Hi ,

Chrome Version 69.0.3497.95 (Official Build) beta (32-bit)
uBlock Origin development build v1.16.21rc0
ublock orgin extra

I had these settings turned on:
  • Hide placeholders of blocked elements
  • Show the number of blocked requests on the icon
  • Make use of context menu where appropriate
  • I am an advanced user (required reading)
  • Privacy
    • Disable pre-fetching (to prevent any connection for blocked network requests)
    • Disable hyperlink auditing
    • Prevent WebRTC from leaking local IP addresses
    • Block CSP reports
below are used along with each individual filter(s):
1host.cf and 1host.cf/addon
66,437 network filters + 1,503 cosmetic filters

cnn 39
varitey 67
Y!TV 68
abcnews 72
foxnews 23
wrestlinginc 38
forbes 9
newtimes 10

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/StevenBlack/hosts/master/hosts
60,785 network filters + 1,504 cosmetic filters

cnn 38
varitey 51
y!tV 35
abcnews 35
foxnews 17
wrestlinginc 32
forbes 9
nytimes 6

Ad Blocking List
4,020 network filters + 1,820 cosmetic filters

cnn 37
variety 48
Y!tV 62
abcnews 27
foxnews 18
wrestlinginc 27
forbes 8
nytimes 7

https://www.squidblacklist.org/downloads/squid-ads.acl
7,270 network filters + 1,519 cosmetic filters
cnn 22
variety 28
Y!TV 35
abcnews 27
foxnews 21
wrestlinginc30
forbes 6
nytimes 4

hpHosts’ Ad and tracking servers (built into ublock origin)
48,536 network filters + 1,519 cosmetic filters
cnn 30
variety 46
Y!TV 53
abcnews 36
foxnews 12
wrestinginc 20
forbes 8
nytimes 9

I thought sqidblacklist would do better or as good as blockzilla but it missed some ads
 
Last edited:

JiSingh12

Level 3
That's what I get too. I wonder how he got 4000+ filters?
Maybe that number is the total from multiple filters and not just solely Blockzilla. Such as uBlock filters + Blockzilla.

I get 4,462 network filters + 2,023 cosmetic filters if i use: (Nano Adblocker)
  • uBlock filters - 10,628 used out of 10,628
  • uBlock filters – Annoyances 523 used out of 523
  • uBlock filters – Badware risks 42 used out of 42
  • uBlock filters – Privacy 144 used out of 145
  • uBlock filters – Resource abuse 282 used out of 283
  • uBlock filters – Unbreak 647 used out of 649
  • Blockzilla - 1,519 used out of 1,522
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: harlan4096

HarborFront

Level 46
Verified
Content Creator
Maybe that number is the total from multiple filters and not just solely Blockzilla. Such as uBlock filters + Blockzilla.

I get 4,462 network filters + 2,023 cosmetic filters if i use: (Nano Adblocker)
  • uBlock filters - 10,628 used out of 10,628
  • uBlock filters – Annoyances 523 used out of 523
  • uBlock filters – Badware risks 42 used out of 42
  • uBlock filters – Privacy 144 used out of 145
  • uBlock filters – Resource abuse 282 used out of 283
  • uBlock filters – Unbreak 647 used out of 649
  • Blockzilla - 1,519 used out of 1,522
TS said

below are used along with each individual filter(s):
with Blockzilla's 1522 filters the sum just don't add up
 

JiSingh12

Level 3
Blockzilla's 1522 filters the sum just don't add up
Yeah, i know, but even the numbers for uBlock filters dont exactly line up with the ones i currently have in Nano Adblocker.
e.g he has 8935 uBlock filters, while i have 10628 uBlock filters.

Nevertheless, i highly highly doubt the 4000+ filters is Blockzilla alone, there is most definitely other filters being used as i double checked Blockzilla from multiple sources.
 

Evjl's Rain

Level 41
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
Malware Hunter
blockzilla always does well because it has a lot of generic rules but lacks specific rules for websites. generic rules will work for new websites which are not in any list
1hosts always performs the best in my test because it has the most common rules for specific sites, but has zero generic rules. It isn't ask big as hphosts ATS but always performs better, IMO

1hosts+blockzilla should be great because they have different purposes

I always suggest adversity and adversity extreme measures, which also has tons of generic rules and it's not huge anyway
 

HarborFront

Level 46
Verified
Content Creator
blockzilla always does well because it has a lot of generic rules but lacks specific rules for websites. generic rules will work for new websites which are not in any list
1hosts always performs the best in my test because it has the most common rules for specific sites, but has zero generic rules. It isn't ask big as hphosts ATS but always performs better, IMO

1hosts+blockzilla should be great because they have different purposes

I always suggest adversity and adversity extreme measures, which also has tons of generic rules and it's not huge anyway
But Adversity and Adversity Extreme Measures were updated last in 2016...............
 
  • Like
Reactions: oldschool

Evjl's Rain

Level 41
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
Malware Hunter
But Adversity and Adversity Extreme Measures were updated last in 2016...............
doesn't matter, because it uses generic rules, they don't need many updates
specific rules require daily update for new websites but generic rules apply for old and new websites without the need for update
update when they find new rules

that's why adblock fast only has 7 generic rules (as they claimed) but can still manage to block ads on a lot of websites, close to adblock plus
 

9724anon7537

Level 1
It would be interesting if someone could make a test with the impact these filter lists have in page loading speed/slowdown, CPU, RAM utilization.

We need to know which of the filter lists are efficient and which cause performance issues.
 

Evjl's Rain

Level 41
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
Malware Hunter
It would be interesting if someone could make a test with the impact these filter lists have in page loading speed/slowdown, CPU, RAM utilization.

We need to know which of the filter lists are efficient and which cause performance issues.
it also depends on the specs of your machine: RAM speed, CPU, maybe HDD speed
for example for me, I start noticing some lags with 300k rules including network & cosmetic but for other people with better CPU, they won't notice anything even at 800k or even 1m (or they just don't compare the speed between <100k and 1m)
I also notice much more CPU usage with too many rules

so the best solution is to reduce the number of rules as much as possible
avoid huge and not-so-effective filters such as hphosts, opt-in more filters with generic rules

I recommend to keep it less than 300k or 250k
 
Yeah, i know, but even the numbers for uBlock filters dont exactly line up with the ones i currently have in Nano Adblocker.
e.g he has 8935 uBlock filters, while i have 10628 uBlock filters.

Nevertheless, i highly highly doubt the 4000+ filters is Blockzilla alone, there is most definitely other filters being used as i double checked Blockzilla from multiple sources.
yeah it should be 4,884 network filters + 2,025 cosmetic filters

with just ublock filters only and blockzilla. I must have had some other filters turned on by mistake.
 

JiSingh12

Level 3
adversity and adversity extreme measures
Never heard of them, but added them.
Already been told my browser security is over the top though in your extension thread..
Therefore my final security on my MAC OS Chrome browser is -
1. BTL
2. Netcraft
3. Nano Adblocker with Blockzilla, Squidblacklist Malicious, 1hosts, and Adversity
4. Safe Browsing
5. Avast Web Filter.

More than enough, lol.
 
5

509322

it also depends on the specs of your machine: RAM speed, CPU, maybe HDD speed
for example for me, I start noticing some lags with 300k rules including network & cosmetic but for other people with better CPU, they won't notice anything even at 800k or even 1m (or they just don't compare the speed between <100k and 1m)
I also notice much more CPU usage with too many rules

so the best solution is to reduce the number of rules as much as possible
avoid huge and not-so-effective filters such as hphosts, opt-in more filters with generic rules

I recommend to keep it less than 300k or 250k
250,000+ block rules ?

How many filters do you use ?