New Update Need testers for the new V5.0 of uBol-stripped which has a new feature called Privacy Inspector

You mean my personal and providers IP-adress. Besides FF VPN (in that case) I use of course FF anti-fingerprinting and FF anti-tracking. No site breakage.
Well FF, Edge and Brave antifinger tracking look for well known fingerprint libraries and I when FF does not break NY Times it probably is mild protection. You could add JShelter to firefox and enable the same protections as with Privacy Inspector when JShelter block something, than FF anti-fingerprinting does what I think it does.

When the team from JShelter says Brave anti-fingerprinting is the text book and they try to mimic it, So I would say Brave strict -> JShelter -> Privacy Inspector -> Brave anti fingerprinting + FF tuned -> Firefox default anti fingerprinting -> Edge anti fingerprinting (included in their anti-tracking). Brave dropped strict because when Always ON caused to much website breakage.

But anti-fingerprinting is over rated. I am using Brave on Linux while most Linux users use FF, same for you when you use FF (with its low market share) on Windows you are also standing out. No anti-fingerprinting can compensate for the anonymity of the herd.
 
May I come and live there? :cautious::D
When you fancy 150 rainy days a year, then the country of Beer, Bitterballs and Brothels is the place to be, but be ware:
In the US you don´t go to a drug store to buy drugs, In the Netherlands you don´t go to a coffee shop to buy coffee, we are a weird lot.
 
Last edited:
Submitted 6.7.10 to chrome webstore (I won´t touch the code until this is in CWS)

What is changed?

The popup panel naming and sequence
1785281008232.png



And Create custom DNR rules morphed into DDG Tracker rader. It now only selects DNR resource tyoes which are used for tracking (and block rules only create 3P) rules. Additionally only resources from domains which are in the DuckuckGo tracker database are shown. To make it easier for users to decide whether you want to block a tracker. An indicator is used to show the API-abuse (red = high, yellow = medium, green = low, grey = none), to help you decide which trackers to start blocking. Easiest and safest (in terms of website breakage) would be to simply block the domain as third-party (catches all resources).

Explained on github with visuals: uBol-stripped/README.md at main · Kees1958/uBol-stripped
 
Use Ghostery's WhoTracks.me feature, “Popular Websites with the Most Tracking.”

WhoTracks.Me

The websites listed have many trackers, so it's easy to see if the extension blocks all of them and/or if, in your case, other defenses,such as DNS-level blocking,are also kicking in first.
It's easy to check if, when you disable DNS blocking, the same tracker is still blocked by the extension.
 
Use Ghostery's WhoTracks.me feature, “Popular Websites with the Most Tracking.”

WhoTracks.Me

The websites listed have many trackers, so it's easy to see if the extension blocks all of them and/or if, in your case, other defenses,such as DNS-level blocking,are also kicking in first.
It's easy to check if, when you disable DNS blocking, the same tracker is still blocked by the extension.
While the extension is open source, the underlying data base has IP right limitations.
 
Last edited:
DDG works great, completely dissected mlive - always use ¨for this domain" to prevent breaking other websites. I only added third-party for advanced users, but will remove that option as soon as I get complaints that this feature breaks websites for which they did not write custom rules for, it also makes the column ordering easier with less variable length fields.
1785315414600.png
 
I only added third-party for advanced users, but will remove that option as soon as I get complaints that this feature breaks websites for which they did not write custom rules for
So far (without extended testing) this feature didn't cause problems. FYI: I don't use uBol-stripped together with 3P-Matrix-lite. I simulated (a part of) the latter by the rule you well know: *^$script,subdocument,third-party,to=~be|~com|~de|~dev|~eu|~inf|~io|~ms|~net|~nl|~org|~uk|~us|~video
Did you notice my wish for scrolling in the small window of Scriptlet reference?
 
  • Like
Reactions: LinuxFan58
So far (without extended testing) this feature didn't cause problems. FYI: I don't use uBol-stripped together with 3P-Matrix-lite. I simulated (a part of) the latter by the rule you well know: *^$script,subdocument,third-party,to=~be|~com|~de|~dev|~eu|~inf|~io|~ms|~net|~nl|~org|~uk|~us|~video
Did you notice my wish for scrolling in the small window of Scriptlet reference?
I have noted it Jan, thx

Yes, I also had only one exception (ziggogo.tv), but I had a two times a payment came not through. It turned out that payment provider and the shop had a mismatch. But when that happens, I was always wondering whether it was the ^$script,subdocument,third-party,to=~be|~com|~de|~dev|~eu|~inf|~io|~ms|~net|~nl|~org|~uk|~us|~video rule.

One was for a set of screws and drilling bits, so not a big deal, but when a payment for nearly 1500 euro's for hard wood was gone for two days, I stopped using the easy allow (through ABP-rules). This experience is why 3P-Matrix-lite has a whitelist for payment services AI collected for me in 5Eyes and extended EU-zone and has an on the fly switch protection level option (no diving into settings, but a 1 click action) and color coded icon (shows the level).

3P-Matrix-lite is tiny les than 80KB and uses DNR rules which are enforced by Chrome build-in advertising engine.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: oldschool
For webshops etc. I use in Edge a separate profile without any ad-/tracker blokking extension. My impression (not more as that because I didn't record it) is that 3P-Matrix-lite has some overlap with uBol-stripped. So now I can explore the full potention of uBol-stripped.
 
  • Like
Reactions: oldschool
For webshops etc. I use in Edge a separate profile without any ad-/tracker blokking extension. My impression (not more as that because I didn't record it) is that 3P-Matrix-lite has some overlap with uBol-stripped. So now I can explore the full potention of uBol-stripped.
zero overlap, they complement each other, but using a clean separate profile is a good approach (also safer against snooping)(y)
 
Please, can you explain my findings from a random chosen (but not complex) site (tsnzorg.nl)?
DDG Radar (3P-Matrix-lite disabled) shows next trackers.

uBOL-stripped.jpg
When 3P-Matrix-lite (step 5) is enabled, only the first two red marked items are shown in DDG Radar.
The show-blocks-screen from 3P-Matrix-lite shows always the same two items.

3P.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: oldschool
@Jan Willy

Timing differences: depends when you trigger what. Mv3 DNR rules are applied silently, so extensions use different mechanisms to guess what is blocked or allowed. DDG creates DNR rules and 3P-Matrix-lite create DNR rules and you can be 100% sure they are enforced (silently) by Chrome's They also use slightly different variants to get better readings for their purpose (3P for allowing blocked, DDG for blocking allowed).

With your two browser profile and safe habits, uBol-stripped has extra Security & Privacy and with your easy-medium-mode hard coded rule you achieve the same as 3P-Matrix-lite in level 3 protection (and you don´t need the build-in whitelist because you use a different profile).
 
Last edited: