Boost Chrome browser security with these five add-ons

nothing is bullet proof. I got tired of tweaks, updates, installs. tell me how often you face malware while browsing. For me almost never!

So I don,t bother with any of these add-ons.

 

I don't particularly consider blocking power alone as an advantage. I do list blocking too much as a disadvantage in this article.

HTTPSB's approach though is to give the user as much control (and information) as possible on how much to block. This means the wider the range available -- block from 0-100%, -- the more control a user has. The advantage is the range of possibilities. Some users do want that control.

The two driving principles for HTTPSB: informed consent and tools for an informed user to effectively consent/dissent.

Regarding EasyList's whitelisting, I am quite skeptical that all in there is to "unbreak" websites. I invite anyone to look into the whitelist section is see what is whitelisted.

For instance, I just picked a whitelist rule randomly which appeared questionable:
"@@||google.com/adsense/search/$script,domain=izito.co.uk",
then I browsed "izito.co.uk", and all seemed to work just fine. The site didn't seem to mind that ads from google.com were not served.

Another:
"@@||pubmatic.com/AdServer/js/universalpixel.js$domain=politico.com"
I dug even a bit farther, trying to find out where exactly the page needed the loaded script, to no avail. As far as I can tell, the js code is solely for 3rd-party tracking purpose.

Then I found others which seem to be outdated, sites had been redesigned.

That is not to say there is no whitelisting in there which unbreak a site, but to say that *all* whitelisting is to unbreak sites is unconvincing from what I see.

My bad, see below.

 

Adding to what gorhill said: Easylist (and any other filterlist) is nothing else but a blacklist with one big shortcoming: It only blocks elements/objects for which filter rules are available. New or unknown security/privacy threats where no filters apply are therefore not blocked - regardless how big Easylist has grown over the years.

Think twice before you decide that some new addon is somehow worse than all those years of work just because it's blocking more. It's not about a new addon but all about a different approach which is certainly superior if it comes to new/unknown security/privacy threats. And nobody denies that such an approach requires more work and is not as convenient as just relying on a blacklist.

 

EasyList+EasyPrivacy is nice for blocking about as much as can blocked without reducing website functionality, except for ad removal/hiding. EasyList+EasyPrivacy doesn't block some elements from social media sites though, since doing so would reduce website functionality.

 

Easylist & EasyPrivacy doesn't block any social media, that's a whole separate, optional list.

I already stated that in my post, I'm not sure why you're repeatedly ignoring what I'm saying and going off on a tangent.

I'm not sure why this discussion has seemingly become about HTTPSB, or how we got here in specific. Hell, it's not even mentioned in the article.. I'm not trying to badmouth your addon or degrade it. My response was to "privacy addons" in general. To my knowledge HTTPSB isn't inherently about privacy, it's about control, of which privacy can be achieved.

Addons like Disconnect and Ghostery or lists like EasyPrivacy are solely about privacy. My point was don't go around thinking "oh this blocks more obviously it's better".

You're perfectly free to read the free and open repo changelog here: https://hg.adblockplus.org/easylist

You're free to report such issues, but they are also changed, and entiries being removed is also common.

There is no other reason for the whitelist. What exactly is there to be sceptical about?

 

Right. And using those separate, optional list(s) breaks website functionality that people may or not may not care about.

 

Weird conversation granted HTTPSB uses Easylist.

So HTTPSB differs in implementing Easylist versus Adblock and the likes.

Pros of HTTPSB: You can use EL blocking and then get much more granular. It has a logging system. So the user gets the "quick fix" of slapping on Easylist, but is further informed and put in control.

Cons versus Adblock: no DOM. So can't hide elements, collapse, or adjust CSS. You can also add subs (although HTTPSB has most)

I use both. If Gorhill added DOM...I'd drop adblock like a bad habit.

 

Agreed.

 

Thanks for the pointer to https://hg.adblockplus.org/easylist/, wish I knew about it beforehand.

This helps me realize I made a big mistake, I gave "izito.co.uk" as an example, and I just can't find it anymore. Now I realize that somehow I was looking at the exceptions in the "acceptable ads" list (where it rightly needs to be), while I thougth I was looking at the main EasyList.

Also, regarding the other exception I was questioning, "@@||pubmatic.com/AdServer/js/universalpixel.js$domain=politico.com", I find that in the log it's because that comments were broken without these exceptions.

Great resource, I will try to contribute whenever I find something useful to the lists.

Given that there is a way to clear out whatever questioning I may have had about some entries in the exception lists, I may add support for these exceptions in HTTPSB -- though before that a more complete support of the filter syntax is required.

 

Glad to have cleared up your doubts and good to hear it will help you improve your addon.