Windows_Security

Level 23
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
AdblockPlus has (again) raised some eyebrows by announcing its cooperation with Flatr, so I took a look at this add-on on firefox (on Windows 8.1 or higher it is safer to use browsers which support AppContainer sandbox and of other OS-mitigations).

The firefox add-on has a nice feature called (custom) filter groups. I only use ABP to block third party stuff (so I have only one filter rule). You can enable and disable groups, e.g. for allowing exceptions on third party stuff blocking as explained in the picture below.

With menu option: "Filter preferences", you are able to navigate to these groups and with the option "Open blockable items" it opens a windows where it lists what is allowed and blocked (see picture). By right clicking a blocked item, it helps you to create an exception rule.

Think different ;) block all third-party stuff (trackers and ads) with just one rule.

The nice thing about the groups is that you can create general exception rules (e.g. google-analytics.com) and put them in a group called "news sites" and only enable this group when you surf to these news websites. For the paranoids among us this facilitates a structured way to micro manage and activate your exception (allow) rules.

Reasons why I prefer ABP over uBlock for third-party blocking:
- Visual feedback (grey) icon when ABP is disabled on all websites
- Control granularity to disable ABP and guidance to create allow rules
- ABP blocks all third-party type while uBlock only scripts and iframes


Reason why you might prefer uBlock over ABP: developer of uBlock has no commercial intentions ;)
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Handsome Recluse

Level 19
Verified
Can't you also do that with NoScript although images aren't blocked? Turn the first checkbox on to allow first party sites,
NoScript Block Third Party only.png
Allow exceptions
NoScript Allow Exceptions.png
Mark as untrusted on news sites to disable all scripts on news sites as shown in the third image if blocking all scripts on news sites isn't a problem, else use Noscript ABE.
I see you've now gone the more whitelisting route since you only blocked third-party sites from http sites before.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Windows_Security

Level 23
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
1. Temporarily allow first level domain
Playing with it now, but that does not work for me. Somehow a third-party iframe is still blocked despite allowing scripts, so I don't pass a privacy check on the two websites I tried it out (nu.nl and nos.nl).

2. Blocking all third-party in stead of HTTP.
Correct in stead of doing all my browsing from Chrome, I also use Firefox to search when writing content. I downgraded from Windows 10 to Windows 7, so the security disadvantage of Firefox is not that evident anymore (also has Low-IL now).
 
Last edited:

gorhill

Level 1
ABP blocks all third-party type while uBlock only scripts and iframes
That's just misinformation. Why are you doing this?

Your rule "||*.*^$third-party" will work just fine in uBlock Origin ("*$third-party" is cleaner), it's standard filter syntax which works in all blockers compatible with ABP-compatible filtering. Where did you get that this does not work in uBO?

Moreover the dynamic filtering pane allows to block using simple point-and-click, including for 3rd-party frames, scripts, or all 3rd-party requests. ABP does not have this point-and-click feature, and this means un-breaking sites broken as a result of blocking alI 3rd-party network requests would be a pain with ABP, you can't point-and-click to create exceptions, unlike uBO's dynamic filtering, including on a per-site basis.

Visual feedback (grey) icon when ABP is disabled on all websites.
uBO's icon is also grayed when disabled on a web site, and actually all blockers are like this.

I suggest people try uBO or whatever blocker out there for themselves firsthand rather than being mislead by erroneous information from dubious sources.
 
Last edited:

Windows_Security

Level 23
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
That's just misinformation. Why are you doing this?

Your rule "||*.*^$third-party" will work just fine in uBlock Origin ("*$third-party" is cleaner), it's standard filter syntax which works in all blockers compatible with ABP-compatible filtering. Where did you get that this does not work in uBO?

Moreover the dynamic filtering pane allows to block using simple point-and-click, including for 3rd-party frames, scripts, or all 3rd-party requests. ABP does not have this point-and-click feature, and this means un-breaking sites broken as a result of blocking alI 3rd-party network requests would be a pain with ABP, you can't point-and-click to create exceptions, unlike uBO's dynamic filtering, including on a per-site basis.



uBO's icon is also grayed when disabled on a web site, and actually all blockers are like this.

I suggest people try uBO or whatever blocker out there for themselves firsthand rather than being mislead by erroneous information from dubious sources.
To answer your acquisitions and attack
  1. Well reading back I have stated that incorrectly "ABP blocks all third-party type while uBlock only scripts and iframes" I should have mentioned in ITS OWN ADVANCED RULES options. Why are you thinking this is deliberate misinformation?

  2. I posted: "Visual feedback (grey) icon when ABP is disabled on all websites."
    uBlock can't be disabled for all websites from its own context menu like ABP, "(everyone can check that who has uBlock installed)

  3. I posted "Control granularity to disable ABP, guidance to create allow rules".
    As far as I know the point and click feature of uBlock creates BLOCK rules, not ALLOW rules (but maybe I missed that, so feel free to demonstrate differently). Ublock does not have the option to disable on page or ALL websites (so ABP has three options to disable and UBlock0 only 1 as far as I know, so ABP has more "Control granularity to disable ABP").

So one ill constructed sentence by me (which I have not written with bad intend) and two misread attacks by you. I guess you had a bad day, to react so over the top.
 
Last edited:

Handsome Recluse

Level 19
Verified
Can't you use dynamic filtering to globally allow all for 2? You can also locally allow all for that website. The green one overrides filter rules, gray one keeps it, red denies the resource.
You can block third-party resources in filter rules then add exceptions and allow all resources using dynamic filtering at will. You can just disable all third-party on news sites.
 
Last edited:

Windows_Security

Level 23
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
It is not about ability to block, that is the ill constructed sentence I used, uBlock can block third-party and create BLOCK rules easily. ABP is more user friendly in creating ALLOW rules. This example of news website illustrates this.

Finding, checking and creating allow rules in uB0
1. On the news website, click on the uB0 icon
2. Click on the reporter tool icon
3. Select which page I want the detailed report about (drop down list)
4. Click on the refresh button
5. In light-red uB0 reporter displays what is blocked, but clicking it shows the filter, right clicking does nothing, so I have to remember the domain
6. Click on the chrome tab of the news website
7. Click on the uB0 icon again (it hides it menu automatically)
8. Allow that domain in the drop down menu
9. Click on the refresh menu
10. Check whether allow has effect (otherwise go back to step 4 and repeat) and click on padlock to make rule permanent

Same procedure with ABP using that one rule

1. Click on dropdown triangle of UBP and drop down menu appears, click on blockable items
2. "under water" pane appears at the bottom, so I simultaneously see the page I am trying to unblock (top) and the blocked items (bottom)
3. Right click on of the blocked item and choose "add exception rule for item"
4. Panel appears guiding you to create an alow rule, choose option by selecting radio button and click on create filter button
5. Click on refresh to check the allow has correct effect that's it (otherwise go to 3 and repeat).

uB0 is designed to create block rules (yes it even has point and click), but ABP facilitates creation of allow exceptions in an easy way.

The reason why I use the reporter is because the sequence of blocked third-party items often provide clues on what to allow.
 
Last edited:

Windows_Security

Level 23
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
Changed the third-party block rule to (scripts, plug-in requests, frames and data requests):

*$script,object-subrequest,subdocument,xmlhttprequest,third-party
 
Last edited:

Windows_Security

Level 23
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
adblockplus purchashed by a russian company that has a bad history. plus it's in no way better than uBlock origin.
Well my ill constructed sentence might have appeared that I claimed ABP is better than uB0, that is not the case. I also mentioned why privacy conscious members might prefere uB0 because of its developer, but you have to admit that making allow rules is a lot easier with ABP when you want to blacklist third-party in general and whitelist a few exceptions. An improvement for uB0 would be to display the outpt of the current website by default in a split screen (with output as the report as under water panel) like ABP does.
 

mekelek

Level 28
Well my ill constructed sentence might have appeared that I claimed ABP is better than uB0, that is not the case. I also mentioned why privacy conscious members might prefere uB0 because of its developer, but you have to admit that making allow rules is a lot easier with ABP when you want to blacklist third-party in general and whitelist a few exceptions. An improvement for uB0 would be to display the outpt of the current website by default in a split screen (with output as the report as under water panel) like ABP does.
well you can highlight the item you want to blacklist and just add it with a single click. or for advanced users you can modify it even.