µBlock, a lean and fast blocker

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by gorhill, Jun 23, 2014.

  1. nicolaasjan

    nicolaasjan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Posts:
    329
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    175.204 network filters + 130.872 cosmetic filters.

    But it's not only the amount of rules that's restricted by this new manifest, as far as I understood.
    It will also limit what uBO is allowed to do with the requests.

    Maybe @gorhill can tell you more about that.
     
  2. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    14,774
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Yes but that's the thing, shouldn't there be an easier way to figure this stuff out? And yes I know, I'm in love with her, but then again I'm in love with hundreds of women on the internet LOL.

    To clarify, sometimes stuff works on my desktop, but it doesn't work on my laptop and vice versa, while I'm using the same uBlock filters on both machines, at least I believe so. It's so weird, but don't get me wrong, uBlock Origin stays one of the best extensions ever.
     
  3. Sampei Nihira

    Sampei Nihira Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2013
    Posts:
    2,211
    Location:
    Italy
    In the pc of my daughter, who loves to use Chrome, I set about 75.000 rules in UBO.
    I could even decrease them by 10.000 if we consider the protective effect of AV + DNS.
    I would recommend you to start reducing your total rules.

    If in the future,UBO in Chrome has limited effectiveness,but I don't think so,we will consider alternatives.
    ;):)
     
  4. Sampei Nihira

    Sampei Nihira Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2013
    Posts:
    2,211
    Location:
    Italy
    Today I did a test with my NM28.
    I entered in My filters - UBO these rules:

    https://github.com/LennyFox/Blocklists/blob/master/Extra%20security

    ! Block downloading executable content from insecure HTTP websites

    Then I disabled my:

    "Online Malicious Domains Blocklist"

    in UBO and searched the URLhaus database
    for a file with the correct characteristics subject to blocking by UBO:


    100.JPG

    I regularly downloaded the exe file from HTTP to a folder on my HD D: without any block by UBO:

    100a.JPG

    There is no outside interference.
    I have disabled any DNS intervention.
    No AV.
    No browser blocking dangerous downloads.
    No Google Safe browsing or the corresponding Microsoft functionality.

    I recommend that user to replicate the test.:thumb:
    And if it works in other OSes and browsers, put a warning in its list that has no general validity.
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2021
  5. Dragon1952

    Dragon1952 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2012
    Posts:
    2,308
    Location:
    Hollow Earth - Telos
    I have 2 UBO Filters for Privacy. AdGuard Tracking and EasyPrivacy. Which filter blocks FLoC.
     
  6. nicolaasjan

    nicolaasjan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Posts:
    329
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    It's the one that's built in:
    uBlock filters – Privacy
     
  7. Adric

    Adric Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,494
    That blocklist was renamed to Extra Security uBO and then a few minutes later deleted o_O
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2021
  8. Gandalf_The_Grey

    Gandalf_The_Grey Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2012
    Posts:
    892
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Thanks for posting this. :thumb: Those rules only seem to work with AdGuard.
    Lenny Fox has now deleted this list and he switched to AdGuard.
    You can follow the discussion on MalwareTips:
    https://malwaretips.com/threads/whi...with-ubo-ag-and-abp.102255/page-8#post-938259
     
  9. Sampei Nihira

    Sampei Nihira Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2013
    Posts:
    2,211
    Location:
    Italy
  10. Brummelchen

    Brummelchen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Posts:
    4,075
    not sure to get the point here.
    i use https-only mode in firefox, this would also deny downloads from such source as Lenny show. in all cases (and browsers) downloads are put in a secure environment with no breakout (any dangerous windows folder is caught). and firefox asks for executable downloads. i do not read all which browser he uses.
     
  11. Gandalf_The_Grey

    Gandalf_The_Grey Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2012
    Posts:
    892
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    There is now a newer and smaller Extra security uBO filterlist:
    Code:
    ! Block third-party executable content from insecure HTTP websites
    ||HTTP://*$third-party,~stylesheet,~media,~image
    
    ! Block downloading executable content from insecure HTTP websites 
    |http://*.exe^$document
    |http://*.msi^$document
    |http://*.bat^$document
    |http://*.dll^$document
    |http://*.hta^$document
    |http://*.jar^$document
    |http://*.msu^$document
    |http://*.pif^$document
    |http://*.ps1^$document
    |http://*.ps2^$document
    |http://*.reg^$document
    |http://*.scr^$document
    |http://*.sys^$document
    |http://*.vbe^$document
    |http://*.vbs^$document
    |http://*.tmp^$document
    https://raw.githubusercontent.com/LennyFox/Blocklists/master/Extra security uBO
     
  12. Jan Willy

    Jan Willy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2021
    Posts:
    34
    Location:
    Netherlands
    The list is called Extra security. IMHO the most (perhaps only) relevant rule is the first. Therefore you don't need this list. One can add this rule to My rules.
     
  13. Sampei Nihira

    Sampei Nihira Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2013
    Posts:
    2,211
    Location:
    Italy
    Note in the URLhaus database that only a fraction of malware content URLs are covered by the list.
    Also note that using the list I used, which I disabled in the test post, covers virtually all malicious links.
    For example, the list does not cover executables masquerading as other extensions.
    It may help,but it is not the panacea for all ills.
     
  14. Sampei Nihira

    Sampei Nihira Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2013
    Posts:
    2,211
    Location:
    Italy
    I've noticed that often what you cite as the first rule is written like this:

    Code:
    |HTTP://$third-party,~image,~stylesheet,~media
    I would be curious to know the opinion of Yuki or Raymond.
     
  15. nicolaasjan

    nicolaasjan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Posts:
    329
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2021
  16. Gandalf_The_Grey

    Gandalf_The_Grey Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2012
    Posts:
    892
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Yes, thanks, it was a nice suggestion that Extra security uBO filterlist, but I won't be using it :thumb:
     
  17. Brummelchen

    Brummelchen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Posts:
    4,075
    the first rule is futile if you deny mixed content in browser, firefox can do this.
    https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/mixed-content-blocking-firefox
    But this only concerns active content, not passive and not objects loaded or other content.
    Code:
    security.mixed_content.block_display_content    true 
    security.mixed_content.block_object_subrequest    true 
    security.mixed_content.upgrade_display_content    true
    i did not yet test further if https mode deny all mixed content by default without those switches

    There are more sites, but firefox will show me and offer the unsafe method, i can refuse or use it. https mode.

    Chromium based do not have such option for https mode or any deeper switches for mixed content. I also thinkthat the extension "https everywhere" cannot help out, not tested. therefor i think Lenny dont use firefox.

    not to forget what i wrote above:
    the "extra" list contain only executables. in case of a fresh profile firefox only knew few formats and for the rest it will ask what to do.
     
  18. nicolaasjan

    nicolaasjan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Posts:
    329
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    I won't use it either, because it would create a lot of false positives.
    Besides that, files with these kind of extensions (except for the *.jar files perhaps) don't do any harm on my Linux system. Haha.
     
  19. Jan Willy

    Jan Willy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2021
    Posts:
    34
    Location:
    Netherlands
    On the site https://github.com/Yuki2718/adblock/issues/4 you can read Yuki2718's comment in his post from January 15. 2021. In footnote 2 he says: "BTW even in correct form it's still an inefficient filter. Performance-wise, single inefficient filter is worse than 10,000 efficient filters - but I don't say any inefficient filter shouldn't be used." I think you already knew Yuki2718's opinion. Yuki2718's own Medium Mode seems the better way to go (See: https://github.com/Yuki2718/adblock).
     
  20. Sampei Nihira

    Sampei Nihira Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2013
    Posts:
    2,211
    Location:
    Italy
    Probably yes, maybe not, who knows.
    I'm just a simple and humble fisherman ......
    ;):)
     
  21. plat1098

    plat1098 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2018
    Posts:
    1,213
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
  22. nicolaasjan

    nicolaasjan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Posts:
    329
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    I think it works now in the Development version of uBO (scriptlet added).
    *##+js(no-floc)

    This is what I see (Chromium 92.0.4474.0) on amifloced.org :

     
  23. plat1098

    plat1098 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2018
    Posts:
    1,213
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Awesome, thank you nicolaasjan. Also for the amifloced link (which is EFF). :thumb: The more I read about this FLoC jazz, the more disturbed I am by it.

    I hope the saying: "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction" will be applicable for the duration.
     
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2021
  24. nicolaasjan

    nicolaasjan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Posts:
    329
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    <OT>
    It's nicolaas (Dutch for Nicholas)
    Nicolaas Jan
    From Wikipedia:
    </OT>
     
  25. plat1098

    plat1098 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2018
    Posts:
    1,213
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    I stand corrected and edited the post in question. :)
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.