Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Software
General Apps
AdGuard
AdGuard Browser Extension - Stable Updates Thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ForgottenSeer 92963" data-source="post: 976365"><p>This needs some more explanation.</p><p></p><p>The reason for me to create my own (ad and tracking, but mostly tracking) blocklist was the near ridicule unbalance in anti-tracking in EasyPrivacy filter. Tracking is done through cookies, third-party scripts, pixel tags, websocket connections and CNAME spoofing. EasyPrivacy only focussed on 1 or 2 and ignored the other tracking mechanisms.</p><p></p><p>When you only provide a partial solution, it makes no sense to detail this on the millimeter (while ignoring other large holes). I also found it quite stupid (of EasyList) to focus on the websites you visit (like in EasyPrivacy) and not focus on the advertising/tracking networks which put the ads (through bidding mechanisms) on the websites you visit (Peter Low blocks the ad serving networks behind the websites you visit).</p><p></p><p>Other problem with community maintained filters is the dead wood they contain (contributors add new rules, but don't remove them when ads change or websites die). To give you an idea Fanboy (now working for Brave) curated the Easylist filters and reduced them by half in size (took him 1.5 year to do that). So I disliked the partial focus (only block one tracking mechanism) and their approach (focus on websites you visit in stead of the adserving networks behind those websites) and the dead wood this approach generates when volunteers maintain them.</p><p></p><p>I first started to feed Peter Low with new tracking networks, until the developers from SmartAdBlock added my small 200 tracking networks list to their build-in choice of blocklist and explained me how easy it is to create your own blocklists on Github. Because I liked uBO I started to maintain and expand my Kees1958 list on Github. Because the community maintaining EasyPrivacy only has eyes for one or two of the tracking mechanisms, I think it is better (more effective and more efficient) to use Peter Low's or my Kees1958 for blocking most popular ad and tracking networks.</p><p></p><p>AdGuard provides both the application and maintains the blocklists and has its own DNS service (which allows them also to acquire depersonalized big-date on new tracking tactics and effectiveness of blocklist). Adguard introduced the optimized blocklist filters. They also added cname cloaking and $websocket blocks to their lists, introduced URL parameter cleaning, added self destructing third-party cookies (uBO today still does not has the $cookie option).</p><p></p><p>In short the guys from AdGuard are the innovators who broadened the playing field of tracking protection. They also have the means to collect big-data on the effectiveness of their block mechanisms and blocklists, so they are the people who know a lot more about tracking protection, that is why I think it is better to use AG filters in AG application.</p><p></p><p>Hope this answers your question.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ForgottenSeer 92963, post: 976365"] This needs some more explanation. The reason for me to create my own (ad and tracking, but mostly tracking) blocklist was the near ridicule unbalance in anti-tracking in EasyPrivacy filter. Tracking is done through cookies, third-party scripts, pixel tags, websocket connections and CNAME spoofing. EasyPrivacy only focussed on 1 or 2 and ignored the other tracking mechanisms. When you only provide a partial solution, it makes no sense to detail this on the millimeter (while ignoring other large holes). I also found it quite stupid (of EasyList) to focus on the websites you visit (like in EasyPrivacy) and not focus on the advertising/tracking networks which put the ads (through bidding mechanisms) on the websites you visit (Peter Low blocks the ad serving networks behind the websites you visit). Other problem with community maintained filters is the dead wood they contain (contributors add new rules, but don't remove them when ads change or websites die). To give you an idea Fanboy (now working for Brave) curated the Easylist filters and reduced them by half in size (took him 1.5 year to do that). So I disliked the partial focus (only block one tracking mechanism) and their approach (focus on websites you visit in stead of the adserving networks behind those websites) and the dead wood this approach generates when volunteers maintain them. I first started to feed Peter Low with new tracking networks, until the developers from SmartAdBlock added my small 200 tracking networks list to their build-in choice of blocklist and explained me how easy it is to create your own blocklists on Github. Because I liked uBO I started to maintain and expand my Kees1958 list on Github. Because the community maintaining EasyPrivacy only has eyes for one or two of the tracking mechanisms, I think it is better (more effective and more efficient) to use Peter Low's or my Kees1958 for blocking most popular ad and tracking networks. AdGuard provides both the application and maintains the blocklists and has its own DNS service (which allows them also to acquire depersonalized big-date on new tracking tactics and effectiveness of blocklist). Adguard introduced the optimized blocklist filters. They also added cname cloaking and $websocket blocks to their lists, introduced URL parameter cleaning, added self destructing third-party cookies (uBO today still does not has the $cookie option). In short the guys from AdGuard are the innovators who broadened the playing field of tracking protection. They also have the means to collect big-data on the effectiveness of their block mechanisms and blocklists, so they are the people who know a lot more about tracking protection, that is why I think it is better to use AG filters in AG application. Hope this answers your question. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top