Sorry. The right syntax for AdGuard is:@security123 good example of tightening the block-third-party to everything, but as far as I know $all only works with
uBlockOrigin
||example.com^$all
Adblocking innovation
- Thread starter Lenny_Fox
- Start date
||example.com^$all
- Oct 1, 2019
- 1,120
I am probably overlooking the $all, but I can't find it at How to create your own ad filters | AdGuard Knowledgebase
- Oct 1, 2019
- 1,120
Update on benchmark ublock_perf_thread_answer.md (with AdblockPlus, uBlockOriging and Ghostery devs particpating and agreeing on the benchmark's setup and validity).
The benchmark is done with easylist filter only (about 60K blocks and 49K hides for references)
So on average Ghostery processes 17.5 request in a millisecond (1/1000 of a second), AdblockPlus 9.6 and uBlockOrigin 8.25. With this low additional overhead per request it is hard to believe that Google wants to restrict adblockers to 30K rules (roughly 1/3 of easylist) for performance reasons.
The benchmark is done with easylist filter only (about 60K blocks and 49K hides for references)
So on average Ghostery processes 17.5 request in a millisecond (1/1000 of a second), AdblockPlus 9.6 and uBlockOrigin 8.25. With this low additional overhead per request it is hard to believe that Google wants to restrict adblockers to 30K rules (roughly 1/3 of easylist) for performance reasons.
Here we go: Add $all modifier support to the rules converter · Issue #1506 · AdguardTeam/AdguardBrowserExtension
I don't know why AdGuard doesn't put that in their documentation. Maybe open a issue for that
Thanks a lot!
Now i wonder why Brave is so often recommend. Also i doesn't wonder that DuckDuckGo is so bad. That's not their main task
- Mar 16, 2019
- 3,868
The benchmark is a year old now. I wonder how things have changed since then!
- Oct 1, 2019
- 1,120
Check the releases. but reading the comments from Gorhil (posting more code optimization is not worth the effort) I don't think he will optimize the code any further, the data (rules) is already compressed, so that only leaves javascript runtime. uBO on Firefox uses webassembly so that could influence the benchmark when other extension don't use webassembly or when they don't mind setting the eval permission in Chrome (to use webassembly, which Gorhill understandebly refused as being a stupid reduction of security) the others might gain on uBO in Chrome. You should ask the devs for details.
Last edited:
- Mar 29, 2018
- 7,698
These tests are interesting tech talk but are meaningless to me in real time re: Brave. It just works for me and its plenty fast, with some good privacy features built-in.
Edit: They continually optimize their adblock filtering - but still having trouble implementing their sync and Brave rewards, both features I don't use.
- Mar 16, 2019
- 3,868
Hmm right. Check the values. Those are extremely low values and probably not noticeable at all. Also last year I remember Brave saying they improved their adblocker performance by 69% so the value is probably much lower now.
- Mar 29, 2018
- 7,698
I had edited above post reflecting this.
- Jun 12, 2018
- 65
Brave Improves Its Ad-Blocker Performance by 69x with New Engine Implementation in Rust | Brave
Brave Shields, which protect users’ privacy from trackers and ads, are one of the cornerstone components of the browser involved in handling every single web request made for loading a website.
Mind you these were early days/tests for their new rust-based blocker engine, things has been improved since then i.e code optimization.
- Jan 21, 2018
- 814
Yes, it is very hard to believe G**gle thinks that anyone with a slight understanding of this way adblockers work would believe this.
Agree, Brave is fast when used this way, without sync and rewards. I've only tried using these two features briefly and they seemed to slow Brave down a bit - that is a judgement made without any serious scientific investigation though.
Top picture my FF browser with uBO
Bottom picture my Brave browser with Adguard Adblocker. Adguard Adblocker is a joke!! And don't trust Brave Shields
Bottom picture my Brave browser with Adguard Adblocker. Adguard Adblocker is a joke!! And don't trust Brave Shields
Last edited:
the website is very tricky. Simply just add 1 single rule to your adblocker. It will block most ads on that site
- Oct 1, 2016
- 311
What filters/option are enabled in AdGuard?
- Jan 21, 2018
- 814
I can't say that I'm very impressed with Adguard Adblocker either. I've tried it previously and sought alternatives quite quickly and I am currently using it on one PC with both Brave and FF browsers. My results are not as poor as your screenshot example, but they are not as good as when I use UBO.
Ok added. Now that webpage is very clean. But the number of ads blocked is much less than uBO
- Jan 21, 2018
- 814
That makes a significant difference, thanks @Evjl's Rain I'm going to have to find some time to experiment with both Adguard and UBO to make comparisons much more thoroughly. "But the number of ads blocked is much less than uBO" - I don't know how you have both Adguard and UBO set up, if it is as similar as possible this suggests there may be a difference in how they count blocked ads, if its not down to one having a larger list of ads to block.
Brave, by default, uses the below filters. As long as in Adguard Adblocker you don't use the same filters will do
Last edited:
- Oct 1, 2019
- 1,120
uBO/uMA show elements blocked while AG shows request blocked, so AG numbers will be significantly lower
- Aug 19, 2019
- 1,222
Simple workaround based on the blocking third party http and images while allowing stylesheet but blocks a lot of it.
HTTP://*^$third-party,image,~stylesheet
Still working out what works best for me but the Medium mode guide in this forum seems to work fine. I've just made that adustmen as a workaround to block all the add images. Most sites I use are only https so I might get away with blocking $all but would probably break to many websites.
HTTP://*^$third-party,image,~stylesheet
Still working out what works best for me but the Medium mode guide in this forum seems to work fine. I've just made that adustmen as a workaround to block all the add images. Most sites I use are only https so I might get away with blocking $all but would probably break to many websites.
