µBlock, a lean and fast blocker

I like being able to either noop all 3rd party scripts, then additionally frames, or test / try individual 'entries' first, for a site - then optionally 'lock' these (for future) for that site.

It is simple to manage and intuitive for me.

 

Looks like it has some features of NoScript/Scriptsafe.

 

Well, your first argument is subjective, and if it comes to adblocking capacities: Both uBO and Adguard can use the same filterlists, and Adguard AFAIK supports the uBO-specific extensions of the ABP filter syntax (and vice versa). What makes uBO superior is in particular:

1. Dynamic Filtering which allows for global and domain-specific rules. Examples what it can do can be found here and here. Here's an overview of its network filtering engine (details).
2. its excellent logger which lets you easily create very detailed static and dynamic filters.
3. many settings (like disabling javascript by default) and related per-site switches.

All this is not available in other products.

Neither has uBO for me.

 

Well, but again, this suggests that specific filers/filterlists cause this problem. That's why I asked if you tried disabling one after the other to find the culprit.

 

It is of course, the dynamic filtering - in medium mode - that I was so clumsily trying to describe ...

@guest Try it, I think you'll like it.

 

So you never tried uBlock Origin before? After reading your recents posts I got that impression, uBlock Origin isnt just an adblocker, it is a wide-spectrum blocker.

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Blocking-mode

 

One thing I like in Adguard is being system wide.

 

Used it (on FF Linux) , doesn't impress me so much compared to Adguard desktop, it is why i ask questions to know what really motivate people with it.

 

To have a fair comparison you have to compare ublock vs adguard (browser extension). On my freshly installed laptop I installed the adguard browser version and while visiting my usual sites I saw that it didn't block the amount I was used to (like from the adguard desktop version running on my main pc).
As a browser version for me both ublock and adguard did ok.
Also not all people are willing to pay for an "adblocker".

 

i prefer to use ubo for cosmetic filtering only and let umatrix deal with the rest.

 

I can't find any easy or medium mode setting in UBO.

 

Have a look at the wiki page about the different modes: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Blocking-mode

 

You won't find such a setting but instead check the box "I am an advanced user" after reading the wiki and watching The Hated One's video, which gorhill himself recommends. The link is on the wiki. With a bit of trial and error, you'll be a pro in no time. Easier than µMatrix for me with enough granularity. You can make it a firewall for your browser. Also see here: https://malwaretips.com/threads/ubl...-user-tips-questions-and-issues-thread.92247/

 

Not meant as nitpicking but on behalf of a more precise terminology: I'm pretty sure that you're using uBO not only for cosmetic filtering but rather for static filtering. uMatrix works on the DNS- or domain-level. The ABP filter syntax used by uBO (+ its own enhancements) can block things which can not be blocked by uMatrix. This includes cosmetic filtering (aka Element Hiding) but is by far not restricted to it.

 

nope. i use it for cosmetic filtering (element picker mainly) without static filters.

 

Maybe you can concentrate your efforts in helping someone else.

Thanks.

 

FWIW, disabling Norton Safe Web extension allows Firefox to open much quicker. I can't completely let uBO off the hook because when the page isn't loading disabling uBO and that page loads immediately. That does not happen if I disable the Norton Safe Web extension while the page is trying to load.

This suggests to me that there could be some conflict between the two extensions.

 

Hm, this surprises me. This means that you do not have any filterlists enabled?

I'm asking this as without static filters (usually from the filterlists) you wouldn't be able to block a script like

with the static filter (from EasyList)

Code:

/ad/zeus/*

or a script like

with the static filter(from EasyList as well)

Code:

/advertising/*$script,domain=~advertising.org.il|~commercialplanet.eu|~kloterfarms.com|~temple.edu|~themarker.com

unless you block all scripts for that domain in uMatrix (which would probably render it unusable). Cosmetic filtering in uBO would not help here as it would not block that script (unless you create a corresponding static filter with the element picker but you're not doing that).

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something ...

 

No worries, mate, I'm going to leave this forum anyway.

 

no, i do have some filterlists enabled. it's just that i don't rely on them for blocking elements/things globally. i use ubo for cosmetic filtering and umtx for dealing with websites globally. blocking ads is not a priority for me.

 

So you are using static filtering. I think we are talking at cross purposes

 

yeah, that about sums it up.

 

Leave the forum? Maybe take a break if you need but leaving is kinda a little overboard.

 

Yeah @summerheat, I do implore you to stay as I have found your inputs, as a genuine expert here, most useful.