UBlock Origin Lite - Nice adblocker for modern challenges

https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/issues/285

Will this request be accepted?

 

Guys,I would need some information.
In this latest version of uBlock Origin Lite the choice of filters used remains even after updating the extension version, or, are filters you had disabled selected again?

I read some feedback on MT and opened a issue.

 

To check the Strict Blocking of uBlock Origin Lite use this:

Code:

2cnt.net

you will see:

https://ibb.co/Gfsbhmqb

the red arrow warns you that there was a "malicious" link blocking that was done by the browser (caused by uBlock Origin Lite).

If you click with your mouse on what is highlighted by the blue arrow, you will see which list of filters is responsible for the Strict Blocking:

https://ibb.co/8DsKkyfb

 

uBlock Origin Lite (uBOL) v2025.525.2314 has been released. (28-May-2025)

Spoiler

uBOLite_2025.525.2314 Latest

uBO Lite (uBOL), a permission-less MV3 API-based content blocker.

• Synopsis
• Documentation

Release notes

• Remove CERT.PL's Warning List
• Add to troubleshooting info whether webext API calls failed
• Give admins ability to prevent usage of zapper
• Allow body element to vertically scroll
• Add support to convert header= option to DNR rules
• Add browser info in troubleshooting data
• Updated filter lists
• Commit history

 

Next version of uBlock origin Lite will support custom DNR rules:

https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/releases/tag/uBOLite_2025.601.2131

It is possible to see that Gorhill radically changes his mind and implements what he should have done long before.

https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/discussions/323

I believe it is difficult (not impossible) to use DNR rules to achieve efficient dynamic filtering.
Because of the necessary exception rules.

Much more feasible to get DNR rules to increase the privacy of uBlock Origin Lite with Ping,Beacon...............
Interesting import/export.

I think it is easy for many users to use AI,I have already tried,for writing YAML compatible custom DNR rules.

 

uBlock Origin Lite (uBOL) v2025.603.859 has been released. (03-June-2025)

Spoiler

uBOLite_2025.603.859 Latest

uBO Lite (uBOL), a permission-less MV3 API-based content blocker.

• Synopsis
• Documentation

Release notes

• Updated filter lists
• Commit history

 

Guys I wrote a DNR rule to block Ping,Beacon,CSP.
As far as I understand,but my IT studies had not included writing DNR rules,so I could be wrong,it is not possible,unfortunately,to block WebRTC.






I will write you the code you should copy it and put it into uBlock Origin Lite and I assume it will turn as in my image into YAML format:

Code:

[
  {
    "action": {
      "type": "block"
    },
    "condition": {
      "resourceTypes": [
        "ping",
        "object",
        "csp_report"
      ]
    },
    "id": 1
  }
]

The code to copy works !!!!!!

I will insert the test:

https://apps.armin.dev/ping-spotter/

P.S.

A thank you would be appreciated.

 

Thank you @Sampei Nihira !

 

With the help of AI, I added 1 rule that block these test:

https://browserleaks.com/proxy

if you write more rules later you have to enter an ID with higher sequence number.

Code:

[
  {
    "action": {
      "type": "block"
    },
    "condition": {
      "resourceTypes": [
        "ping",
        "object",
        "csp_report"
      ]
    },
    "id": 1
  },
  {
    "action": {
      "type": "block"
    },
    "condition": {
      "urlFilter": "|*/proxy.js",
      "resourceTypes": [
        "script"
      ]
    },
    "id": 2
  }
]

Almost certainly the code above is improvable.
Any help is appreciated.

I am satisfied with the improved privacy of uBlock Origin Lite.

P.S.

Removed WebRTC rule because blocking "webrtc" searches.

 

UBlock Origin Lite works much better than I expected.

 

@Sampei Nihira
You did and do a wonderful job. Thank you very much.

 

Also kees1958 has some problems in DNR rules:

https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/issues/362

I wrote another WebRTC rule that no longer blocks searches but I am not satisfied with it at all:

Code:

[
  {
    "action": {
      "type": "block"
    },
    "condition": {
      "resourceTypes": [
        "ping",
        "object",
        "csp_report"
      ]
    },
    "id": 1
  },
  {
    "action": {
      "type": "block"
    },
    "condition": {
      "urlFilter": "|*/proxy.js",
      "resourceTypes": [
        "script"
      ]
    },
    "id": 2
  },
  {
    "action": {
      "type": "block"
    },
    "condition": {
      "regexFilter": "(^|/)webrtc\.js(\?.*)?$",
      "resourceTypes": [
        "script"
      ]
    },
    "id": 3
  }
]

P.S.

Improvements to the WebRTC rule.

 

It is interesting to consider that the syntax does not support “thirdparty.”
So at the moment it is difficult for example to block thirdparty from all HTTP domains.

I now know how to use “third party.”
But I don't have the ability to know what instruction to use next to write a Hard Mode + TLD
Example:

Code:

action:
  type: block
condition:
  urlFilter: http://
  domainType: thirdParty
  resourceTypes:
    - xmlhttprequest

And also there would be the necessary exceptions.
Someone better than me will certainly be able to do it.


But it is possible to block all HTTPs.
This also blocks all HTTP malwares.
This rule allows blocking HTTP malwares exploiting port 443 even if you have blocked with an fw rule all TCP ports but not obviously port 443.
It is certainly recommended in Edge.

Code:

action:
  type: block
condition:
  urlFilter: http://
  resourceTypes:
    - main_frame
    - sub_frame
    - xmlhttprequest
    - script
    - image
    - stylesheet
    - object
    - font
    - media
    - websocket
    - other
---

It is possible to copy the rule and add it.
Don't forget to save.

 

My rule to block http:
action:
type: block
condition:
urlFilter: http://
resourceTypes:
- main_frame
---

PS1: How do you make 'code' of it for this forum?

PS2: Now I know.

Code:

action:
  type: block
condition:
  urlFilter: http://
  resourceTypes:
    - main_frame
---

 

I did not understand the question.

P.S.
Ah....OK.

 

Click the "+" sign in the editor, then choose "</> code".

 

Will uBO Lite get an element picker/zapper mode?

Edit: I'm guessing. No.

 

Thanks.

 

Thanks.

 

If I understand you well, I think you have to make a separate rule to allow trusted TLD's.

 

I can't,because obviously I'm doing something wrong.
I'll write you the rule I created:

Code:

priority: 4
action:
  type: block
condition:
  urlFilter: *
  domainType: thirdParty
priority: 5
action:
  type: allow
condition:
  urlFilter: *://*.(com|eu|info|io|ms|net|it|org|edu)/*
  domainType: thirdParty
---

The first part of the rule blocks third parties and it works.
It is the second part with the allowed TLDs that does not work.

Moreover, in the absence of a Log it is rather difficult to check.
But I have used this:

https://msfn.org/board/topic/185910-resuming-the-transition-to-manifest-v3/#comments

in the first post there is an .co image that with the first rule is not showing (and this is correct).
With the second part of the rule you shouldn't see it anyway because .co is not in the TLDs (instead you can see and this is not correct).

So it is difficult to understand how to insert exceptions + TLD.
Perhaps someone better than me will succeed in this endeavor.

https://github.com/Kees1958/W3C_annual_most_used_survey_blocklist/issues/94

I hope Kees1958 will not be too offended by this blatant OT.

 

We're all milking the same cow, so I think it's not a problem for him.
Normally I don't use uBO Lite. For this occasion I started with it and if I can find time, I will see what I can do. It triggered my curiosity.