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

AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

adguard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 371 posts

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

#81

Post by ameshkov »

gorhill wrote: post #71

One of the stated goal of MV3 by Google[1] was to avoid extensions with broad permissions: > our new declarativeNetRequest API is designed to be a privacy-preserving method for extensions to block network requests without needing access to sensitive data This MV3-based AdGuard extension still requires a broad permission to "read or modify host data" on all sites[2]: "host_permissions": [ " " ], So what you have now i…

All true, and we (content blockers devs) were saying this all for years, since MV3 was first announced. MV3 brings very little (if any) privacy and security enhancements, this is for the future MV4 when extensions will be dumbed down to sets of declarative rules.

We'll now need to rely on Chrome team for implementing what we need. But they do it painfully slow or not do at all.

Also, where will we get the new ideas if every browser follows that path? Take Safari for example, every little improvement that we requested [1] was inspired by what we already did in other browsers long ago.

Anyways, a working content blocker on MV3 is possible. I even think a casual user won't feel much difference. But there is a big difference under the hood and to feel the consequences we have to wait a few years.

[1]: https://bugs.webkit.org/ (search for those reported by @adguard.com). Just a very small part of what we requested was implemented, content blocking is not a priority I guess, and it won't be a priority for Chrome.

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

#82

Post by Multicomp »

gnomewascool wrote: post #51
Multicomp wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox is building MV3 and while they are coy with deprecating MV2, we all know, c'mon, they won't keep MV2 even a day after their minimum year promised. Their track record speaks against them. XPCOM extensions? Killed, but don't worry, we will re-implement all the needed APIs as WebExtensions (didn't happen). Fennec to Fenix mobile extensions? Killed, you get these 10 blessed ones, don't worry, we will eventually r…

I also was and still am disappointed about both changes, but I don't think you're being at all fair to Mozilla. In both transitions, Mozilla made sure to support the needs of both uBlock origin and NoScript, extending the webextension API (such that uBlock origin on Firefox is more capable than on current Chromium) and working with uBlock to make its interface more mobile-friendly. They also extended the webextension…

> I don't think you're being at all fair to Mozilla

> In both transitions, Mozilla made sure [to keep top popular addons mostly happy and ensure adblockers are happy]

Those are all fair points, and yes, I was probably too harsh with my language overall, that post written before I was corrected that Mozilla was not developing MV3 the same as Google was.

I stand by my strikes that Mozilla did kill XPCOM, and failed to deliver their promise to release all addons to Fenix on shipping stable versions. They don't even enable about:config on stable Fenix to enable power users to workaround that limitation.

In short, I believe I was 60% fair in my opinion.

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

#83

Post by Dalewyn »

bambax wrote: post #7

> By releasing an extension built with Manifest V3 today — first among developers of ad blockers – we can say that we've met the challenge that Google posed to us. They shouldn't do this IMHO. Manifest V3 is a horrible attempt to kill adblocking (under the banner of "security", as always). But, the web is completely unusable without adblocking. If there are no more (effective) adblockers for Chrome, users will franti…

>there are many: Firefox and Brave to mention just two.

So just Firefox and then all the Chromes?

There really aren't "many" alternatives, there isn't even /an/ alternative because Firefox suffers from Mozilla Misguidance(tm).

Presumably the same people who bitched about the IE6 monopoly brought on and fully embraced the Chrome monopoly. We now all get to sleep in the Chrome bed.

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

#84

Post by Multicomp »

groovybits wrote: post #41
syrgian wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the summary. I had perceived the betrayal but I had never organized the thoughts nor verified the claims. What do you think is the future (+2 years) for people with hatred for ads? For now I am using Firefox on computer + Kiwi in Android, but I also expect those two to go awry in the mid term. * I see that after the edit, it doesn't look as bleak for Firefox PC. But what about Android?

> What do you think is the future (+2 years) for people with hatred for ads? DNS-based blocking

I don't know. I'm using it now in the form of pihole, but DoT/DoH with ESNI are coming, and we don't have a good way to ID and block them by their very nature, which is the bad edge of the double-edged sword that they enable.

The good edge is keeping ISPs etc. from messing with your DNS requests, but that sword cuts both ways as it also can lock your own home network out.

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

#85

Post by jefftk »

ryannevius wrote: post #61
therealmarv wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Switch to Brave, you will still maintain 99% of the bell and whistles of Chrome (because it's a Chrome fork) and you will have an Adblock engine directly in the browser core written in Rust. How cool is that... Especially on mobile Brave is a game changer. https://github.com/brave/adblock-rust

Does Brave have the memory / slowdown issues attributed to Chrome on Apple silicone MacBooks?

I would be surprised if they differed here, since it's the same core browser.

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

#86

Post by chrisweekly »

groovybits wrote: post #41
syrgian wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the summary. I had perceived the betrayal but I had never organized the thoughts nor verified the claims. What do you think is the future (+2 years) for people with hatred for ads? For now I am using Firefox on computer + Kiwi in Android, but I also expect those two to go awry in the mid term. * I see that after the edit, it doesn't look as bleak for Firefox PC. But what about Android?

> What do you think is the future (+2 years) for people with hatred for ads? DNS-based blocking

I think a hosted browser might be key to solving this. Something like Mighty (https://mightyapp.com) if it were self-hosted or somehow run by an org you could trust (or be run in some verifiably zero-trust way).

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

#87

Post by e3bc54b2 »

gorhill wrote: post #71

One of the stated goal of MV3 by Google[1] was to avoid extensions with broad permissions: > our new declarativeNetRequest API is designed to be a privacy-preserving method for extensions to block network requests without needing access to sensitive data This MV3-based AdGuard extension still requires a broad permission to "read or modify host data" on all sites[2]: "host_permissions": [ " " ], So what you have now i…

For context, gorhill is the veteran author of original uBlock, and current uBlock Origin. He knows what he's talking about as author, maintainer and one of the community leader/voice of probably the single best and only conflict-of-interest-free ad-blocker currently in existence.

His past post[0] was reposted and generated quite a discussion on HN [1].

For further details on why uBO is conflict free, this is the README.md on github repo[2] says:

---

Free. Open source. For users by users. No donations sought.

---

0: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...

1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32542968

2: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock

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

#88

Post by jefftk »

Multicomp wrote: post #16

It is such a bummer to me that Firefox is implementing MV3 and deprecating MV2[1]. Internet Explorer 6 never left, it just became Google Chrome*. Vivaldi? Killed, Chrome clone. Edge? Killed, Chrome clone. Brave? Killed, Chrome clone. Firefox? Technically a separate engine and in theory among the last hopes, but so sclerotic it follows Chrome in almost all of its decisions. (Can MV2 be kept as a stable basic-security-…

> Vivaldi? Killed, Chrome clone. ... Brave? Killed, Chrome clone.

Brave and Vivaldi have always been built on Chromium, because that was the easiest way for them to get started as new browsers. There wasn't some pre-Chromium version of either that was killed.*

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

#89

Post by JoshTriplett »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #69
JoshTriplett wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The solution here though is simple: As the sole publishing source of extensions users can install on Chrome, Google just needs to stop distributing malware from their extension store! But of course, that would require Google actually take some responsibility and do some legwork and neither of those things are in their core competency. If Google actually had any goals of improving security, they'd literally just delet…

If Google did that, there'd be widespread cries of "gatekeeping!". Mozilla was blasted for doing exactly the same thing.

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

#90

Post by mekster »

vbezhenar wrote: post #2

Are we going to lose ublock origin on chrome when v2 will be disabled?

Haven't used adblocker extension for a while. I just have AdGuard Home on a VPS to be used with every device on the network and do DNS level blocking and all is clean including stopping trackers from non browser apps.
Post reply on HN