Hot Take Evaluate your content blocker with Ad Block Tester

The developers of AdGuard and uBlock Origin find the test of d3ward pointless.
uBlock blocks the testing domain and thus always gives 100%
! Defuse pointless online tool too causing hardship to volunteers
!
*$3p,domain=d3ward.github.io
@@*$redirect-rule,domain=d3ward.github.io
d3ward.github.io##.textads

And AdGuard does the same:
 
Privacy Badger isn't an adblocker. It's goal is to block trackers. It's pointless to use it besides a content blocker like uBO. Testing on d3ward has little to do with visiting real world tracking sites. On the FAQ page the site offers a small filterlist that offers a 100% score. On real world tracking sites this list does hardly anything. A nice overview of real world tracking sites: https://www.ghostery.com/whotracksme/websites
 
The developers of AdGuard and uBlock Origin find the test of d3ward pointless.
uBlock blocks the testing domain and thus always gives 100%
...not exactly, the test may be pointless (?) but running ublock orgin default I only got 99% -- it said 2 were not blocked. (the exception proves the rule??)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gandalf_The_Grey
...not exactly, the test may be pointless (?) but running ublock orgin default I only got 99% -- it said 2 were not blocked. (the exception proves the rule??)
Ok, fair enough, but by blocking most with its own rules uBlock Origin makes the test pointless.
 
Privacy Badger isn't an adblocker. It's goal is to block trackers. It's pointless to use it besides a content blocker like uBO. Testing on d3ward has little to do with visiting real world tracking sites. On the FAQ page the site offers a small filterlist that offers a 100% score. On real world tracking sites this list does hardly anything. A nice overview of real world tracking sites: https://www.ghostery.com/whotracksme/websites
in some browsers & other VMs I use Ghostery. "Privacy Babger is an install-and-forget browser add-on that stops advertisers and trackers..." so sayeth EFF (emphasis added) -- I have not taken the time to review the content of ublock filter lists -- I just just use the default setup.


EDIT -- @Jan Willy well I suppose how you parse the full sentence you are correct! -- I did not mean to quote it out of context.
 
Last edited:
@simmerskool
Some more information about Privacy Badger (from its own site):
IMG_20241103_222917.jpg
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: simmerskool
What about trackers that uBlock Origin catch, is it catch those too?
interesting now an hour or 2 later, but I updated the VM from fedora 40 to 41. Should be same version of firefox. ublock also sees static.cloudflareinsights.com and few that pd does not see AND now pd does NOT see platform.twitter.com. interesting...?
 
  • Wow
Reactions: lokamoka820
interesting now an hour or 2 later, but I updated the VM from fedora 40 to 41. Should be same version of firefox. ublock also sees static.cloudflareinsights.com and few that pd does not see AND now pd does NOT see platform.twitter.com. interesting...?
Maybe the page was not loaded completely, sometimes you need to scroll to the end of the page to let all the content load and wait for seconds, the counter will then start to rise.
 
Ok, fair enough, but by blocking most with its own rules uBlock Origin makes the test pointless.
This discussion has degenerated into one about which trackers uBO and Privacy Badger are blocking. @Gandalf_The_Grey has it right, and I think @Jan Willy would agree. First, PB is a tracker blocker which happens to block some ads which are trackers. uBO is designed to block both. Finally, the test is pointless.

Users should choose their extension based on their intention, either to block tracking or to block both ads and trackers. Word!
 
Just tried it on macOS 15.1, with AdGuard for Mac, not the extension. Got 81% on both Edge and Safari. Thought could be higher.