SeriousHoax

Level 39
Verified
Top poster
Well-known
Mar 16, 2019
2,892

Lenny_Fox

Level 22
Verified
Top poster
Well-known
Oct 1, 2019
1,127
@SecurityNightmares

I am using the ABP version with AdGuard, because I have seen rules with $cookie. For uBlockOrigin I use the HOST file version because I noticed these $cookie domains are missing in the HOST version. I did this because I do not know whether uBlockOrigin only omits the $cookie or the entire rule (when it only omits the $cookie II assume using the ABP version could break websites).

Do you know whether uBlockOrigin omits just the $cookie (which would be wrong) or the entire rle (which would prevent possible website breakage). To compensate for the lacking third-party option in the HOST file version, I have added "no-strict-blocking: * true". I know the is not the same, but prevents uBo from blockin website navigation when clicking on sponsored links.

Thanks for your hard work.
 
Last edited:
F

ForgottenSeer 85179

I don't use uBlock Origin so I can't help. Sorry
Why not just test it?
 

Lenny_Fox

Level 22
Verified
Top poster
Well-known
Oct 1, 2019
1,127
I don't use uBlock Origin so I can't help. Sorry
Why not just test it?
Then I need to know on which websites these trackers are used (which I don't).

That is the USP of your list (like Peter's Low, Disconnect and Ghostery) it does not chase the websites I visit, but the (third-party) advertising and tracking networks used on those websites (did I catch you on an off-guard moment? ), this is why I have over 90% of the blockrate of uBO default with less than 5% of the rules (or did you trick me into promoting the USP of your list again?).

:)
 
Last edited:
  • Sad
Reactions: ForgottenSeer 85179

rain2reign

Level 6
Verified
Well-known
Jun 21, 2020
291
@SecurityNightmares

I am using the ABP version with AdGuard, because I have seen rules with $cookie. For uBlockOrigin I use the HOST file version because I noticed these $cookie domains are missing in the HOST version. I did this because I do not know whether uBlockOrigin only omits the $cookie or the entire rule (when it only omits the $cookie II assume using the ABP version could break websites).

Do you know whether uBlockOrigin omits just the $cookie (which would be wrong) or the entire rle (which would prevent possible website breakage). To compensate for the lacking third-party option in the HOST file version, I have added "no-strict-blocking: * true". I know the is not the same, but prevents uBo from blockin website navigation when clicking on sponsored links.

Thanks for your hard work.
Ublock will omit the entire line from a quick test i did on Imgur's URL. It's not a foolproof, but the logger showed it just completely ignored that rule altogether. The $cookie is in the Chromium version of Adgaurd's 'Tracking Protection Filter'. That particular entire section is deleted altogether in the uBlock compatible counterpart of that same list.

Look for the header:
Code:
!-------------- Cookies --------------------------------------------------------!

AG: https://filters.adtidy.org/extension/chromium/filters/3.txt
uBlock: https://filters.adtidy.org/extension/ublock/filters/3.txt
 
Last edited:

oldschool

Level 65
Verified
Top poster
Well-known
Mar 29, 2018
5,409
@Burrito My opinion is undecided, because there is no one-serves-all-uses-best-solution


1. For people favoring an 'innovative heuristics' out of the box solution - Ghostery
When you enable all categorie except Essential and Video Players, it blocks a lot without breaking websites. Because Cliqz is a digital marketing agency, it is distrusted by many privacy aware pc users. Ghostery provides ' offerings and rewards' (like Brave) as an alternative to Google advertisements (it is relatively easy to opt out). As long as it is possible to opt-out, it is a good option, since it uses the most advanced technology.

2. For people favoring ' classic blocklist' out of the box solution - AdGuard
AdGuard has the most accurate and easiest to use "element hiding feature' - ' block missed ads on this webpage' feature. On top of that Adgaurd's maintains its own blocklists and has an option to use ' optimized filters'. Although AdGuard uses classic blocklists, it deals with the two main disadvantages of classic blocklists (stale/dead rules and rules which are never triggered).

3. For people favoring to block third-party - uBlockOrigin
When you like to block third-party javascript and (i)frames and selectively enable (trusted) websites, then uBlockOrigin is your best choice. Only change I would make is to enable Peter's Low and disable all other stuff and enable advanced options to selectively block additional domains on your trusted websites. When blocking 3p by default, it makes no sense to enable many blocklists, since 3p-blocking will do all the muscle work for you.

4. Brave-Edge-Opera users
Why bother to use an adblocker when the build-in adblocker works so well? Initially I used 'balanced-mode' by default in Edge and switched to strict blocking-mode when searching/surfing the web. Now I use strict-mode, because I noticed online banking and booking worked when I had forgotten to turn back to balanced-mode.

5. Geek mode (for dodgy browsing)
When you block 3p-scripts and 3p-frames with uBlockOrigin, you still miss some other potentially tricky third-party stuff like XMLhttp Reguest and Websocket calls. For dodgy browsing it is better to install uMatrix. In Opera I have installed uMatrix with all hostfiles disabled and rule 'matrix-off: * true' While matrix is off, it still shows what is happening on a webpage (geek-mode). For dodgy-browsing I just change ''matrix-off: * true' to 'matrix-off: * false' temporarily and block all 3p-stuff for that session.
Just re-reading this thread and @Lenny_Fox analysis and recommendations are spot-on.

I'm trying Ghostery again for set-and-forget usage without breakage, even with its unattractive icon & UI. I might even start liking it. :D
 
Top