µBlock, a lean and fast blocker

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

  1. Pilou42

    Pilou42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2014
    Posts:
    66
    @gorhill: I see we can use :has function. Do you plan to use a variant like hasnot ?
    As example I have xda forum which loads .page-showthread.page DIV. In one of these 50+ DIV, there's the board we want to see, in another of these 50+ DIV, there's an ad.
    Something like:
    forum.xda-developers.com##.page-showthread.page:hasnot([id="poststop"])

    Edit 19/11: Wow, they improved their method. Now it has dynamic class name instead of .page-showthread.page (even if it does not change something for us). Even a filter like forum.xda-developers.com##body>Span:style(background:none !important) is not working, cause website css has priority over uBlock one. The only solution is really to have something like hasnot.
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2016
  2. Trooper

    Trooper Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Posts:
    4,160
    I have a question. Once again, it is regarding the i Capture.PNG more website. When you go to there homepage, this is appearing now. Kind of a pita. *See attached picture* Is there anyway to get rid of this.

    Thanks for the help in advance!

    The url is -http://www.imore.com/
     
  3. Pilou42

    Pilou42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2014
    Posts:
    66
    It looks like their script are on https, except the ones which check if you have an adblocker.
    Try this filter:
    Code:
    ||http://www.imore.com/$script
    Maybe if you add ,domain=imore.com after "script" it is better for uBlock algorithm (totally not sure though).

    Btw, without any filters, if you use https instead of http, I think you won't have this nag screen (until they fix it ok).
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2016
  4. gorhill

    gorhill Developer

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    836
    Location:
    Canada
    Disabling inline script works if only reading the articles is good enough for you -- this may break some functionalities on the site, I don't know that site enough to tell:
    Code:
    ||www.imore.com^$inline-script
    Otherwise another more accurate solution is available if you use 1.9.17+:
    Code:
    imore.com##script:inject(setTimeout-defuser.js, checkBlocked, 100)
    Which filter I added to uBO's own filter.
     
  5. wat0114

    wat0114 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Posts:
    2,523
    Location:
    Canada
    Fair enough, you're right, but with rare exception have I seen network filter options present themselves, so I'm stuck on seeing the element picker used primarily for cosmetic filtering.
     
  6. There is an easy fix, I will PM it to you.
    upload_2016-11-19_10-11-7.png

    Regards Kees
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 20, 2016
  7. wat0114

    wat0114 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Posts:
    2,523
    Location:
    Canada
    Does anyone know what could be going on with this site, vancouversun.com? The screenshot shows numerous unusual and lengthy prefixes in the subdomain names, all of which contain vancouversun.com There're actually about double what's being shown. This and pcmag dot com are so far the only sites I've seen like this. Could this be some sort of "tactic" to push more ad content to viewers? Just wondering if anyone has an idea what's up with this?
     

    Attached Files:

  8. Pilou42

    Pilou42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2014
    Posts:
    66
    Wow... another website to avoid. It looks ok if you block vancouversun.com script. The script causes multiple redirection and makes the site blink.
    The long and multiple subdomains, I already had seen here for example. Unfortunately, on this site, there's no way to block ads before video. Note that you have to authorize videoplaza requests and Flash to view video.
     
  9. TheWindBringeth

    TheWindBringeth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Posts:
    2,171
    @wat0114: Based on just a quick look at the hosts, I think *.g00.vancouversun.com is CNAMEd to the Instart Logic CDN. Which, I've read, basically breaks things down into pieces and tries to delivery them in an order which improves responsiveness. So what you are seeing there may be related to that technology, rather than the typical subdomain based tracking we'd suspect. I'd be cautious though. I'd check out all the hostnames and also look at what scripts/etc is being served.
     
  10. mood

    mood Updates Team

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2012
    Posts:
    17,610
    After enabling scripts i can see it too. If i look in the logger, nearly all kind of requests have a unusual length. Scripts up to 2000 chars, images 1000chars, etc.
    And i can see "ping"-requests.
    With disabled scripts all requests and domains look "normal"
     
  11. wat0114

    wat0114 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Posts:
    2,523
    Location:
    Canada
    Thank you all for your replies. @mood you're right the page looks normal with scripts disabled. Hopefully it is because of what @TheWindBringeth suggests it could be, and not something at a nefarious level. I've always trusted that website, as it's a news site for one of the city's major newspapers.
     
  12. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    11,965
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    BTW, is it possible to make some kind of global rule that will block videos on Yahoo Finance? Also, I managed to fix a problem with the help of uBlock. The site www.eci.nl couldn't load on Firefox because of some faulty script, but after blocking ajax.googleapis.com, it works just fine.
     
  13. summerheat

    summerheat Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2015
    Posts:
    1,670
    I haven't tried it but you should be able to do this by using the logger. At the bottom of that site you should see how to create respective network filters. Perhaps it's even possible to create a dynamic URL filtering rule.
     
  14. :D my neighbour who moved from Firefox with Noscript to Chrome with uBlock Origin has an useability suggestion :thumb:

    When the box "I am an advanced user" is selected, clicking the wheel icon should open the "My Rules" tab in stead of the first "Settings" tab

    Rational: advanced user want to edit their rules 9 out of 10 times @gorhill
     
  15. topo

    topo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2013
    Posts:
    125
    does ublockorigin update automatically in chrome? in firefox it will update within 5 minutes after opening firefox which just updated from 1.9.16 to 1.10.0 a couple of days ago. chrome ubo still at 1.9.16. also there is a box allow access to file urls, should this be checked? thanks for your help
     
  16. mood

    mood Updates Team

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2012
    Posts:
    17,610
    It is automatically updated, but users of Chrome always need to wait a little bit longer to get a new version.
     
  17. topo

    topo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2013
    Posts:
    125
    mood, thanks for your reply. since i'm new to chrome(installed 30 days ago) just seems to take a long time for ubo to update. firefox is my main browser and ubo updates quickly. i updated chrome this morning and ubo is still at 1.9.16. thanks again
     
  18. XhenEd

    XhenEd Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2014
    Posts:
    536
    Location:
    Philippines
    No way it's uBlock Origin dev 's(gorhill) fault. It's just the way Chrome Store works.

    Yeah, I completely understand you, as I'm frustrated myself for the sluggish release of any updates, including uBlock Origin, from Chrome Store.
     
  19. harsha_mic

    harsha_mic Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    Posts:
    815
    Location:
    India
    i think raymond created a bug entry, i suppose it was also post being referenced there...
     
  20. chrcol

    chrcol Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2006
    Posts:
    897
    Location:
    UK
    you now have the inevitable pm please also :)

    I guess you didnt want to make it public so the webmaster of that site doesnt counter it.

    interestingly I dont get the anti adblock message on the site.
     
  21. bcsman

    bcsman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2009
    Posts:
    102
    I don't get the imore ad block screen either, Pale Moon 26.5.0 and UBlock origin 1.10.0
     
  22. gorhill

    gorhill Developer

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    836
    Location:
    Canada
    Just found out the extension "Adblock Pro"[1] in the Chrome store uses uBlock Origin code base (though an older one, ~1.7.4). Also, whoever is behind Adblock Pro added Google Analytics hook in the code + a suspicious Content Security Directive to allow embedding Flash objects in the source of the extension. There is no attribution of any sort, and the About pane in the dashboard has been removed from view.

    I wonder whether this is a violation of the GPLv3 license.

    [1] https ://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/adblock-pro/ocifcklkibdehekfnmflempfgjhbedch
     
  23. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    11,965
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Perhaps you can check it out? What annoys the hell out of me, is that a lot of sites have chosen to auto-play videos, instead of click to play. It's like they are retarded or something. But sadly enough there doesn't seem to be a way to simply block all video's from loading at all.

    Weird, so Google Play still can't be trusted. That's why I try to keep extensions to a minimum.
     
  24. When
    More uBlock clones from Comodo https://chrome.google.com/webstore/...ker/hhnkmoijlinhobdagnchdhogdmedamce?hl=en-GB

    Would not be surprised when they would have mixed in their own (Comodo) DNS service.
     
  25. gorhill

    gorhill Developer

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    836
    Location:
    Canada
    This one is based on an even older version of uBO, 1.3.0. I didn't see anything bad added to it, but I did not look at every single source code file. Mostly I just see they changed instances of "µBlock" to "comodoBlock" in the source code.

    Anyway, not sure if my argument is well grounded, I fired a complaint to the Chrome store about these two extensions not respecting clause 4 and 5 of the GPLv3:
    These essentially copycat versions of (old versions of) uBlock Origin do not add anything of value to the original, rather the opposite:
    Comodo UAdBlocker removed all the locales other than English. Adblock Pro added analytics to the extension itself, and the ability to embed plugin objects in the extension code itself which does not look good, in short, both offer nothing of value to end users.

    Apparently I could add a term to the GPLv3 license to prevent the removal of attribution or something (section 7 og GPLv3) so that at least users know what they are dealing with and as a consequence may decide to use the original instead, but I would need advice from people who are more knowledgeable than me about the legalese of licenses.
     
Loading...
  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.