Google Chrome's Next Update Will Mark the End of Popular Ad Blockers (9to5google.com) 161
Google is removing Chrome's last remaining workarounds for Manifest V2 extensions, effectively ending support for legacy ad blockers such as the original uBlock Origin. 9to5Google reports: CyberNews points out a Chromium commit that removes support for the "kExtensionManifestV2Disabled" flag, which is referred to as "dead code" seeing as Chrome no longer supports Manifest V2 extensions. This removal acts as the final stop for many Manifest V2-based ad blocker extensions that were still in use today -- the flag was effectively a loophole to continue using these extensions.
A Googler on the commit explains: "MV2 extensions are no longer allowed in any supported version of Chrome, and we are removing support for them and the associated functionality. We won't be able to provide / maintain this functionality indefinitely due to the complexity and tech debt, as well as the security risks it entails (we've actually found a number of bugs that are specific to MV2 lately). Of course, other browsers can continue supporting these if they so desire."
This will also impact other Chromium-based browsers, though the comment notes that "other browsers can continue supporting these if they so desire." Neowin points out that Microsoft Edge and Opera are likely to follow suit. Chrome 150, set to be released later this month, will remove this flag, while other leftover bits of Manifest V2 will be removed in the v151 release.
A Googler on the commit explains: "MV2 extensions are no longer allowed in any supported version of Chrome, and we are removing support for them and the associated functionality. We won't be able to provide / maintain this functionality indefinitely due to the complexity and tech debt, as well as the security risks it entails (we've actually found a number of bugs that are specific to MV2 lately). Of course, other browsers can continue supporting these if they so desire."
This will also impact other Chromium-based browsers, though the comment notes that "other browsers can continue supporting these if they so desire." Neowin points out that Microsoft Edge and Opera are likely to follow suit. Chrome 150, set to be released later this month, will remove this flag, while other leftover bits of Manifest V2 will be removed in the v151 release.
Bye Chrome... (Score:3, Insightful)
The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.
Re:Bye Chrome... (Score:5, Interesting)
And bye every other browser except Firefox. No Vivaldi, no Brave, any Chromium browser.
I'm a little surprised no one has tried to bring Manifest v2 back in a Chromium fork. It's supposedly open source after all. If it's too complicated to do practically, then really what's the point in Chromium being open source at all.
Re: Bye Chrome... (Score:5, Informative)
Brave has its own filtering engine, separate from Chromium.
Brave dependent? (Score:2)
Also, does Brave depend on Chromium for its updates? The same way, say Debian derivatives depend on Debian, or Redhat derivatives on RedHat?
I was under the impression that Brave was a complete fork of Chromium, just like OpenBSD was of NetBSD
Re: (Score:2)
Brave has its own filtering engine, separate from Chromium.
That's sort of beside the point. Those people who wanted to use their own specific plugin with brave no longer will be able to, and will be dependent on their own internal thing.
Mind you this coming from a browser which appended affiliate links to user inputs. We've debated at length here before how much Brave can be trusted. Bottom line is there are concerns including that it's ToR mode may not be safe. It does provide a lot of privacy from websniffers though, to the point where its inbuilt adblocker had a
Re: (Score:3)
Yes. And I hink the Brave filter is working quite well.
Re: (Score:3)
In 2016, Brave promised to remove banner ads from websites and replace them with their own [archive.is], basically trying to extract money directly from websites without the consent of their owners
In the same year, CEO Brendan Eich unilaterally added a fringe, pay-to-win Wikipedia clone into the default search engine list [github.com].
In 2018, Tom Scott and other creators noticed Brave was soliciting donations in their names without their knowledge or consent [reddit.com].
In 2020, Brave got caught [theverge.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a little surprised no one has tried to bring Manifest v2 back in a Chromium fork. It's supposedly open source after all. If it's too complicated to do practically, then really what's the point in Chromium being open source at all.
See also: Android and the ever-increasing difficulty, impracticality, and necessity of getting root access.
Re:Bye Chrome... (Score:5, Informative)
For every 1 person I know, who knows that a thing called an ad blocker exists, I know 10 others who haven't heard of a thing called ad blocker. Consumer ignorance is what helps monopolies thrive. Google and every other capitalism hating corporate entity is betting on consumer ignorance.
Re:Bye Chrome... (Score:4, Informative)
Librewolf too (yeah it's a FF fork but I like it for privacy-specific stuff).
Edge over Chrome? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
And bye every other browser except Firefox. No Vivaldi, no Brave, any Chromium browser.
I'm a little surprised no one has tried to bring Manifest v2 back in a Chromium fork. It's supposedly open source after all. If it's too complicated to do practically, then really what's the point in Chromium being open source at all.
Why surprised? v2 vs v3 extensions aren't the problem.
v3 ad blockers work far better than ever before, everywhere except Chrome specifically.
Chromium code allows a v3 extension to register uint32 URI hooks for matching and filtering purposes.
Only Chrome changes this value down to a thousand. It's a Google policy, no more or less technically relevant than their policy to spell their brand name correctly.
If Chrome itself was released as source, one could change this single value back and we wouldn't be havi
Re: (Score:2)
v3 ad blockers don't eliminate the actual downloads, which is one of the main benefits of using one on metered connections.
Re: (Score:2)
And bye every other browser except Firefox
Some of us never left. When Chrome took the 800 lb gorilla role from IE it inevitably embraced enshittification wholesale. Firefox has also done so to a much lesser degree, but at least I can remove or disable all of it.
With the NoScript and uBlock Origin add ons I can keep my browsing reasonably sane. MS Edge is here for those crap sites that won't work in FF. Chrome is persona non grata on my PCs.
Re:Bye Chrome... (Score:5, Insightful)
Been on Firefox since Quantum and got rid of Chrome when they blocked ublock origin a year ago when they forced you to turn on the flag.
Edge still supports it and it's sunset status is still TBD. [microsoft.com] If they're smart they'll keep it that way, since they can gain some share from this debacle.
Re: (Score:2)
What was this unnamed "muscle memory breaking change" from 2023? Be specific.
Re: (Score:2)
Another reason to avoid Chrome (Score:5, Informative)
Check.
The adblockers work just dandy with Firefox.
Re:Another reason to avoid Chrome (Score:4, Informative)
Yep, same here, and if an ad does happen to sneak through (looking at you /. and MondoDB) it's a simple right click and block element.
Re: (Score:2)
That's going to get tougher everyday (Score:5, Insightful)
Eventually they won't be in the slightest concerned about antitrust enforcement. In the old days the other companies would be worried about Google controlling all the browser code but nowadays the way they look at it it's cheaper to just bribe Google a bit than it is to have any antitrust enforcement.
You see this in the beef industry. In the old days McDonald's and the other fast food restaurants would sue the beef producers for antitrust violations resulting in cheaper prices across the board. Nowadays the beef producer is just give McDonald's a kickback in order to prevent them from doing a lawsuit and of course the administration sure is shit isn't going to do one. McDonald's gets to pocket the difference in prices because they're a large buyer but when you go to the grocery store you pay more.
It's another case where a system we didn't really think about has been dismantled and it's having wide-ranging effects. This is what's called a chesterton's fence if you haven't heard. Basically don't take offense down unless you understand why it was put up
Re: (Score:2)
Troll? really? I guess none of the knee-jerk mods bothered to even read this post. He's not wrong.
Re:Another reason to avoid Chrome (Score:5, Insightful)
The adblockers work just dandy with Firefox.
Yeah but then you're using Firefox, which has distain for users in a whole different set of ways, not the least of which is an endless focus on everything except for fixing bugs.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Any particular bugs in Firefox bothering you? I've not stopped using it since the start. Then when Google removed don't be evil I was less tempted to switch to Chrome. In my day job I use both, because Chrome had profiles before Firefox, but I'm not surfing the web at work.
Sure there are some websites where the odd bit doesn't work, but that is rare in my experience. And I expect due to their coding it wrong (by accident) rather than a Firefox bug.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes. Plenty. Firefox seems to have problems releasing memory in off screen DOM objects resulting in an endless memory leak. It also has a tendency to fully lock up the UI when a web page displays more than 3 pre-loaded video elements at once - a problem that is resolved by minimising and restoring the window using windows hotkeys. All in all you can't do something as mind boggling complex as scrolling through reddit without hitting some breaking bug.
It has a problem with cache release meaning your cache wil
Re: (Score:2)
Any particular bugs in Firefox bothering you?
The biggest bugs are in the mobile version IME. I use it with only one addon (UBO) and it crashes on me at least daily, sometimes several times a day. I am using it mostly for slashdot and faceboot, because I don't trust their app. Faceboot's heavy javascript punches ff mobile right in the dick.
I posted a review about it and they responded about sending in the crash reports. Well, I have been, FOR YEARS, and they do dick about the crashes.
Re: (Score:2)
The biggest bugs are in the mobile version IME. I use it with only one addon (UBO) and it crashes on me at least daily, sometimes several times a day.
FWIW I use Firefox (Beta) on Android exclusively and can count the number of crashes I've seen in the last year on one hand. I use a half-dozen addons, including uBO, but I do keep a modest open tab count (usually fewer than 12) and rely more on bookmarks.
The only real issue I see with mobile Firefox is possibly battery and memory use but it's improved drastically in the last 5-6 years, so if you're looking at comparisons online make sure to check the dates (AI summaries love to use ancient data). Some of
Re: (Score:2)
But I use FF since when it came out and hardly ever find it wrong, especially after they last year fixed the main memory leak.
Re: (Score:2)
The memory leaks that never get fixed
I'm not buying it. I've got (checks) 372 tabs open just in the window that holds slashdot, and I only close the browser every few weeks when I reboot for a kernel update. Memory usage doesn't grow. There are not leaks.
While memory leaks do sometimes exist in software generally, when a user claims there is one there's a 99%+ chance that user doesn't understand what "memory leak" means, and they really just mean "it uses too much mem-oh-rye." Which usually also means they don't have ad-blockers, visit unsavor
372?! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For example, I've got 6 or 7 tabs open from a tool supply website. I know for sure I'm going to buy the products in the first two tabs, but I buy more tools than I need so I've got to work it into the schedule. (My wife doesn't mind me wasting money on tools, and doesn't pay attention to what I spend, but if there's too many new boxes at the same time she'll end up asking to see the credit card history... which takes hours, because of her poor financial understanding. Spoiler: She has a bachelors in Account
Re: (Score:2)
You could have a look at Zen browser if Firefox yanks your chain.
I am surprisingly happy with it so far. Been using it for, oh I don't know, about two weeks?
Re: (Score:2)
Hardly use it so (Score:3)
Veni, vidi, Vivaldi? (Score:3)
This has been my browser of choice for a while. Also a Chromium-based one. But let's see if they follow Google/Chrome with this. I don't expect the creators of Vivaldi to do this though.
So if ad-blocking remains part of your (personal) core, you should want to replace your Chrome browser for Vivaldi.
Re:Veni, vidi, Vivaldi? (Score:5, Informative)
Vivaldi is definitely losing Manifestv2 when upstream does. All chromium-derived browser are. Vivaldi actually doesn't even support uBlock Origin now. They provide their own, inferior ad blocker. Firefox is now the only choice.
Re:Veni, vidi, Vivaldi? (Score:4, Informative)
But let's see if they follow Google/Chrome with this. I don't expect the creators of Vivaldi to do this though.
Why would you not expect it? The upstream code support for V2 is being removed. It's not some flag that can be set. Vivaldi will have to actively fork and proceed to fully maintain the code base going forward, without incorporating these upstream changes. This kind of thing can quickly lead to breaking bugs.
But in any case you don't need to expect anything. Vivaldi creators have been open about this and...
So if ad-blocking remains part of your (personal) core, you should want to replace your Chrome browser for Vivaldi.
unfortunately ...
We will keep Manifest v2 for as long as it’s still available in Chromium.
https://vivaldi.com/blog/manif... [vivaldi.com]
Why Chrome? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's closed source spyware. Why is anyone still using it?
The only time I ever installed Chrome was that brief period when it was the only way to stream Netflix on Linux.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
And honestly I have so many other things that have eaten my privacy alive there's no point in worrying about Chrome doing it. I am way more concerned with the lack of antitrust law enforcement and with widespread voter suppression at the county level.
Re: (Score:2)
extremely good memory usage
This is not true. It's gotten *better* to the point of being, at best, average. The Chromium engine is very fast and good, but the Chrome browser itself is bloated and mid.
Re: (Score:3)
> Because it's the default in most cases and it's fast with extremely good memory usage.
Neither of these are true.
As far as defaults go: Windows defaults to Edge, you need to use Edge to download Chrome. MacOS defaults to Safari, you have to use Safari to download Chrome. And the GNU/Linux distros I use default to Firefox and require administrator involvement to install Chrome, which generally seems wonky to me (the install, not the application - typically it starts complaining after a few months about n
Re: (Score:2)
It's closed source spyware. Why is anyone still using it?
Why not?
Chromium is open source spyware (including no longer supporting V2 adblocking). Vivaldi is just a Chrome skin with little meaningful change (including no longer supporting V2 adblocking). Opera is just Chinese spyware. Brave claims to be for the users but has a history of fucking them over especially with affiliate redirects. Edge is ... LOL. and Firefox... dear Firefox... I want to like you, but at some point I'd prefer you to stop doing shit like focusing on running your VPN service and actually f
Re: (Score:2)
Lynx still seems to be a good privacy focused choice but doesn't support nice modern features like displaying images.
May I suggest these TUI alternatives?
* w3m - a classic with support for tables, frames, and images. No javascript or CSS though.
* browsh - asciified interface to a Firefox backend, so it supports nearly all modern standards, but you're using Firefox.
* chawan - a modern TUI browser with support for tables, CSS, images, and even most javascript.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
It's closed source spyware. Why is anyone still using it?
Because Firefox is ass, and Chrome basically is the de-facto standard web developers test against. While I hate Google's privacy sucking as much as the next guy, I have very limited tolerance for futzing around with alternate browsers when Chrome just works.
I've been running the "lite" version of uBlock Origin and it seems fine. I'm sure there's some esoteric situations where it falls apart, but I've yet to run into them.
Re:Why Chrome? (Score:5, Insightful)
I've been running the "lite" version of uBlock Origin and it seems fine. I'm sure there's some esoteric situations where it falls apart, but I've yet to run into them.
Yeah, esoteric situations like blocking alphabet's own ads.
That's the entire rub. Google wants you to block ads. All of them, except theirs. I think there's a word for that.
Re: (Score:2)
People use Chrome because it's popular! Anyone who's anyone uses Chrome!
"Security Issues" (Score:2)
Are those security issues in the room with us right now? Can you point them out to us?
There are chromium-based derivatives (Score:2)
A gazillion of them supporting ad blockers.
Re:There are chromium-based derivatives (Score:4, Insightful)
>"A gazillion of them supporting ad blockers."
And most of them are just me-too leaches, too cheap to perform actual development and support themselves. It is not like there is a rich browser diversity anymore, we are barely hanging on to anything NOT Google-controlled:
"This will also impact other Chromium-based browsers, though the comment notes that other browsers can continue supporting these if they so desire. Microsoft Edge and Opera are likely to follow suit [with dropping support]."
So, how many of them are willing to actually maintain the code on their own for this? (Not that I care that much, because I use Firefox exclusively). A few might, but not a "gazillion." When you hitch your wagon to the Google beast, you are being mostly led around at their direction. And their interests are generally not user's interests.
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. None of them will support Manifest v2 when it is removed from Chromium which is really what this slashdot post is all about. I kind of thought most of them dropped v2 already since Chromium made it really hard to enable.
Firefox is all that is left, for all its warts and user-hostile developers.
Re: There are chromium-based derivatives (Score:2)
and Vivaldi
If you block ads... (Score:5, Funny)
you miss out on the true meaning of Christmas.
Re:If you block ads... (Score:5, Funny)
Every time you block an ad, a puppy dies.
Re:If you block ads... (Score:5, Funny)
I hate puppies.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
An Angel gets set on fire
A puppy somewhere, is kicked
A baby duck will lose her mother
Last but certainly not least:
Jesus will punch you in the mouth!
Firefox (Score:2, Funny)
It's a good thing we all use and promote Firefox (coupled with UBO). Right?
Re: (Score:3)
It's a good thing we all use and promote Firefox (coupled with UBO). Right?
Once FireFox is outlawed, only criminals will use FireFox.
Re: (Score:2)
>"Once FireFox is outlawed, only criminals will use FireFox."
Ug, I fear a life of crime is coming...
Re: (Score:2)
When Firefox stops locking up from doing something as mindblowingly complex as scrolling through reddit maybe I'll reconsider it. I can look past the other issues, like the slow rendering of some pages, but I soured on it a few years ago due to breaking bugs, and bugs which are Mozilla's fault, not the fault of web developers.
Maybe when they are finished with looking at shoehorning pocket and VPNs, and AI into their browser they can actually start fixing some bugs for a change.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't have any such problems on any of my Linux desktops or the hundreds I manage. I would prefer they focus more on core stuff than other stuff, however.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think I've seen firefox lock up in... 20 years?
Title Correction: (Score:4)
"Privacy Rapists' Privacy Raping Browser's Next Update Will Mark the End of it Being An Actual Useful Web Browser"
There FTFY - like I've always said, if it doesn't run uBlock Origin (the real full featured one), it's not a real browser.
Re:Title Correction: (Score:4, Insightful)
Ad blockers feel like a victimless act. One click, a cleaner page, a faster load time, fewer distractions. The individual benefit is obvious. The collective cost is less visible.
Advertising is often mocked as the internet's tax. In reality, it is closer to a voluntary subsidy. Every banner, sponsor spot, and pre-roll ad represents someone else paying so that millions of people can access content without opening their wallets. The result is one of the greatest information distribution systems ever created. A teenager can learn calculus. A mechanic can diagnose an engine problem. A programmer can solve a bug. A citizen can read investigative journalism. All without reaching for a credit card.
The alternative sounds appealing until it arrives.
When advertising revenue disappears, websites do not become altruistic. They become desperate. Paywalls multiply. Subscription fatigue spreads. Features once available to everyone become restricted to paying members. Communities shrink. Independent creators vanish. Small publishers fold. The largest corporations survive because they have the scale to charge directly. Ironically, widespread ad blocking often strengthens the very giants people claim to oppose.
The internet's golden promise was accessibility. Ads help preserve that promise.
Critics point out that online advertising can be intrusive, manipulative, and poorly implemented. They are right. Nobody enjoys auto-playing videos that scream from hidden tabs. Nobody wants pages buried beneath popups and tracking scripts. But that is an argument for better advertising, not for eliminating the economic foundation that supports free content.
Good advertising is surprisingly easy to ignore. Great advertising can even be useful. Entire industries have been built by people discovering products, services, books, games, and tools they genuinely wanted through advertisements. The problem is not the existence of ads. The problem is bad ads.
There is also a deeper cultural question. Every time we consume content, someone creates value for us. A journalist spends weeks on an investigation. A developer maintains a tool. A creator produces a video. A forum moderator keeps a community alive. If we refuse subscriptions, refuse donations, and refuse advertising, what exactly are we contributing in return?
Nothing in economics remains free forever. Costs always exist. The only question is who pays them.
Ad blockers offer a seductive fantasy: infinite content with no tradeoffs. Yet the internet was not built by fantasies. It was built by incentives. Remove enough of those incentives and the ecosystem begins to hollow out from within. The first casualties are not the billion-dollar platforms. They are the niche blogs, independent creators, local newsrooms, hobbyist forums, and small communities that make the web worth exploring.
A healthy internet needs revenue. Advertising, imperfect as it may be, remains one of the few models capable of funding access at global scale. It allows a student with no money and a billionaire with unlimited money to read the same article, watch the same video, and participate in the same conversation.
That is not a flaw. That is one of the internet's greatest achievements.
The next time an ad appears, consider what it represents. Not merely a product being sold, but a bargain being honored. A tiny contribution toward keeping knowledge open, creators paid, and information accessible to anyone with a connection.
The ad is not the enemy.
The disappearance of everything it quietly funds might be.
Re: (Score:3)
Go ahead. Show me the ads. But when I set tracking protection to strict, don't lie to me and tell me that I can't visit your page because I'm blocking your ads.I'm not. I can still see them. Just like I can see the billboards I drive by every day.
Re:Title Correction: (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you would find that if the ads are done in a tasteful unobtrusive way, people don't bother with hacky half-assed ad blocking routines that also fuck up legitimate content thinking it's ads.
It's much like paying for music - when the music business was charging $1 a song, people stopped bothering with all the stupid piracy shit. Even more so now that we have music-as-a-service wherever you have an internet connection.
I don't have any problem with content producers getting paid for their work through ad revenue. I have a problem with them festooning their content with so many fucking ads that I can't get TO the content.
Yes, I'm looking at you too, Slashdot. Mind your bullshit before I find the increased ad-to-content ratio to be the final nail and you get ZERO impressions from me rather than the few you get now.
Re: (Score:3)
I agree. Ads which cover 80% of content, popup, popunder, music, impossible to close, super repetitive, super repetitive, super repetitive, purposely distractive, should be blown to heck.
Sometimes, I turn off my ad blockers. The interweb is unusable. Just crap. Half the websites I'd never, ever use at all if I didn't have an ad-blocker.
I don't have any problem with content producers getting paid for their work through ad revenue. I have a problem with them festooning their content with so many fucking ads
Re: Title Correction: (Score:2)
Now take all your arguments, but instead of us normal people taking money from the content producers via ad blockers, make it about Google who trained their AI on that content, then stepped between the content producer and the consumer to present that content as its own and take all their ad revenue.
Who did it worse?
Re: (Score:3)
The modern internet runs on an uncomfortable bargain. We want endless news, videos, forums, tutorials, memes, investigations, reviews, guides, maps, weather reports, and communities. We want them instantly. We want them searchable. We want them updated every hour of every day. Then we install software specifically designed to remove the mechanism that pays for all of it. Ad blockers feel like a victimless act. One click, a cleaner page, a faster load time, fewer distractions. The individual benefit is obvious. The collective cost is less visible.
And if ads weren't occasionally a vector for malware, fewer people would be determined to block them all. Imagine an alternate universe where one in ten million vitamin pills is cyanide. Who'd take a vitamin pill every day?
Yes, but... (Score:2)
I think I would otherwise continue to use them because they aren't just scroll-past-able banner ads anymore; do you remember those days? Now it's nutty the hoops one has to jump through to glance at something where it turns out you're not really interested in it.
Further, do you think they would stop adding ads per page once their coffer$ were full? Hahaha, that's a good one. They're
Re: (Score:2)
The next time an ad appears, consider what it represents. Not merely a product being sold, but a bargain being honored.
The "bargain" went out the upper story window with sick puppies on Tv and Cancer kids who don't get the donations from abusive ads. If the Ad people want responsible ad consumption then they have to clean up the toilet bowl of filthy ads out there. Advertiser want all the money (private gains) with a free for all of crappy ads galore (public losses).
Enshitifcation at its finest trying to make themselves look noble. "Go kill yourself." (Bill Hicks)
Re: (Score:2)
The biggest problem with advertising as a funding mechanism is that it creates incentives to *make the content worse*. It's no longer "what can I present that will help the user". It's "what can I present that will attract advertisers and keep the user spending time where I can further target them". There's the tracking thing, too, of course, and the scam propagation, and whatever else. As well as just the raw annoyance.
There's no incentive for anybody improve "bad ads" as long as they believe bad ads still
Re: (Score:2)
The ad is not the enemy.
Bullshit. Advertisers made themselves the enemy with their shitty tactics like pop ups, obnoxious animated video ads, stupid loud audio, and generally annoying intrusiveness. And let's not forget about being vectors for malware, which is the worst sin of all.
If the ads stayed reasonable and sane I likely wouldn't run adblockers. The reality of things means that insanity reigns, and I am forced to take my sanity into my own hands. Fuck advertisements, and the horse they rode in on. Marketing types made
Re: (Score:2)
Does advertising even work? How come they show me meat ads when I'm vegetarian? Why show me tire ads for weeks after I've bought tires? Is the real point just to annoy?
No, it shows your digital sanitation is working. If you start seeing ads that areb related you your searches, or your email inbox, or what you are watching on TV, then you'll know that their spyware knows too much about you.
bugs that are specific to MV2 (Score:2)
> we've actually found a number of bugs that are specific to MV2 lately
What, ad blockers use MV2? Serious bug, we know.
PiHole (Score:5, Informative)
It's pretty simple to set up a PiHole on your network. If you're feeling particular randy you could also add Unbound and Tailscale into the mix too.
Re:PiHole (Score:5, Informative)
Here's a video showing how to set these up for those interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re:PiHole (Score:5, Interesting)
Unbound: Unbound is a validating, recursive, caching DNS resolver. The main reason people run it is recursion: instead of forwarding your queries to an upstream like 1.1.1.1 or 8.8.8.8, Unbound walks the hierarchy itself — root servers, then TLD servers, then the authoritative server for the domain. The payoff is that no single third party ever sees your full query stream, and you're not trusting a public resolver's logging or filtering policies. It also does DNSSEC validation (cryptographically verifying answers weren't tampered with) and caches results locally for speed.
Re: (Score:2)
If you are running a Ubiquiti EdgeRouter, you can even install Unbound on the router and config that to be the default resolver for the internal network, as well as the router itself.
It's just running dnsmasq as it's default resolver, so may as well add the debian repos and make it better:
configure
set system package repository wheezy components 'main contrib non-free'
set system package repository wheezy distribution 'wheezy'
set system package repository wheezy url 'debian.org'
commit
save
update
apt-get update
Re:PiHole (Score:5, Insightful)
It's good and everyone should do it, but it's worth noting that PiHole isn't the be-all and end-all of solutions. There's a significant portion of ad content that needs to be blocked dynamically based on page rendering rulesets which PiHole simply doesn't catch. A proper browser plugin is still a must.
That said PiHole is a godsend for locked down Android devices on the network which don't benefit from any simple adblocking.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. I have a pi-hole and it's great for helping block ads in Android apps, but it misses a lot, especially in web pages.
Reminds me of the old APK HOSTS FILE ENGINE spam we all used to love seeing on Slashdot. Everyone (rightfully) gave him shit for it, but Pi-hole is exactly the same thing. Blocking based solely on domain names hasn't been sufficient for 15+ years and as great as pi-hole is, that hasn't changed.
Re:PiHole (Score:4, Informative)
pihole doesn't block ads directly, it simply blocks from resolving some dns hostnames that are known to serve ads, which is not how adblockers work.
pihole on its own will block barely 10% of what UBO blocks, and that comes from someone that has over 800k hosts on pihole lists
Other browsers can ... (Score:3)
A Googler on the commit explains: "MV2 extensions are no longer allowed in any supported version of Chrome, ...
Of course, other browsers can continue supporting these if they so desire."
How magnanimous of him. /s
Really? (Score:2)
I'd love to know how the next Chrome update is going to kill the ad block running as my network's DNS host. Even if they try to man-in-the-middle DNS in the browser, I control the network and I'll blackhole that shit at the router.
I'd similarly love to know how the next Chrome update is going to do fuck-all to the plugins I have running in Firefox / Zen.
What a stupid fucking "headline."
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I'd love to know how the next Chrome update is going to kill the ad block running as my network's DNS host.
DNS is nice and all, but if you're not running an adblocker that can intercept webrequests in flight you're not running a good adblocker period. DNS holing (while a good idea in general, and one I do too) is just pathetic in comparison to a proper browser based blocking feature.
I'd similarly love to know how the next Chrome update is going to do fuck-all to the plugins I have running in Firefox / Zen.
There's nothing popular about the adblockers running in an unpopular browser. The headline excludes you buttercup, but your main character syndrome aside for a moment.
What a stupid fucking "headline."
What a stupid fucking "post" you made.
Google Chrome's Final Update (Score:2)
Will Mark the End of Popular Ad Blockers
Rise of pop-up adverts (Score:2)
I've found that most paid-subscription services won't work in privacy-orientated (Mozilla-based) browsers. One or two Chrome-based browsers block the adverts while many (Eg. Opera), don't.
Does anybody still make a locally installed proxy? (Score:2)
Something that sits between the internet and the browser and alters the page before the browser sees it? Then Google can pound sand.
The modern Web is basically unusable ... (Score:4, Insightful)
... without (ultra)powerful ad- and trackblock setups, media buffers and stream-rippers. I currently use Brave and that works pretty well, but the amount of big guns I have to whip out in order not to be bombarded like some sorry-ass regular browser user has gotten ridiculous in the last five years. I wonder how further this can go on before a notable portion of us just get's fed up and redoes the Web entirely.
When I'm on a regular browser on some other machine and I see ad-trash or cookie popups clobbering the screen and my eyeballs, I usually just close the tab and do something else. I'm sick and tired of this garbage and it's simply not worth my time or cognitive load. Same with youtube ads.
Maybe it's time us nerds retreat to a new type of protocol and service, like some fully encrypted and signed WebFS thing where this garbage simply doesn't exist. It feels somewhat overdue to be honest.
Re: (Score:2)
Being used to FF with uBO on the laptop and DuckDuckGo on the Android I am always totally surprised by the junk other browsers allow to cover up content.
Even
FF might not be perfect but it sure beats other browsers anytime.
THIS is how you abuse a monopoly. TAKE NOTE! (Score:2)
Remember guys, google says the whole internet needs to be ads, but their AIs don't need to pay the sites they steal from, but they'll be DAMNED if they're gonna let you use their browser (which has integrated AI) to not waste your own actual time/do your civic duty of staring at bullshit for idiots
dunt be ebil
Re: (Score:2)
Remember guys, google says the whole internet needs to be ads, but their AIs don't need to pay the sites they steal from, but they'll be DAMNED if they're gonna let you use their browser (which has integrated AI) to not waste your own actual time/do your civic duty of staring at bullshit for idiots
dunt be ebil
Why would anyone use a web browser made by an advertising company? Fuck Chrome, and fuck Google.
Well, don't use Chrome anyway (Score:2)
Give us a reason... (Score:3)
This is great (Score:2)
We shouldn't be giving all our data to google anyway. But they are shooting themselves in the foot, I'll bet they lose marketshare to some amount at least in the small percentages. The web is unusable without an ad blocker, some pages have ads in between paragraphs, its shocking if you are used to an ad blocker and you then turn it off.
If you have to use Chrome... (Score:2)
Excellent idea (Score:2)
Considering everyone is abusing on chromium can you also make sure to inject your enshitification intravenously in a way it cannot be removed?
Thanks Google!
Re: (Score:2)
Stanford grads were thinking the same thing. [yahoo.com]