Live data from Hacker News

AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

adguard.com

261–270 of 371 posts

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#261
Correction:

Analytics & Ad Blocker by Globemallow.io https://globemallow.io/ was the first Manifest v3 Ad Block extension.

I first published on 06/22/2022.

Last night actually I asked if AdGuard would want to license the software, and sent them a link to my extension. They are aware they weren't the first, and made this post after knowing it.

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#262
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, the extinguish phase, of EEE.

Firefox did them a favor by trashing the extension ecosystem that had put the pressure on Google in the first place.

https://cdn.fosstodon.org/media_attachments/files/108/556/56...

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about simply not supporting chrome. I believe some responsibility for this lies with us developers. It was developers who made extensions for chrome. We as technologists recommended chrome to our friends and families. Without us chrome would likely not be in the position it is today and google could not dictate the terms like they do. Maybe it is time that extension authors abandon ship, and we recommend alternat…

Not recommending Chrome is the way to go. There was a time where developers only tested against IE, built features on top of IE, and there didn't seem any way to defeat the garbage associated with IE. But people recommended Firefox anyway for most browsing since it was a better experience on the open web. Eventually it up ended the dominance by giving a better browsing experience except when forced to use IE through…

This. While I appreciate the work AdBlock does, supporting MV3 is ludicrous. If no ad block extension supported it, it would be dead on arrival - with Chrome too (if Google tried to force it). Just let it be, fire up your Firefox and browse freely.

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sort of boycotting will only work when widely supported by both developers and users and this is not the case. Despite all the public outcry and news outlets telling that the end is near, it didn't affect the Chrome's share. > Without us chrome would likely not be in the position it is today and google could not dictate the terms like they do. I kind of disagree with this. Google Chrome's current popularity stan…

If suddenly there was no ad blocking available on Chrome cold turkey we would see nearly all users who are accustomed to an ad free experience go looking for a new browser. Coordinate this with a marketing blitz from Firefox and essentially you can take nearly all the Chrome ad block users and turn them into Firefox users. And from there it's word of mouth even from the non-techies. Good ad blocking is an essential p…

If the serious ad-blockers would stop supporting chrome, then all the shady freemium/quasi-malware stuff would be more than happy to be the only option. Most people don't "really" choose their browser, they just use what someone (or themselves years ago) installed for them. The main reason for chrome's shares is google's search&android domination and how hard they pushed it.

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sort of boycotting will only work when widely supported by both developers and users and this is not the case. Despite all the public outcry and news outlets telling that the end is near, it didn't affect the Chrome's share. > Without us chrome would likely not be in the position it is today and google could not dictate the terms like they do. I kind of disagree with this. Google Chrome's current popularity stan…

If suddenly there was no ad blocking available on Chrome cold turkey we would see nearly all users who are accustomed to an ad free experience go looking for a new browser. Coordinate this with a marketing blitz from Firefox and essentially you can take nearly all the Chrome ad block users and turn them into Firefox users. And from there it's word of mouth even from the non-techies. Good ad blocking is an essential p…

they're not stupid enough to block it all at once

MV3 will slowly make adblocking more and more useless, like boiling the frog

at which point most people who formerly used adblockers will become accustomed to the ad-infested web again

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't trust Mozilla. They continually make changes against the interests of the computer literate, they continually screw with the UI, they continually take control away from the user, they are literally in Google's pocket, and their own attempts at fundraising put the lie to their claims about privacy.

I don't understand this reasoning. On one hand everyone complained that Firefox was to slow to bloated could be brought down by extensions etc. and moved to chrome because it was faster. Then Firefox implemented changes to make it faster, isolate extensions etc. and everyone complains that they killed them off and doesn't think of the users. Now we have the situation that people say they can trust Mozilla, because of…

Chrome is not to be trusted; this I agree with. Chromium forks on the other hand, like brave or vivaldi, have none of these problems. The former has already committed to not implementing this garbage restriction on blockers. Chromium's engine is solid from a technical standpoint and doesn't have any inherent privacy issues aside from being owned by Google engineers.

If it sounds like I'm holding Firefox to a higher standard, I am. Their own positioning in their own marketing is based on a moral stance on privacy and "empowering the user". They have demonstrated that this stance is held out of marketing convenience rather than sincerity.

Chrome is the devil you know, you know it is made by an ad company, is filled with tracking, and will always act to support that. Firefox is… Not who they make themselves out to be. That's almost worse in a way.

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about simply not supporting chrome. I believe some responsibility for this lies with us developers. It was developers who made extensions for chrome. We as technologists recommended chrome to our friends and families. Without us chrome would likely not be in the position it is today and google could not dictate the terms like they do. Maybe it is time that extension authors abandon ship, and we recommend alternat…

I think you are right. It's not worth it. I just switched to Firefox. I'm typing this on Firefox. I used to use Ungoogled Chromium.

Welcome! :)

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#268
post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is objectively less safe to use the web without an ad blocker.

Then it is a good thing that MV3 doesn't prevent ad blockers as demonstrated by AdGuard having made one.

> as demonstrated by AdGuard having made a crippled one.

Fixed that for you.

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Manifest V3 is a horrible attempt to kill adblocking I really don't understand the push of MV3. I don't believe they're just for security as Google claimed but at the same time I feel thinking it's "just" to ruin ad blocking is equally baffling. Could someone who is more involved elaborate the nuance of (intent of) MV3?

I've talked to a number of real engineers within Google. The folks building the browser have no desire to kill adblocking; they're never going to include first-party adblocking (not least of which because antitrust), but they're not out to break third-party adblockers. It really is the case that the same mechanisms that enable adblockers ("this extension may affect your traffic on every website") are also the mechani…

have you heard of "plausible deniability"?

I very much doubt the upper management is stupid enough to tell the grunts that they're doing this to kill off adblockers

they know there will be intense regulatory scrutiny on this at some point in the future

the true factors that went into this decision will have been discussed verbally and in-person only

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#270
post #77

Manifest v3 is going to be a slaughter. Extension developers have known the slaughter was coming, but Chrome users are going to be taken by surprise. Many free Chrome extensions aren't going to get updated at all for v3, because it's too much work. Many aren't going to work right anymore because of the new restrictions. And ad blocking aside, v3 seems like a nightmare in general, and still quite buggy. The service wo…

NGL, I did find MV3 harder to implement against. Not because of the declarative model alone, but because the declarative model's rules are under-documented.

Can you replace an image URL fetched remotely with an image stored in the extension itself (via rewriting the URL from a remote fetch to a file fetch)? Maybe? No, because redirection from remote URLs to file URLs trips the resource fetch security model independent of anything else, except a developer has no reason to believe that security model applies also to extensions?

Testing against the declarative model feels very wild west and since it isn't just JavaScript, I can't just slap the debugger on it and introspect all the data going back and forth.

Post reply on HN