IE InPrivate Filtering blocklists

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by m00nbl00d, May 30, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    I'm in the process of converting known adware, etc blocklists to IE's InPrivate Filtering supported format XML.

    I'll have to e-mail the authors of such blocklists and check whether or not it will be OK to make them available for everyone. If yes, I'll host them at Rapidshare and post the links over here.

    You can import whichever list you wish. Too many entries may cause slowdowns when opening IE, though.

    I'm wondering if it would be possible for Microsoft to optimize InPrivate Filtering so that it's able to handle large entries. I guess Microsoft never considered this possible scenario, hence if we place too many entries it becomes slower than without them. It's a matter of contacting with them and see what they can do.

    I'll keep you posted.
     
  2. NoIos

    NoIos Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    Posts:
    607
    Nice idea :thumb: . It sounds natural a slowdown using huge lists. Don't expect fast reactions by Microsoft on issues like this.
     
  3. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    Thank you.

    I expect Microsoft to try do something about it. After all, they did implement such feature. In my most honest opinion it would be stupid not to enhance it. The more people asking about it the better. They might actually do something. When I start a thread over Microsoft's forums I'll give you guys the link so that you can applaud the decision, etc. :D

    Edit: By the way, I'll also be creating my own blocklist, but it will me more directed to sites on my own country. I don't know if some country people come in here, but then I'll also place it in here and if there is, better! :)
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2010
  4. Cudni

    Cudni Global Moderator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Posts:
    6,956
    Location:
    Somethingshire
  5. acuariano

    acuariano Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Posts:
    786
    that link-list is outdated..fanboy has a lis for IE8 but is from feb-28.
    moonblood hope you can take care of this situation,and give us th link,i'll pas it to my friends..
    actually i use simple adblock which is good too.
     
  6. Cudni

    Cudni Global Moderator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Posts:
    6,956
    Location:
    Somethingshire
    it is/was meant as reference
     
  7. Greg S

    Greg S Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2009
    Posts:
    1,039
    Location:
    A l a b a m a
    I'm interested. I've used a very large list in the past but didn't notice any slowdown.
     
  8. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    When I mean slowdowns, I mean when working within InPrivate Filtering, it is a pain in the neck to browse the entries and, for example, try to delete an entry, IE becomes a bit unresponsive. The more entries, the worse.

    This could be circumvented by deleting all entries and delete the entry you wish from the xml file and them import it again.
    But, I believe that Microsoft could do something about it. It's just like IE's restricted sites zone. I have lots of entries, but it is very fast to browse through all them. The reason is that it is optimized to work that way, unlike InPrivate Filtering, because when Microsoft implemented this feature into IE, I don't think they were considering people would be using it for such large lists.
     
  9. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    I just did a small test to see if it would block ads, using my own very small list - a merely few entries :D - and it did block.

    Curious thing:

    IE8 InPrivate Filtering if set to block manually - the option I chose for the test - will block (if I chose to) the following regarding some google ads:

    <item><description>googlesyndication.com/pagead/*/show_ads.js</description><wf:blockRegex><![CDATA[googlesyndication\.com/pagead/.*show_ads\.js.*]]>

    That's how InPrivate Filtering itself bocks and exports.

    But, that's not necessary since

    <item><description>It will block googlesyndication.com ads</description><wf:blockRegex><![CDATA[googlesyndication.com]]>

    will block the ads, anyway. Funny to see how IE8 InPrivate Filtering blocks them.

    The <description> doesn't matter. It can be anything. It's what it is, a description.

    Anyway, I'll be sending e-mails now asking for permissions to share converted lists. Not my own at the moment. Very very very... very much small! :)
     
  10. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    Hello,

    Sorry for not giving any news sooner.

    First, allow me to say that I had to end the contract I had with my ISP. This means I no longer have an Internet connection.
    They weren't keeping their end of the deal; they kept on restricting my Internet connection speed to miserable speeds of sometimes 8 kbps. Unexcused, since I was paying for 7.2 Mbps.
    I spent the whole month of May trying to have them to restore my speed back, but to no avail.

    I'm looking for a new service, and this time I'll be getting a fiber Internet connection with a speed of 20 to 30 Mbps. Way better than the one I was suppose to have. I hope my area is already covered by such service. Other surrounding areas already are, so... I'm guessing is a matter of time until mine is too, if not already so.

    This is just to explain why I said nothing more related to the subject of the thread I started.

    Second, I want to talk about the subject of the thread itself.

    I mentioned I was in the process of converting ads blacklists to IE InPrivate Filtering format. That's true, but I decided not to convert any lists and only keep my own, which already has a few entries. It will grow over time, and as soon as I get my new Internet connection, it will only get bigger. ;)

    Why have I stepped back?

    The reason is quite simple: I'd always have to be sure I would provide you the latest blacklists provided by third-parties.

    I would also need to be sure every and each entry would be working as it should. Such task would take a lot of my time, and time that I cannot give to such task.
    So, by only keeping my own blocklist, specifically created for InPrivate Filtering, I'll be 100% sure all entries are working fine, because I'll verify whether or not they are working as I put them in the blacklist.

    For example, Fanboy's ads blacklist contains an entry like /www/delivery/. Such entry won't do a damn thing in InPrivate Filtering. I tested it with one site from my country, which does strore ads in a domain like domainname. com/www/delivery/etc.

    It still displayed the ads.

    That's just an example. I also looked for some info, and many people were complaining that the convert list some user was making available wasn't working fine. The reason is quite simple: Those lists exist and were created for Adblock Plus and not InPrivate Filtering.

    You may understand that it would be very time consuming to check every and each entry from other blacklists.

    One thing I noticed in a few tests I made is that InPrivate Filtering does not seem to be blocking Google ads from Gmail.
    While placing the entry googlesyndication.com does block Google ads from the websites where I've spot them, it won't block them in Gmail.
    Maybe Microsoft did it on purpose and coded InPrivate Filtering not to block ads in Gmail. I've already seen other people mentioning that it wouldn't block Google ads in Gmail.

    I'll check it out again when I can, though, and see if something else is required.

    One other interesting thing that I've noticed is that InPrivate Filtering won't look at wildcards such as * in entries like www.wilderssecurity.com/ads/*.

    For InPrivate Filtering the * is actually what it is, a *.

    It also won't look at the . in entries like ad..

    I came across that behavior when opening a video tutorial coded in flash. It wouldn't be displayed at all. I checked it out and that's how I found out that it will disregard the ..

    The sourcecode of the video has the following
    And, if the entry ad. is in place, InPrivate Filtering will only look for ad, which will find it in
    blocking the full page.

    I'll keep in touch. Don't worry, I hope to be back on-line in full power quite soon. I also am still researching for websites containing ads, trackers, etc, just not quite so often as I would like.

    Hope you understand.

    Regards
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.