New Update AdGuard Manifest V3 Extension v0.3.12

[MalwareTips]

We continue to improve our experimental extension that works with Manifest V3. The main changes of this release were made under the hood. The only thing you'll probably notice is that we fixed the more options menu color in the dark theme.


Check out more info on this extension

• AdGuard Blog
• Product Hunt

This version on GitHub.

Continue reading...

 

[Back3]

Mine is v0.3.13 .... difficult to see the number of sites blocked

 

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Version 0.3.13:

In this version, we've fixed the display of some settings elements and added minor improvements. Now everything looks nice again and works great (as always).

Changelog​

• [Fixed] Settings options do not display intended description #15

Install stable version from store​

• Chrome

Release 0.3.13 · AdguardTeam/AdGuardMV3

In this version, we've fixed the display of some settings elements and added minor improvements. Now everything looks nice again and works great (as always). Changelog [Fixed] Settings options do ...

github.com

 

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

AdGuard MV3 Extension 0.3.15 released
No changelog yet

Releases · AdguardTeam/AdGuardMV3

AdGuard browser extension prototype based on the new Manifest V3 - AdguardTeam/AdGuardMV3

github.com

AdGuard AdBlocker MV3 Experimental

Experimental version of unmatched adblock extension built on Manifest V3.

chrome.google.com

 

[Jan Willy]

Unfortunately it's in uBO lite (Manifest V3) not possible to use Medium Mode. In AdGuard MV3 Extension one can use a filter rule that does correspond to uBO's Medium Mode:

To prevent broken links I have whitelisted most regular domainextensions:

The downside of this whitelisting is that you shouldn't use in AdGuard MV3 Extension, filterlists with third party blocking rules. Many of those rules would be overruled by the whitelist. Other lists, e.g. Eaysylist Cookie List, work well together with the whitelist.

 

[ForgottenSeer 97327]

@Jan Willy

I have played with a similar idea when I tried out AdGuard_MV3. Your idea worked reasonable well because I used AG_MV3 only for cosmetic filtering on websites I visit a lot. The bulk of the blocking is done in my browser (Edge blocking advertising and tracking networks) and my DNS (NextDNS privacy filters allowing affiliate ad and tracking networks but blocking many website specific stuff using NextDNS, AdGuardDNS and OISD filters).

I used the exact same rules (from NL also), but i made the allow exceptions for all websites which I had bookmarked or for which I had created cosmetic rules with AdGuard_MV3 red crosshair feature (which helps to create cosmetic rules in the user rules section of AG_MV3). Your rules would look like:

! your generic block rule
||*$third-party,script,subdocument

! TLD allow exceptions excluding my bookmarked domains
@@.com^$script,subdocument,domain=~bookmark1.nl|~favorite2.com|~starredwebsite3.org|~websitewithCosmeticRuleAdded.net
@@.eu^$script,subdocument,domain=~bookmark1.nl|~favorite2.com|~starredwebsite3.org|~websitewithCosmeticRuleAdded.net
etc

This has the advantage that I did reduce the third-party medium mode attack surface reduction for websites I normally don't visit, but keep the benefit of AG's blocklist for the websites I visit a lot (e.g. news websites and websites with IT-news). Using this in combination with DNS-level and browser build-in blocking it was a reasonable replacement for uBo's smart-medium mode (the thread of Windows_Security which is a sticky in this forum). I say reasonable, because every time I added an exception, I had to add this domain to all eight TLD allow rules.

I guess we just have to wait and see how AG_MV3 and uBO-lite pan out. AG_MV3 is much more mature functionality wise than uBO-lite. It is also funny to see the different development principles of those two great extensions (AG-team focusses of functionality first and optimize afterwards, Gorhill focusses on optimization forst and offer functionality afterwards). When I had to choose right now I would opt for AG_MV3.

 

[Jan Willy]

I say reasonable, because every time I added an exception, I had to add this domain to all eight TLD allow rules.

Whitelisting most common domainextensions is just a matter of convenience. Only using the block rule means that in cases a site doesn't show up well because of blocking a third party script or frame (subdocument), you have to whitelist that specific third party domain. E.g.: @@||example.com^$script,subdocument,third-party. A complicating factor is that AdGuard MV3 Extension doesn't log events (yet). So it's not immediately clear which third party site it concerns.

 

[Virtuoso]

@Jan Willy

I have played with a similar idea when I tried out AdGuard_MV3. Your idea worked reasonable well because I used AG_MV3 only for cosmetic filtering on websites I visit a lot. The bulk of the blocking is done in my browser (Edge blocking advertising and tracking networks) and my DNS (NextDNS privacy filters allowing affiliate ad and tracking networks but blocking many website specific stuff using NextDNS, AdGuardDNS and OISD filters).

I used the exact same rules (from NL also), but i made the allow exceptions for all websites which I had bookmarked or for which I had created cosmetic rules with AdGuard_MV3 red crosshair feature (which helps to create cosmetic rules in the user rules section of AG_MV3). Your rules would look like:

! your generic block rule
||*$third-party,script,subdocument

! TLD allow exceptions excluding my bookmarked domains
@@.com^$script,subdocument,domain=~bookmark1.nl|~favorite2.com|~starredwebsite3.org|~websitewithCosmeticRuleAdded.net
@@.eu^$script,subdocument,domain=~bookmark1.nl|~favorite2.com|~starredwebsite3.org|~websitewithCosmeticRuleAdded.net
etc

This has the advantage that I did reduce the third-party medium mode attack surface reduction for websites I normally don't visit, but keep the benefit of AG's blocklist for the websites I visit a lot (e.g. news websites and websites with IT-news). Using this in combination with DNS-level and browser build-in blocking it was a reasonable replacement for uBo's smart-medium mode (the thread of Windows_Security which is a sticky in this forum). I say reasonable, because every time I added an exception, I had to add this domain to all eight TLD allow rules.

I guess we just have to wait and see how AG_MV3 and uBO-lite pan out. AG_MV3 is much more mature functionality wise than uBO-lite. It is also funny to see the different development principles of those two great extensions (AG-team focusses of functionality first and optimize afterwards, Gorhill focusses on optimization forst and offer functionality afterwards). When I had to choose right now I would opt for AG_MV3.

What do you think about "optimal" vs "complete" mode in uBOLite? For a normal user who wants to block stubborn ads on shady websites which mode will be preferable?

 

[ForgottenSeer 97327]

@Virtuoso

I think it is in general a good idea to offer different levels of filtering. You can either choose to run complete mode and drop back to optimal mode for websites when it breaks website functionality (advanced user) or run it in optimal mode and increase filtering for nasty websites (informed user). The beauty of this flexibility is that you can use what fits you best. So well done Mr. Gorhill

I would like Microsoft to adopt this idea of offering diefferent filtering levels per website for their anti-tracking also. Advanced users could run it in STRICT and fallback to BALANCED when they run into problems. It is much smarter than a ON-OFF switch alone. CNN for instance would not play videos, when Edge was set to STRICT in the past (it is no problem anymore). They only thing I could do with just one filtering level is to use the feedback button and switch of Edge build-in anti-tracking for CNN. Providing an option to fallback to a less aggressive level of filtering is a much more sophisticated solution IMO.

 

[Back3]

A month ago, my setup was AdGuard Manifest V3, NextDNS with AdGuard DNS Filter and NextDNS Custom List, I don't care about cookies. Two days ago, I disabled AdGuard Manifest. My surfing is faster, and the ad blocking is nearly as good. I use Chrome and Edge.
I checked my ad blocking on PC Mag website, which has a ton of publicity and, so far, so good. No issues with aesthetics.

 

[Back3]

Everything is fine on my regular websites. But NextDNS doesn't stop adds on YouTube: AdGuard Manifest V3 does a better job.

 

[ForgottenSeer 97327]

FYI

I tried AdGuard_MV3 to test Jan Willy's easy medium mode (excluding my bookmarked websites) and noticed the CPU usage of the service-worker has dropped substantially on my PC
(Running AG_MV3 with Edge anti-tracking on strict and NextDNS privacy filters of NextDNS, AdguardDNS and OISD), so it seems AG-team has done some optimizing

 

[ForgottenSeer 97327]

Everything is fine on my regular websites. But NextDNS doesn't stop adds on YouTube: AdGuard Manifest V3 does a better job.

You can choose to enable AG only on the websites needed with Edge (see picture)

Spoiler: Picture

AG is not needed on MT, just shown as example

 

[Virtuoso]

FYI

I tried AdGuard_MV3 to test Jan Willy's easy medium mode (excluding my bookmarked websites) and noticed the CPU usage of the service-worker has dropped substantially on my PC
(Running AG_MV3 with Edge anti-tracking on strict and NextDNS privacy filters of NextDNS, AdguardDNS and OISD), so it seems AG-team has done some optimizing

Earlier when I compared Adguard MV3 vs uBOLite, uBOLite was much faster than Adguard MV3. What is the situation now after various updates on both the extensions?

 

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Earlier when I compared Adguard MV3 vs uBOLite, uBOLite was much faster than Adguard MV3. What is the situation now after various updates on both the extensions?

In my experience uBO Lite is still faster, but AdGuard MV3 more complete (with cookie and annoyances blocking).

 

[oldschool]

In my experience uBO Lite is still faster, but AdGuard MV3 more complete (with cookie and annoyances blocking).

Its UI is very slow, e.g. when I en/disable a filter list the UI lags, as if it's not responding, and I only see the changed setting by refreshing the page.

 

[silversurfer]

I saw today on Chrome web store: AdGuard MV3 version 0.3.16

AdGuard AdBlocker MV3 Experimental

Experimental version of unmatched adblock extension built on Manifest V3.

chrome.google.com

No info nor changelog yet

Releases · AdguardTeam/AdGuardMV3

AdGuard browser extension prototype based on the new Manifest V3 - AdguardTeam/AdGuardMV3

github.com

 

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

I saw today on Chrome web store: AdGuard MV3 version 0.3.16

AdGuard AdBlocker MV3 Experimental

Experimental version of unmatched adblock extension built on Manifest V3.

chrome.google.com

No info nor changelog yet

Releases · AdguardTeam/AdGuardMV3

AdGuard browser extension prototype based on the new Manifest V3 - AdguardTeam/AdGuardMV3

github.com

Thanks, for the update
Unfortunately with this version the extension's own options page doesn't load anymore for me with MS Edge.

 

[silversurfer]

Thanks, for the update
Unfortunately with this version the extension's own options page doesn't load anymore for me with MS Edge.

I am sorry, I haven't noticed that before, but same issue for me on both Edge and Vivaldi Hopefully, a new fixed version coming soon...

 

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

I am sorry, I haven't noticed that before, but same issue for me on both Edge and Vivaldi Hopefully, a new fixed version coming soon...

working on it right now. a fix will be available as soon as Chrome checks, usually in 1-2 days.

Unable to access options · Issue #28 · AdguardTeam/AdGuardMV3

AdGuard MV3 0.3.16 Edge v.107.X Windows 10 Home The problem was not present in the previous build.

github.com