µBlock, a lean and fast blocker

you're welcome, t.

 

Even disabling UBO no pop-up :



Have you blocked Google consent?

 

thats independent of consent.
msedge on google pages will show this, chrome on ms pages will show another. firefox is not concerned.

 

Also in Google.it no pop-up.
Do you have an explanation?

P.S. After I finish a job I will also try in Linux pc.

 

I cannot view the 2 videos under the article in this page https://www.zougla.gr/greece/articl...n-epi8esi-ton-mat-se-fotoreporter-tis-zouglas The videos are viewable only after disabling ublock for this page.
Any recommendations are welcome. Thanks in advance.

 

No problem.
If you have too many filter lists you may occasionally have these problems.
More filters = more false positives.

 

the challenge is always to gamble with his own general settings, in your case you locked up the page. major solution:

Code:

www.zougla.gr * 3p-frame allow
www.zougla.gr * 3p-script allow

further

Code:

www.zougla.gr akamaized.net * allow
www.zougla.gr pstatic.gr * allow
www.zougla.gr zougla.gr * allow

for me it has advantage to use uMatrix, i disable uBo and do my settings in uM, blocking this or that and watch the result. the minimum results to view the video are transfered to uBo but that was not enough here, i need to set the first code box.

i would say: for your needs you have set uBo to sharp, loosen it.

 

The trouble with "allow" rules instead of block or noop, is you are bypassing the filtering security uBlock provides. The developer, gorhill, has often advised against the use of allow rules.

 

For me, the filter that finally made the videos visible (one is audio, right?) after refreshing the browser was to disable the "ublock filters--Privacy" under the built-in filters section. This filter is one of six that is default-enabled.

After I disabled that filter, I could go back and re-enable all the others I'd unchecked and the videos were still there. Also, I learned the hard way not to disable Fanboy's Annoyances for this site.

Hope this works for you, too. But the videos are potentially viewable at least.

By the way, for now I'm only using one imported filter (CNAME protection) and about 2/3 of the built-in ones, incl. Peter Lowe's list. That's it. Having good success so far, even on sites like Yahoo. Guess I can add more as the need comes up but hopefully it won't.

 

Thanks my friend. AFAIC I had no problem with NoScript and UMatrix setting up the site correctly to play its content my problem was only with UBlock. The problem with the filterlists you choose is something that happens from time to time. In UBlock I have medium mode and similar setups with NoScript and UMatrix. Trying to find the "best" solution for my needs I have concluded these things:

1. NoScript has matured very well and being undiscovered from lot of sites that block "adblock soluions". The downside for me the lack of choosing a domains blacklist (AdGuard DNS Filter (Domains) has very few false positives)
2. UMatrix was the best alternative for NoScript but has being stopped developed.
3. The main reason to use UBlock is the compination of default deny mode, the many filterlists to choose and the cosmetic filtering that sometimes is more than welcome.

 

Today,consistent decrease in filter rules.

 

**** Only for Firefox (who doesn't use NextDNS) ****

I decided to include this list as well:

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/nextdns/cname-cloaking-blocklist/master/domains

The list has been updated to 2022 and now there are 5 rules not included in:

AdGuard CNAME original trackers list.

 

1. It's not detected as it doesn't use any filters/filterlists which is one of its weaknesses. The more important weakness is that a site which you allow in NS is allowed everywhere as there is no distinction between global and local rules like in uBO. Blocking JS in uBO is much more flexible than in NS.
   
   
   I had been of the same opinion - but no longer.

​

 

I agree for the weakness you mention (no filterlists). For the second part NoScript has in recent versions the ability of creating local rules for a site for example In bleepingcomputer.com you can allow bleepstatic.com to work only locally and not gobal. Although not so flexible the blocking is quite efficient and has options to block WebGL, access to LAN and Ping of sites. So far I am quite pleased and I highly recommend to "play" a little to see its capabilities.

 

Ah, I wasn't aware of that. I tried it again and can confirm. But I find it much less user-friendly than uBO.

Well, they can also be blocked in uBO. E.g., enabling the "Block Outsider Intrusion into LAN" list blocks access to LAN.

 

I can't get rid of this consent pop-up from yahoo. I tried Consent Blocker and it shows a 1 on the icon, but the pop-up remains with the screen behind it blurred out. Element zapper temporarily gets rid of it, but the screen is still blurred.
Can someone help me with this? (using Firefox) ESR 91.7)

 

consent from yahoo is special.
anyhow it loads without consent popup here in firefox, no number on "consent blocker" (in chromium i need to accept, but there exist no "consent blocker" extension)

the only filter for yahoo is (in "my rules")

Code:

no-cosmetic-filtering: consent.yahoo.com true
yahoo.com yimg.com * allow

"cosmetic" means the popup should have been shown, but it was obviously "muted"
same in ESR as in v98.

maybe wrong lists in ublock? maybe "i dont care about cookies" in lists or as extension?
that list/extension is futile since month.

 

I used to use Dandelion Sprout's Annoying Banners and Overlays list but have since discontinued as it stopped working for me consistently, or not at all. But here. My anti-paywall ext. suddenly stopped working for WSJ recently too, so I guess the "free ride" is over.

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/DandelionSprout/adfilt/master/AnnoyingBannersAndOverlays.txt

I don't see that overlay and I only have CNAME trackers list in Imports and about 2/3 of the default lists in ubo, incl. EasyList and Easy Privacy. Don't see that overlay in Yahoo.

Edit: Actually, I got one. Enabled "I am an advanced user" and played with the UI and was unable to block this element. Either, this block is incomplete or it seems to be embedded in the page. The Dandelion Sprout list didn't work. Anyone else?

Spoiler

 

@plat1098 Magnolia1234's paywall add-on still works for me on WSJ with a page refresh.

 

Thanks, I had this particular one installed already, just disabled. Doesn't work for me on here, I will have to investigate why.

Tried two dedicated filter lists also for uBlock Origin, they did not work.

Paywalls...yuck.

 

paywall /= cookie consent
for yahoo: just post your used lists and maybe other filters, then we might help, this is just guessing.

and is i wrote consent.yahoo is mandatory, without exception.

 

I faced the same there.
But after clearing all cookies of WSJ, Bypass Paywalls Firefox Clean did it's job.

 

Ain't that something? The thing is: since I set Sandboxie to auto-delete upon closing the browser, this was all working before. Since updating to Firefox. 98.02, the Bypass Paywalls Clean didn't work for me. So I un-boxed Firefox, cleared just the remaining cookies and voila! WSJ shows the entire article.

Probably, I didn't box Firefox one time trying to read WSJ and didn't clear the cookies afterward. I don't think I'll try any of the two uBO lists seeing this extension works fine. All good now, thank you.

 

it would be helpful for other if you dont speak in acronyms - if you mean 2wall street joornal" it might better to write the full name
and you (again) wrote nothing about sandboxie. so you have/had a problem with sandboxie, not your browser.

concerning "WSJ" (wall street journal) - ublock has not sufficient features to block cookie consent.

but its a simple issue for
https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/google-consent/

or for chrome
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/remove-cookie-banners/pacehjmodmfilemfbcahnpdcdmlocjnm/

what you dont see ist that ublock cannot prevent the modification of the html head which is changed when page is loaded. either you use a userscript in -monkey or you block the script which is causing this. but this will lead into more work to avoid it on similar pages so the "consent blocker" is a very decent extension to this for a lot of pages including google, youtube and much more.
(instead the crappy list&extension "i dont care about cookies")

concerning sandboxie again - users here using browsers sandboxed always run into trouble when the box is not clear because it will mix up settings inside and outside which lead to trouble in any way. in case of sandboxie its better to keep data inside.

 

Thank you @Brummelchen for that link to the Chrome extension. I installed it and it already is working great for me.