- Apr 24, 2016
AG4 has new rules engine (tsURLfilter) which is a typescript library and seems to be ready for Manifest V3 see linkSo AG4 vs Ublock Origin?
What we saying?
AdGuard said:The idea is to have a single library that we can reuse for the following tasks:
- Doing content blocking in our Chrome and Firefox extensions (obviously)
- Using this library for parsing rules and converting to Safari-compatible content blocking lists (see AdGuard for Safari, AdGuard for iOS)
- Using this library for validating and linting filter lists (see FiltersRegistry, AdguardFilters)
- It could also be used as a basis for the VS code extension
This needs some more explanation.Thanks for the explanation
So, Peter Low's list or Kees1958 EU-US is not necessary on Adguard?
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 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 sort of explains the same, block the ad-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 (on websites you visit in stead of the adserving networks) 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 people maintaining EasyPrivacy only have eyes for one or two of the tracking mechanisms, I think it is better 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 also started to measure the effectivess of rules. 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.
This one is element picker, not element zapper. Element zapper in uBO lets you block/hide things temporarily for an instance without creating a permanent rule. The blocked item will remain blocked till the webpage is reloaded.
Oh, my bad then. AdGuard once had a page where you could submit any ideas as far as I know. Can't find it at the moment tho...This one is element picker, not element zapper. Element zapper in uBO lets you block/hide things temporarily for an instance without creating a rule. The blocked entry will remain blocked till the webpage is reloaded.
Sounds promisingI've been using the Adguard Browser Extension version 4 for almost 3 weeks now, and I must say I find its filters to be better than EasyList filters used in uBO. Gandalf_The_Grey already mentioned a few times that it does cosmetic filtering better, but I would add that it's more than just better. 2x better than EasyList in my experience. It's even able to bypass some website's redirection timeouts using its own scriplet filters, or whatever the proper term is.
Reporting issues is super easy from the browser's context menu. Anyone should be able to report issues within a minute or two. Their reaction time to fix issues is overall faster than EasyList. As Adguard said, some of their filter maintainers are from Ukraine, so currently the response time is probably slower than average.
Not having that advanced popup UI like uBlock Origin and an element zapper mode is the main downside for me at the moment.
I created an issue a few days ago asking for an advanced UI, and they have tagged the issue with "Version: AdGuard v4.1". So I guess they'll try to do something for this in version 4.1.
Please read this:Does Stealth Mode do more than Privacy filters?
Does Stealth Mode differ from Privacy filters?
Why is Stealth Mode off by default?
But be careful: while blocking third-party cookies can't cause more than just some minor inconvenience (e.g., you will have to manually enter your login/password), restricting the first-party cookies can break some websites.
Privacy filters are used to block network requests to various tracking resources (scripts, pixels, iframes, etc.), thus stopping them from loading and stopping any data being sent to the domain associated with the resource(s).Yes, I've read before. Stealth Mode vs Privacy filters remains head scratch, for me.
Thanks for trying.