What do you guys think of me re-purposing Admuncher as a dedicated WebBug removal tool? (automated) I find Admuncher to be anemic as an ad filter, and much prefer uBlock w/MVHost enabled. It's more effective, and faster, and works on HTTPS (obviously) But I noticed nobody seems to be dealing with web bugs anymore except admuncher. So I made some adjustments to it's settings to turn it into a dedicated web bug killer, while preserving uBlock as my primary adblocker. This setup offers no increased page load time/latency, but admuncher catches a ton of web bugs. (see screenshot below) Thoughts? http://resources.infosecinstitute.com/tracking-user-activities-using-web-bugs/
Nice find Mayahana, it works like a charm on Chrome64, a dedicated program for web-bug blocker only should be nice or simply a integration in some software like AdGuard.....). Thanks Rules.
Never actually used admuncher always used outpost FW adverts removal. Installed now for testing thanks for the idea
admuncher is pretty dead even in version 5 i still lacks newer html or support ssl, forget it, complete waste of time. concerning webbugs maybe you need an addition filterlist see also https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues/87 as i mentioned this day earlier the hosts file can catch also ad servers http://www.hosts-file.net/ --> ATS (ad/tracking servers)
Yes, they are. In my opinion they do a great job blocking these kind of stuff. Maybe Ad Muncher is filtering web bugs before uBlock because of its nature (transparent proxy filtering vs browser extension). Anyway Ghostery/Disconnect + uBlock is much better than Ad Muncher.
Please read what I posted.. I am not speaking of Admuncher used in the capacity to block ads... I am specifically referring to it as a targeted WebBug assassin. Admuncher 5 is not even out.... The only thing the new release did was remove the licensing restrictions. I've found uBlock to not actually remove WebBugs, as noted by that thread where people claim uBlock requires a custom filter at times for WebBugs.. My goal is to augment the adblocking of uBlock with the Webbug boilerplating of Admuncher. If I recall Admuncher was very well regarded for it's ability to remove webbugs specifically. So used in the capacity I am testing it offers NO latency to web activities, while augmenting uBlock with very efficient WebBug killing. (with a Heuristic-like system for WebBugs) Note how Admuncher says "Removed suspected Webbug", heuristic-like detection. Admuncher+uBlock (with MVPS Host) is FAR lighter than Ghostery+uBlock.. Test it yourself. Also in extensive testing I found uBlock default to miss a ton of stuff, and it's only when I enable MVPS Host do I get the blocking I need.
as i mentioned earlier in this forum ghostery ist buggy and leads firefox into errors - i dont care about such "paranoia" software. my thoughts of admuncher were clear - useless stuff. you should use some other methods to avoid webbugs - and ublock is capable to do this - if you miss something, best way is write a note to author. and as i wrote - admuncher can only handle html 1.0 and no gz compression, not to mention spdy. any measuring will tell you how admuncher i just can tell you but please dont argue admuncher in conjunction with webbugs while solutions are so near. PS hosts file can do more than webbugs or LSO-cookies - i can prevent adware in the first line.
I'm having very good luck with Admuncher as a dedicated webbug remover. It's system isn't based on signatures, and appears to be heuristic-like. So that's the ONLY aspect of Admuncher I am using, everything else is disabled. So far I am pleased with AM in this capacity, and use uBlock as my primary blocker for everything else.
Well, Ghostery + ScriptKeeper is already quite fast on my machine, so I don't think I need Ad Muncher. I also don't like proxy filters.
