uBlock vs uMatrix

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by TomAZ, May 8, 2015.

  1. TomAZ

    TomAZ Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2010
    Posts:
    1,002
    Location:
    USA
    I'm sure this question has been asked many times before -- and if so, I'm sorry for asking again. However, being a Firefox user, it has been pretty much a non-issue for me and I never paid much attention -- until just a couple days ago.

    Is it advisable -- or is there any value to using both uBlock and uMatrix together, or do they both do fairly similar things? Or maybe, do they even conflict with one another?
     
  2. Malwar

    Malwar Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Posts:
    271
    Location:
    USA
    uMatrix is a blocker(cookie,css,image,plugin,script,XHR,frame, and other) you can control what you block and what you want to allow(like uBlock Origin dynamic filtering but way more flexible and can be way more strict) uMatrix just blocks ads through the use of host files, uBlock Origin blocks them more deeper per se then uMatrix because of cosmetic and patteren-based filtering like adblock plus. I use both of them together just uncheck the malware domains in uBlock and peter Lowe's and the host files. Also you have more privacy and security when running uMatrix because of the switches(user agent spoofing and referrer spoofing, clearing blocked cookies, blocking hyperlink auditing attempts etc.) and also if you run uBlock it gets whatever ads uMatrix does not get from its blocking) Look at my sig to see how I run them. If you need help just PM me.:thumb::):cool:
     
    Last edited: May 8, 2015
  3. The Red Moon

    The Red Moon Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2012
    Posts:
    3,871
    I suppose the natural end product of such a thread like this is a total merger of both programs into a single product with elements of both programs.
     
  4. TomAZ

    TomAZ Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2010
    Posts:
    1,002
    Location:
    USA
    Can uMatrix be used pretty much with the default settings, or does it take a lot of fiddling to keep it from breaking sites?
     
  5. Malwar

    Malwar Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Posts:
    271
    Location:
    USA
    Depends, Once you get it running and make a few global rules everything runs smooth I just allow css+script then website usually loads after I land on it. But the only thing I allow at all is image global and everything else is blacklisted global then I use allow css+script then whatever I need the bare minimum to get the site to work the way I need it too.
     
  6. wat0114

    wat0114 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Posts:
    1,984
    Location:
    Canada
  7. Windows_Security

    Windows_Security Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2013
    Posts:
    3,079
    Location:
    Netherlands
    They don't conflict. uMatrix has a more granular control and some additional privacy options and is more directed to power users (even with all host files disabled it stops all trackers and ads in default setting).

    When you want to start playing with them I suggest you start with trying uBlock ONLY with a simple ruleset. Just tell ublock that you are an advanced user and explicitely block third party frames and scripts. You can change the third party filters. The rules in red are added just to allow playing of rich media content. Leave them out when you don't want that.

    * * 3p-frame block
    * * 3p-script block
    * googlevideo.com * allow
    * jwpcdn.com * allow
    * vimeo.com * allow
    * vimeocdn.com * allow
    * youtube.com * allow
    * ytimg.com * allow

    Regards Kees
     
  8. Gandalf_The_Grey

    Gandalf_The_Grey Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2012
    Posts:
    392
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    @Windows_Security : Would noop not be better than allow?
    https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dynamic-filtering:-rule-syntax

    I also block social media trackers as mentioned in the wiki: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-and-others:-Blocking-ads,-trackers,-malwares
    My only concern is will my ruleset be too big with all the exceptions:
    Or am I doing something wrong?
     
    Last edited: May 10, 2015
  9. Windows_Security

    Windows_Security Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2013
    Posts:
    3,079
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Yes, NOOP's better (I imported this from my uMatrix rules)
     
  10. tlu

    tlu Guest

    Yes, noop means that the static filters from the filterlists are still applied whereas an allow rule would override any static filters.

    From the wiki:
     
  11. gorhill

    gorhill Developer

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    747
    Location:
    Canada
  12. Windows_Security

    Windows_Security Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2013
    Posts:
    3,079
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Well uBlock users using the ädvanced user option should be satisfied with a simple block third party frames and scripts. No ambition of tightening this any further (because I think thst is where uMatrix is developed for). Looking at your ruleset, any reason why you allowed third party scripts on for example tweakers.net and added a block for linkedin.com?

    With only
    * * 3p-frame block
    * * 3p-script block
    * googlevideo.com * noop
    * jwpcdn.com * noop
    * vimeo.com * noop
    * vimeocdn.com * noop
    * youtube.com * noop
    * ytimg.com * noop

    Tweakers.net also seems to work (allthough I am not logged-in, general NOOP option for HTTPS://* would help in uBlock).
     
  13. gorhill

    gorhill Developer

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    747
    Location:
    Canada
    I would rather question not adding a block to linkedin.com. One of those sites which embeds itself everywhere.
     
  14. Gandalf_The_Grey

    Gandalf_The_Grey Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2012
    Posts:
    392
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    I can log in without third party scripts but I can't log out of tweakers.net.
    Most noop rules I created are for login or logout of certain sites.
    As more sites are going for https these days I'm not sure noop https://* is a good option. Or I don't understand the rule...
    Blocking linkedin.com is because i'm not on linkedin and like Gorhill mentioned it is a tracker at a lot of sites.
     
  15. Windows_Security

    Windows_Security Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2013
    Posts:
    3,079
    Location:
    Netherlands
    So what evil has happened to me for not blocking linkedin.com?
     
  16. gorhill

    gorhill Developer

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    747
    Location:
    Canada
    Sarcasm? Despite your innuendo, I do not see targets of tracking as "evil". I definitely don't trust the perpetrators of tracking, no amount of sarcasm is going to change this.
     
  17. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    Actually, they were a single product until uBlock was created...
     
  18. Windows_Security

    Windows_Security Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2013
    Posts:
    3,079
    Location:
    Netherlands
    First let me acknowledge that I value your contribution by providing two great extensions. So I apologize for "innuen-doing" you.

    The context of my post was to advice someone who is not familiar to use uMatrix to forget about using them together and start discovering uBlock alone. Another user reacted (Gandalf) and explained his concern about the growing list of exceptions. I just wondered why Gandalf was using block rules (considering his concern of growing exceptions).

    So let me rephrase the question (with no sarcasm): what benefits does blocking linkedin.com offer for Gandalf when he is not on linkedin?
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2015
  19. Windows_Security

    Windows_Security Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2013
    Posts:
    3,079
    Location:
    Netherlands
    I will explain (in the context that Gandalf added an explicit block without using Linkedin, so his block third party scripts/frames would probably deal with most unsolicited encounters with linkedin.com).

    IMO uBlock is not suited for expert privacy tweaking. I thought you developed uMatrix for that (so the following list is not an attack on uBlock), uBlock simply lacks the granularity/features for effective privacy:
    - no counter measures against cookie-context-snooping (uMatrix has the option to delete blocked content and cookies on intervals)
    - no counter measures against browser-fingerprinting (uMatrix has option to spoof and change browser user agent)
    - no granular counter measures against pixel-tags (uBlock image blocking breaks to much functionality)

    I applaud that uBlock does not interact with browser's javascript settings. I also applaud that uMatrix disables those user settings to increase transparancy of rule application. Same applies to strict blocking (IMO), fine with uMatrix, but disturbing for uBlock users which click on a sponsored link (with uBlock 0.9.70 it seems it can be switched off by no-strict-blocking: * true, thanks :thumb:).

    To clearify things, I do not ask for uBlock to implement those lacking features. IMHO people should not try to mimic granular experts tweaking with tools which are not designed for that purpose (better use uMatrix for that), because it is to much hassle for half a partly effective solution.
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2015
  20. Gandalf_The_Grey

    Gandalf_The_Grey Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2012
    Posts:
    392
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    @Windows_Security So in your opion I should use uMatrix instead of uBlock because of the more granular control.
    Is there a good tutorial for first timers how to setup uMatrix? I have no idea how to start.
    The reason for using uBlock for me is because it is imo more user friendly.
     
  21. Windows_Security

    Windows_Security Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2013
    Posts:
    3,079
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Well that is a matter of personal preference. I don't use them in conjunction, I use either Adguard (regular image) or uMatrx (test image)

    Use uMatrx as last stand (test image)
    You can start by exporting your uBlock rules and import them in uMatrix. I run uMatrix with default rules and without any host files. It works the same as uBlock (see pic), only now you have two dimensional control (clicking on top part at column script at row tweakimg.net will allow that script, clicking on bottem part will block that cell). Also have a look at the privacy tab, for starters you can safely enable spoof third party HTTP referrer string and block hyperlink auditing requests.

    Untitled.png
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2015
  22. Gandalf_The_Grey

    Gandalf_The_Grey Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2012
    Posts:
    392
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    @Windows_Security Thanks Kees! After some light testing at work I'm almost convinced that uMatrix is more suited for my needs. It does all the 3 party blocking by default and I have more control over what scripts and/or iframes to allow when something is not working on a site. I think i need less exceptions/holes, but will continue testing and compare later tonight at home.
     
  23. Jarmo P

    Jarmo P Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Posts:
    1,186
    There is no way I see it practical to use uBlock (Origin's) dynamic filtering and blocking stuff in it default deny and same time operating uMatrix. 2 blockers are a no no. I have always been a uMatrix (HTTPSB) user, so my knowledge of running uBlock dynamic filtering is a bit thin and limited, but anyways my words.

    I am not sure if your uBlock has some site special dynamic blockings you readers have made, allowing usually all and not default deny. I think that won't still be a good idea according what gorhill have adviced and I have understood. So I just run uBlock as a not advanced user. No idea how the new Firefox uMatrix works in that regard.

    What I understand Windows security is not either running these 2 extensions same time with "dynamic blockings".
    And I see a point in his disabling hosts files in uMatrix for being able to see easier some media sites. I wish but i understand it is on hold, to be able to disable hosts files (temporary) on a site basis in uMatrix. Without the need to disable matrix filtering all together to see some media site. That way for instance frames could still be blocked.

    When you run uMatrix fellows, be prepared to much annoyance in its strong blockings. You can make global rules to say youtube etc to see that content easier, but be prepared/warned also to that you can brake your basic uMatrix rules if you dont know what you are doing with making global rules. Safer just to make domain scope specific rules.
     
  24. tlu

    tlu Guest

    Nevertheless it makes much sense to use it in combination with uBlock (without dynamic filtering) as the latter uses pattern-based filtering by using Adblock Plus-compatible filterlists in order to block things unable to block in uMatrix. So using them together is ideal.

    Please read this:

    https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/wiki/Using-uBlock-with-uMatrix

    As a starter for uMatrix:

    https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/wiki/Very-bare-walkthrough-for-first-time-users

    ... and then proceed to the old wiki for HTTPS Switchboard which is still valid to a large extent, in particular:

    https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/How-to-use-HTTP-Switchboard:-Two-opposing-views
    https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/Block-all---narrowly-allow-all
    https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/The-matrix-scope
    https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/The-matrix-cells
    https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/HTTP-Switchboard-as-NoScript

    And once you're familiar with the basic concept you should read

    https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/wiki/Changes-from-HTTP-Switchboard

    but I admit it's a bit hard to understand for uMatrix newbies ;)
     
  25. Windows_Security

    Windows_Security Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2013
    Posts:
    3,079
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Thomas,

    Even with no/zero hostfiles uand default rules uMatrix seems to block everything I am aware of. I just switched over to my other image, and checked but I don't seem to notice what it could be missing. Could you give an example to clarify this for me?

    Regards Kees
     
Loading...