-party resources by default is nice, but definitely experts-only. Pages will break in weird ways when half their rat's nests of JavaScript are missing, and it will take some coding knowledge to figure out which parts are necessary. I may switch to this myself, but I think I'll keep telling friends and family to use Ghostery

Ghostery breaks so much stuff, I don't know how people can bother. I've found that Privacy Badger does a great job of blocking third-party tools in a way that rarely breaks anything - in which case it's easy to turn off. That and Ad Muncher for Windows.

Ghostery developer here. As someone else pointed out, it's usually analytics tied to certain events like button presses, ads that trigger the main content to load after it shows, or fonts loaded from a 3rd party like Adobe that break sites. When we block the javascript and the developer didn't use a try/catch around that analytics/ad call, it breaks.

Most of the time there's no way around that breakage except by allowing the script (unless you use surrogates). So if Ghostery breaks the page and another blocker doesn't, usually that means that the other blocker is not blocking that script.

Adblock Plus lists, for example, contain extensive exceptions to allow scripts/ads on certain broken sites. This improves usability greatly and is a big reason some people are happy with ABP and not Ghostery. This isn't done in the most transparent way though, which leads to people unjustly accusing them of accepting money to allow ads when they find out about these exceptions. (This has nothing to do with the non-intrusive ads feature, which is a separate issue)

Re: µBlock dynamic filtering: default deny

#50

Post by nyolfen »

bdcs wrote: post #31
skrause wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never seen a single YouTube ad with uBlock and Chrome.

IME, youtube ads seem to come on dynamically, with dynamic amount of "forcible viewing" time, eg 5sec, 30sec, 60sec, etc. It does a pretty damn good job of showing me the most ad without my walking away in disgust. For example, I was on a binge of science videos and the ads went from 0 sec, to 15, to 30, in lock-step with my curiosity.

for me i've noticed they only show up on embedded videos on 3rd party sites
Post reply on HN