µMatrix - the HTTP Switchboard successor

gorhill has published an alpha release of µMatrix, the long-awaited successor of HTTP Switchboard. It's not yet available on the Chrome webstore as it is not yet feature-complete. This site describes the changes compared to HTTPSB.

I installed it a couple of hours ago, and so far no problems. I must really say that I like the new logic of µMatrix a lot: The fact that all scopes exist side by side makes it very easy to define global and/or domain/site-specific rules according to one's needs by quickly switching from one scope to the other(s). There are no longer inheritance problems like in HTTPSB. A major improvement, indeed! (I guess that Giorgio Maone must be be rather envious that he doesn't have anything comparable for Noscript )

Raymond, great work as usual One suggestion, though: The above wiki page is rather technical. Before bringing µMatrix to the webstore, an easy to understand documentation is important so that users can really exploit the power of this new wonderful extension.

 

Looking forward to seeing how this develops.
@gorhill Thanks

 

Hello,

Running smoothly here so far! Great work and thanks to Raymond!

One question... In HTTPSB, there was a "Commit All" available in settings. Is something similar available in uMatrix? I ask because sometimes I may make a few rule changes over several sites and do not remember to commit them immediately while I am at that particular site. In HTTPSB, I could go to settings and see the changes that I had made and commit all of them. Is this feature available in uMatrix (maybe I am just not seeing how to do it)? If this is not available, it would be a good feature to add as I am finding it annoying trying to always remember to commit changes to rules while I am still on the page where I made the changes...

 

I never liked script control in browsers but I will surely try this one. µMatrix and µBlock will probably be a killer combination.

 

Then there is a special irony in the "less is more" statement in your signature.

 

Additional extension that needs constant management and tweaking is "more" and not "less" in my book

 

µBlock has a mini-script killer (dynamic filtering) if ever µMatrix is too complicated. Actually in µBlock just blocking 3rd-party frames helps a lot protect against compromised sites.

 

Currently only the permanent rules are editable. I really want to keep thing as simple as to use only a plain textarea to create rules. I have to give more thoughts about what to do with temporary rules in the "Your rules" tab. Maybe two side-by-side textareas, one for permanent rules (as it is now), and the other for rules which are not commited, and to let the user cut/paste. I do not want more facny than textareas though, for now at least.

 

Thank you for this terrific effort, gorhill.

Question: will it be possible to import an httpsb ruleset into uMatrix?

 

Thank you. I enabled this filters. Will see if anything breaks.
And thank you for your great work gorhill

 

I think it is ready for chrome webstore.
I hope there will be the possibility to import filterset from Internet, like in µBlock (but with µMatrix scheme).
The Chromium-behind-the-scene is awesome, I've never noticed before there were requests to google-analytics (maybe one of my extension).

Also I think blocked frames are too visible. Maybe it's because of the red, but my eyes lose time on it.

 

Hello Pilou42,

Check under "Settings > Hosts files"... Is this what you are looking for?

Look under settings. You can adjust the opacity...
HTH...

 

Arf, I don't understand how I did not see the settings for blocked frames. :/

For the filterset settings, right now, it's for hosts files, I need a filterset with µMatrix scheme.

 

Hello Pilout42,

If I understand you correctly, you want to use an ABP type filter list with uMatrix? One of the purposes of gorhill starting uMatrix was to remove the ABP filtering capabilities from HTTPSB and leave that function for uBlock. If you are wanting ABP type of filtering, try uBlock along with uMatrix. They are designed to complement each other, each with their own specific purpose. I use both here and they work very well together...

 

filterset with %Matrix have a special scheme; example:
* * * block
* 1st-party * allow

I plan to upload my filterset; like this, I can have a filterset for all the computers I use. But maybe gorhill will allow settings to be synchronized with Google account and it would allow me not to upload a filterset...

 

Can gorhill combine µMatrix with µBlock and create a single & solid product?

 

I have not been awaiting anything. I am using HTTP SB. Will change someday if this turns out be good.

 

uMatrix and uBlock are both the child extensions of HTTPSB.
HTTPSB does both pattern-based and Net-based filtering

• uBlock took task of pattern-based filtering from HTTPSB, and improved on it. And does much than former.
• uMatrix took task of net-based filtering from HTTPSB. And designed to be more advanced than former and address very major shortcomings of HTTPSB. See the differences between uMatrix and HTTPSB here for the info..

See my reply above. Am using the apha version and already very better than the former (httpsb)

 

any screenshot of umatrix in action guys?
The umatrix link is to technical for me

 

You'll find examples here.

 

thanks tlu... so it just look like httsb

 

I don't suppose you'd implement a block or at least an alert to these type of annoying, "sneaky" redirects:

Code:

<noscript><meta http-equiv="refresh" content="0;url=http://example.com/no-javascript" /></noscript>

This has been a pet peeve of mine for a while, and while it's rare to find them, they basically deny you content until you enable javascript. I wrote a quick and dirty extension to stop it on a per site basis as I find them, like this:

Code:

chrome.webRequest.onBeforeRequest.addListener(function(details) {
  return {
    redirectUrl: 'about:'
  };
}, {
  urls: [
    'http://example.com/no-javascript',
    'http://example.com/evil'
  ]
}, ['blocking']);

It's a crude way of doing it and I don't like it, but I don't know if there's a better way to do it easily and reliably.

edit:
Would something like this fit uMatrix or HTTPSB functionality? I know you like to keep things pretty tight, rather than "polluting" the extension with more trivial features.

 

@luxi, can you give me an example of one site. Looks interesting
they used noscript tag here..

 

Tucked away in uBlock or kept as insiders secret? So clicking on the columns turns color to reddish, check with logging feature and indeed the logs showed blocking of in-line frames.

Understand why you tuck it away. Here is a GUI-suggestion for uBlock to make it more of a zero configuration extension and cascade some geek stuff from uMatrix and HTTPSB to uBlock

Place a GEEK option into the uBlock GUI, to unlock current settings, so the Geeks can still play with it. For all other users the default is EASY mode.

Simply provide two levels in EASY mode with no USER choices (and uBlock icon colors tells you which mode is selected)
uBlock Red: run as ad/privacy-block, with a predefined set of adblock/notrack blacklists.
uBlock Green: as Red with all available lists (lists which have proven not to brake functionality) and referer-blocking, third party iframe blocking & cross site requests blocking (all except from/to HTTPS whtelisting/blacklisting a few known sources).

In this way the added value of uBlock is made available in EASY mode for the average user while moderate GEEKS are still able to fine tune it in GEEK mode. Of course other trick bits with a low GEEK rating can be pushed from uMatrix to uBlock. For those who want full control the real deal extensions are still available as uMatrix (for real GEEKS) and HTTPS (for nerdy GEEKS).

 

@harsha_mic — I came across one site today but I have seen others in the past when I used Firefox with NoScript (which can block this redirection): http://anpix.org/image/jJG

I guess it's an issue with anything in noscript tags, besides notifying the user they don't have javascript turned on. I don't like the idea of this type of stuff running without my consent and not under my control.