AdGuard MV3 extension

I cannot access the options even without adding custom rules I call it blank options.

 

Do you have version 0.3.17? I hope you can see this. With that version it shouldn't be a problem.

 

Unfortunately this bug persists.

 

Yes, you're right. It's the bug described in post #25 and not the bug in version 0.3.16 described in post #9.

 

That's why I use uBOL alongside and I have to admit that I'm pretty impressed with how well it munches ads.

 

I noticed that, elsewhere, you wrote a new tutorial.
If you could kindly check some whitelist rules after applying MM or HM rules.

Example if in BleepingComputer - Forums I want to display Discord I enter this simple rule which otherwise would be blocked by enabling social widget list:

Code:

@@discordapp.com

HM + TLD rule also blocks icons in "Latest News".
It does not occur in UBO + TLD (so there is no match) and without a log it is rather difficult to verify........
I am also having some problems viewing images hosted in imgBB.

P.S.
I solved it.
In AdGuard Mv3 you have to be careful to enter 2 rules that may overlap in the effects.

I chose Hard Mode + TLD
AdGuard MV3 seems much faster in loading web pages.

 

In my post nr. 7 I stated "A complicating factor is that AdGuard MV3 Extension doesn't log events (yet)."
That's why I use the authentic Adguard browserextension (version 4.1.46) besides the experimental Adguard MV3 browser extension (but not at the same time).
The rules described in just mentioned post work in both extensions.

A briefly summary of the rules.
Example of a blocking rule:
||*^$script,subdocument,third-party,denyallow=com|eu|inf|io|ms|net|nl|org

Domainextension .nl is from my country.

The blocking rule is focussed on unusual and possible suspected third parties.

Example of a site-specific whitelist rule (example.com = third party):
@@example.com^$script,subdocument,third-party

If you want to whitelist the third party only on a specific first party site, the whitelist rule is:
@@example.com^$script,subdocument,third-party,domain=firstparty.com

If you want to whitelist a blocked domainextension there are two possibilities.
1.Add the domainextension to aforementioned blocking rule.
2.Make a separate whitelist rule just for that case. E.g. regarding the domainextension .video (yes this really exists). An example:
@@.video$script,subdocument,third-party,domain=firstparty.com

 

For TLD's best to also add:

• edu
• gov

 

I set AdGuard MV3 in Hard mode + TLD's.

Code:

||*^$third-party,denyallow=com|eu|inf|io|ms|net|it|org|gov|edu

And made a test in a website not subject to exception TLD's.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/

Edge with UBO - hard mode + TLD's.
9 trackers blocked by Edge + 9 blocks in UBO
Score = 18




Edge with UBO Lite (Optimal Mode):
6 trackers blocked by Edge + 11 blocks in UBO Lite
Score = 17



Edge with AdGuard MV3 - Hard Mode + TLD's
9 trackers blocked by Edge + 11 blocks in AdGuard MV3
Score = 20



Notice the improved web page layout in AdGuard MV3.
With UBO Lite the cookies consent pop-up appears.

1. AdGuard MV3
2. uBlock Origin
3. uBblock Origin Lite

 

Without logging available, how on earth do you guys know what to unblock when pages inevitably break, especially using Hard mode?

 

With the use of TLD's the broken pages are limited in number
You can use the UBO log.
I have currently entered only 7 exception rules

Example:
If you use this image host:

https://imgbb.com/

to display the image in a forum you have to enter the exception for .co:

Code:

@@ibb.co

 

Okay that makes sense to use uBO log and the rest of what you said. Thanks

So I can condense the following rules into one rule as @Jan Willy advises in post #7 ?





something like:

||*^$script,subdocument,third-party,denyallow=com|ca|inf|io|ms|edu|net|gov|org

 

Yes.
But the rule that you wrote "condensed" is in the medium mode.
The one I entered (and will use) is hard mode.
The difference is this:



(if I remember correctly) calculated by Kees1958.

 

Okay I don't think I want to be using hard mode anyway. Are you using hard mode or easy-hard mode?

 

I use Hard Mode + TLD's.

In the table it corresponds to Easy-Hard Mode (but I don't find it correct to name it so).

 

Okay I see, thanks! I'll trial Medium mode in Edge browser for the time being to see how it goes. Minutes ago I had to unbreak a link in a news site with: @@postmedia.digital^$script,subdocument,third-party I decided to make it global.

uBO in Firefox helped me to figure this out

EDIT

I briefly tried your Hard mode + TLD's and it did not go well with a news site I frequent often, so I reverted to Medium mode +TLD's

 

Guys, can you verify me that with AdGuard MV3 in Medium Mode the website below works?

https://apwg.org/

With AdGuard MV3 in Hard Mode, I had to enter an exception.
I currently have 8 exception rules.
TH.

 

Works for me in Medium Mode

 

In 'easy' MM (my default setting) the site is a little mutilated, but still usable. I assume that if you try this, the result will be the same. In 'easy' HM it's broken. That's the big risk of this setting. For me too much hassle.
Edit:
I also checked it in FF / uBO 'easy' MM: many 3p script requests to pcdn.co were blocked.

 

Perfect.

 

Yes,it is precisely the exception rule that I inserted.
I checked in UBO (my filter lists) it is allowed so no problem.

 

Some staff member must have read this:

https://github.com/AdguardTeam/AdGuardMV3/issues/31

build 0.3.18 available since yesterday.

 

Although AdGuard MV3 blocks the cookie consent warning,on some websites this functionality is compromised by the lack of blocking the URL's tracking parameter.
This case occurs in FastCompany.com:

AdGuard MV3 does not block cookies consent warning:



With uBlock Origin Lite with only the list enabled AdGuard URL Tracking Protection there is cookie warning blocking:



Using Adguard MV3 + UBO Lite at the same time with only the AdGuard URL Tracking Protection enabled list achieves 2 benefits:

• URL's tracking parameter blocking.
• Blocking of cookie consent warning on some websites.

 

My experience is that next two filterlists do a fine job in AG MV3 regarding blocking cookie notices.



Edit: In most cases first list should do the thing (but not on fastcompany.com). Despite that from second list 253 rules are in use, this list can't be fully effective because the $removeparam rule in that list still doesn't work on MV3, as Sampei Nihira stated in next post.