µBlock, a lean and fast blocker

I don't think an option to disabe/enabe the addon will not be introduced, as Raymond believes its just duplicating the browser functionality. I too tend to agree with him on this!!

So, you really have two options for you at this moment -
- Use browser addon page to disable the addon. If you are using Chrome, i believe it by default provides an option to disable it, when you right-click on it.
- Other option (not a complete one), is to use dynamic filtering. Where you can click on all cell (global scope), and make it green.

 

Im using google chrome as my main browser.I use ublock origin with inline and 3rd party scripts blocked.If i were to disable javascript in chrome,is there any conflict here between chrome and ublock.?

Do i need to use the advanced settings in ublock if i disable the javascript in chrome.?
Thanks.

 

There shouldn't be a conflict but it could be harder to manage rules on two places. Both - Chrome and uBlock - will block scripts if configured so. You can still use advanced settings in uBlock to block 3rd party frames if you set script blocking in Chrome.

 

Thanks, will need to do some reading, because it's not always working as expected.

 

I was wondering why first party scripts (top level domain) were automatically blocked on coolblue.nl?

http://www.coolblue.nl/

 

If you got the Easylist Privacy filters active, /__ssobj/core.js requests are blocked, they are nothing but tracking, probably used in good intentions to get to know which products people are most interested in.

 

hi
uBlock filters – Badware risks block many sites like http://sourceforge.net/projects/winlockpro/ for the filter ||sourceforge.net^$document
it's trusty Badware risks,isn't it?
is there a way to uninstall ublock orign (a clean install ) and re-install ?

 

Why the need to uninstall/reinstall?
If you really want to download something from sourceforge site, just disable uBO then.

 

The option "disable WebRTC" doesn't work, real IP is still visible. After installing "Disable WebRTC" addon IP adress is invisible. There must be a glitch in uBlock, please fix it.

 

I think it works. When I am using a VPN connection, I see only the public IP given by the VPN. Take a test with this: https://ipleak.net/

Chrome shows my public IP, which is fine. Firefox shows:
Your IP address - WebRTC detection
https://ipleak.net/static/images/status/yes.pngNo leak, RTCPeerConnection not available.

Main thing is my ISP given IP or my router given IP is not shown in either of them.

If I uncheck WebRTC option in Firefox uBO, the test will show my VPN given local address and also my router given local IP.

 

Try it please: https://diafygi.github.io/webrtc-ips/

 

Also, if about:config in Firefox already has media.peerconnection.enabled (I think that is the entry) set to false, ticking WebRTC in uBlock will reverse it. That is what happened on my side... not sure if it can be replicated.

 

If I uncheck WebRTC leak option in Firefox uBO, that test will leak my VPN given local IP, ISP given IP and router given IP. If checked none leaking, so it works.

Something has changed in latest Chrome I think. The WebRTC option in uBO has no effect on either of these tests. They don't show any leaking even if unchecked.
Edit: Above paragraph was written testing in incognito mode. That option works the same in Chrome normal mode as in Firefox and if unchecked leaks IP information.

I don't find after these tests that the uBO WebRTC option is not working. It works. Might be something in marzametal's post that the option acts as a toggle. I have not messed with either FF or Chrome settings myself.

 

I tested it in Chrome. When uBlock Origin is blocking WebRTC from leaking my IP, I get only public IP showed (VPN). When I disable that option it shows local IP and IP designated by my ISP. So in my case that setting works just fine.

 

I think that's the problem here too. However, with separate addon "Disable WebRTC" the setting in media.peerconnection doesn't matter, IP is invisible.

 

OK I see, but I want it to always allow all "first party" scripts. Because this might break things I assume.

 

Code:

* * 1p-script allow
* * 1p-script noop

The first rule allows all 1st party scripts absolutely on global basis (with no static filtering)
The second rule allows 1st party scripts globally but will apply static filtering

The second rule is recommended over the first. You should probably just apply the specific allow all filtering to any sites that may need it, such as the one you listed above.

You might also want to take a look at medium Blocking mode.

 

Will check it out, but I would sure like to have a dumbed down version, something like ScriptKeeper:

https://addons.opera.com/en/extensions/details/scriptkeeper/

 

that's the beauty of uBlocko, in that you can dumb it down to the point where it's blocking bare minimum, although probably not recommended. There is also enhanced easy mode which is simply easy mode with the addition of blocking 3rd-party frames globally. this will give you pretty decent blocking while breaking very few webpages.

 

Your global * * 1p-script allow rule is rather interesting and does exactly what the guy asked. You can say you are an advanced user and with that rule just weaken the easy mode somewhat with the cost of loosing the tooltips. Not that I would use it but theoretically. And there is also the possibility to uncheck the 3rd party filters to bring the filtering downto ABP level. Not that I would use that either.

The second noop rule is useless as far as I can see. It is default.

 

Whoa, easy there! Neither of those I use. Those are just crude examples because he wanted to allow 1st-party scripts, but I didn't recommend the first one at least and, in fact, I recommended he look at medium and enhanced easy blocking modes. Yes I know the second is default, but that was shown just to emphasize what it does. FWIW, I've been using medium mode for quite a while now.

 

I am currently using uBlocko (static filtering) and uMatrix, but am considering changing to uBlocko only, with dynamic medium mode filtering, for its ease of use.
Any views on what I would lose by doing this?

 

What comes to mind is blocking dynamically filtering (1st party) cookies, images, plugins, xhr and other.
Matrix provides a convenient view of what is actually allowed and to operate.
What is in the Privacy section of the dashboard. Those options will protect even when matrix is disabled for a site.
More hosts files if one likes them.

I use them together. If i filter with uMatrix, uBO has local noop settings for 3rd party script and frame. If I filter with uBO, uMatrix matrix filtering is disabled for the site. It is convenient to have uMatrix allow scripts (and frames and other stuff uBO allows too, except the cookies) for the first party as a default setting when running them together.

 

Kind of hard to answer when you don't tell what you are afraid to lose in (security, privacy). Also what options did you disable/enable from on uMatrix?

 

Both security and privacy ... all settings are at default I think, and all hosts files selected except hpHosts.