µBlock, a lean and fast blocker

Okay thanks!! So these are secure rules?
* * 1p-script noop
* * 3p-frame block
* * 3p-script block
* * inline-script block
* csi.gstatic.com * block
* doubleclick.net * block
* ggpht.com * block
* google-analytics.com * block
* googleadservices.com * block
* www.youtube-nocookie.com * block
docs.google.com fonts.googleapis.com * noop
docs.google.com fonts.gstatic.com * noop
docs.google.com google.com * noop
docs.google.com googleusercontent.com * noop
docs.google.com gstatic.com * noop
docs.google.com ssl.gstatic.com * noop
malwaretips.com malwaretips.com * noop
www.wilderssecurity.com wilderssecurity.com * noop
www.youtube.com googlevideo.com * noop
www.youtube.com youtube.com * noop
www.youtube.com ytimg.com * noop

 

I would say those are secure, although gorhill (Raymond) will know for sure. The mistake I made initially was using Allow for a few of the global entries.

 

Okay thanks!

 

I have been trying to figure how to phrase as concisely as possible dynamic filtering, and so far I got: "To further fine-tune uBlock's filtering behavior". So baseline is uBlock's behavior with its default static filter lists. Dynamic filtering allows one to bypass one way or another those static filters (bypass block static filters, or bypass allow static filters).

I think I will try to find real life cases of how it's useful and make a video each time I have a good use case. I made this one today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bzB6tESynM

A good collection of these will be better than any wall of text.

 

What is the best setup in Ublock for GMAIL? I select gmail from my chrome browser and although I now have light grey for 1st party scripts allowed, I still have to disable Ublock to get it to load.

 

Copy and paste this in your my rules section of ublock and hit apply
mail.google.com google.com * noop
mail.google.com gstatic.com * noop

 

Tnx Malwar. I now am in the 'noop' club.

 

lol okay your welcome anytime!!

 

@gorhill Updated to latest stable, it works perfectly!!

 

So as per the "Using Umatrix with Ublock" info from the wiki page, should we still leave all scripts alone in ublock (1st, 3rd, Inline)?

 

Everything seems pretty straight forward except for the filtering of the + and -

Some sites have ++ whiles others only + same goes with the minuses, what is the diffrence?

 

Quick question in regards to filtering. I have 3rd part frames globally blocked, in which for instance Wilders has a light pink shade to it so if I set it to dark gray or:

• Dark gray: no-op rule
  • To cancel any dynamic filtering, the requests will still be subject to static filtering

What exactly does "no-op' rule mean in terms of how it effects a web page?

 

Hello,

Try the wiki: "required reading" and under dynamic filtering check out the "quick guide"....

Quote from the "quick guide":

 

Ah, didn't see the link, thank you much

 

I removed uMatrix and enabled dynamic filtering in uBlock. It seems that pages are loading faster for me. Did anybody else noticed that or is this just my imagination?

 

Brilliant improvement to share code and gui with uMatrix

 

Really liking µBlock. Thanks for the massive amount of work, gorhill

 

I've noticed that too. For example, NFL.com loads in about 10 s using only uMatrix, 8 s using only uBlock. This was trying several tests on both and results are consistent.

 

Wow, this just keeps getting better and better. With the right base settings and most filters checked off I see no reason to run anything else.

 

Bravo that man Bravo @gorhill
Now we just need that other chap to port this to Firefox and all will be well

 

I would seriously consider moving back to Firefox if we had ports of uBlock/uMatrix. But congrats on the nice new features, gorhill, and thank you.

 

10 seconds ?!?

I get ~0.7 second: http://www.numion.com/StopWatch/Start.html?Url=http://www.nfl.com/&WebtimerButton=00:00:00.553 with following rules:

• numion.com nfl.com * allow
• numion.com nfl.com frame allow
• numion.com nflcdn.com * allow

I see no reason why uMatrix would be slower, especially that it does much less work than uBlock, since there are no cosmetic filters to handle.

 

uBlock doesn't seem to work with the checkboxes for host files.

For example with hp hosts checked, I can still reach any site on hp host database. For example this site (non-malicious) which I have verified is on the hp hosts file;

~ link removed ~

NOT blocked with uBlock and the hp host checked.

 

Disregard. I found the issue. It's between my ears.

 

My congratulations to Gorhill, Man you are the best!