Serious Discussion uBlock Origin Lite - General Discussions

[Sampei.Nihira]

Those who install uBoL in Firefox only have version 2026.111.1925 available.
The two most recent versions of uBoL for Firefox are not available.

I assumed that an extension installed using this method would not update automatically, so I even opened a issue regarding the delay in updating uBoL for Firefox, which was then closed by Gorhill.

Today, as I have a little more free time, I opened uBoL's manifest.json and was delighted to discover that the extension supported automatic updates, provided they were available on GitHub.

I wanted to share this little discovery with the forum members.

 

[Sampei.Nihira]

It is absurd that uBoL users for Firefox are forced to use uBoL.Firefox.signed.xpi, which was released a month ago.

It is probably not Mr. Hill's fault that Github does not publish updates.

So I added a further comment to the report I had made, considering that it is not possible for every user to criticize what they call the delay in releasing updates.

It is time for the team to review this lack of priority.

 

[Sampei.Nihira]

It is interesting to note that, in addition to me, the simultaneous use of uBo + uBoL is also supported by

@u-RraaLL.

Obviously, its configuration has a different purpose.

But this possibility is real and works without problems, provided the necessary precautions are taken.

It could be a step forward in experimentation for other users.

 

[Sampei.Nihira]

For this reason:

Firefox.signed.xpi not found · uBlockOrigin uBOL-home · Discussion #599

the use of uBoL in Firefox should be seriously reconsidered.

 

[LinuxFan58]

For this reason:

Firefox.signed.xpi not found · uBlockOrigin uBOL-home · Discussion #599

the use of uBoL in Firefox should be seriously reconsidered.

Question Sampei-san,

When you only use your DNR rules, why do you bother updating the extension? As far as I know after the development of uBol focuses on implementing (more complex) procedural blocking (which you are using uBo for).

 

[Sampei.Nihira]

Question Sampei-san,

When you only use your DNR rules, why do you bother updating the extension? As far as I know after the development of uBol focuses on implementing (more complex) procedural blocking (which you are using uBo for).

It's not for me, I do everything as usual with others in mind.
I've always had the character of a good Samaritan!

 

[7Oz-64]

@Sampei.Nihira

 

[Sampei.Nihira]

@Sampei.Nihira
View attachment 295577

Replace with this:

action:
  type: block
condition:
  resourceTypes:
    - ping
    - csp_report
    - object
---

test:

Ping Spotter

 

[7Oz-64]

Replace with this:

action:
  type: block
condition:
  resourceTypes:
    - ping
    - csp_report
    - object
---

test:

Ping Spotter

Already did (with my actuals rules)

 

[Parkinsond]

Already did (with my actuals rules)
View attachment 295580

All on

 

[7Oz-64]

@Parkinsond
So if you're use UBOL, add DNR rules, the one provided by @Sampei.Nihira block all on my Marmaduke browser.
i can't found again the discussion about not block csp reports but i know there are some contreversial discussions

 

[Parkinsond]

@Parkinsond
So if you're use UBOL, add DNR rules, the one provided by @Sampei.Nihira block all on my Marmaduke browser.
i can't found again the discussion about not block csp reports but i know there are some contreversial discussions

Having "request sent" for the three items does it pose a serious risk?

 

[7Oz-64]

Having "request sent" for the three items does it pose a serious risk?

I don't think so, more privacy concern!!!

 

[Sampei.Nihira]

@Parkinsond
So if you're use UBOL, add DNR rules, the one provided by @Sampei.Nihira block all on my Marmaduke browser.
i can't found again the discussion about not block csp reports but i know there are some contreversial discussions

Yes, because csp_report is first-party in the case of the test.
AG team considers, for example, blocking only third-party csp_report.

 

[7Oz-64]

@Sampei.Nihira
some of your screenshot on 1 first page : "Block outsider intrusion into LAN", you don't activate-it ? specific reason ?

 

[Sampei.Nihira]

@Sampei.Nihira
some of your screenshot on 1 first page : "Block outsider intrusion into LAN", you don't activate-it ? specific reason ?

Because it was replaced via browser.

P.S.
If present and active.........................

 

[7Oz-64]

Because it was replaced via browser.

P.S.
If present and active.........................

local-network-access-check ?
uhm have to disable-it in ubol cause already activated this flag.
And using both ag and ubol (you're filters settings + AI widgets) give more privacy

 

[Sampei.Nihira]

local-network-access-check ?

I have 5 in Chrome:

List of Interesting Experimental Flags for Google Chrome to Try Out

P.S.

4 in Firefox.

 

[7Oz-64]

I have 5 in Chrome:

List of Interesting Experimental Flags for Google Chrome to Try Out

Yes me too, except split permissions (not present)

 

[7Oz-64]

@Sampei.Nihira
also have :
Anonymize local IPs exposed by WebRTC
Disable search engine collection
And all of yours