New Update uBlock Origin/Nano Adblocker - User Tips, Questions and Issues Thread

[floalma]

@oldschool
Thanks for your answer but I'm afraid that you didn't understood my question.

My question is concerning @Windows_Security answer from this link : Discuss - uBlock Origin/Nano Adblocker - user tips, questions and issues thread and the attached screenshot with KEEP and REMOVE

And also the following :

"Now every time Chromium informs you that SCRIPTS are blocked on a website you want to visit:
1. Allow this website in site Chromium permissions
2. Allow this website in uB0 using the UB) control and add a DOMAINofWEBSITE.XXX * 3p-frame noop rule for that website"

 

[oldschool]

@floalma Oops! I have no answer for that one.

 

[oldschool]

Here's a great suggestion from Martin @ Ghacks when you encounter stubborn anti-adblock barriers on a website you visit :

How to block Blockadblock manually using uBlock Origin - gHacks Tech News

How to block Blockadblock manually using uBlock Origin. It's a very simple process and requires no technical skills whatsoever.

www.ghacks.net

How to block Blockadblock manually
1. Add the following script to your ad blocker. I used Ublock Origin (Dashboard > My Filters). It may work with other add-ons.

@@||example.com^$generichide
example.com##script:inject(bab-defuser.js)

2.Replace the address "example.com" with the URL of the website which has Blockadblock on it.
3. Click on Apply changes.
Reload the page which you were trying to access. And it should work perfectly even when your ad blocker is fully functional. You have to do this for every website which has blockadblock enabled if it does not work correctly.

Many thanks to Martin for this and all the info his excellent website provides!

 

[EPiC-APOC]

I'm trying these rules (in FireFox) but I don't think it works? (I don't see it switching from blocked to noop I mean)

* * 3p-script noop
* * 3p-frame block

com * 3p-frame noop
inf * 3p-frame noop
net * 3p-frame noop
nl * 3p-frame noop
org * 3p-frame noop

I'm I doing it wrong?

 

[Burrito]

Manifest V3 extension in Chrome 80 "Canary in a Coalmine" build

In spite of the overwhelmingly negative feedback on the Manifest V3 extension system, Google is standing firm on Chrome’s ad-blocking changes. Last month, the company announced that it has begun testing its upcoming extension manifest V3 in the latest Chrome Canary build. As of October 31st, the Manifest V3 developer preview has been made available in the Chrome 80 Canary build.
....
The lead developer of popular ad blocker uBlock Origin, which relies on the original functionality of the webRequest API, commented, “This breaks uBlock Origin and uMatrix, [which] are incompatible with the basic matching algorithm picked, ostensibly designed to enforce EasyList-like filter lists,” he explained in an email to The Register. “A blocking webRequest API allows open-ended content blocker designs, not restricted to a specific design and limits dictated by the same company which states that content blockers are a threat to its business.”
....
Many users also mentioned that Chrome is using its dominance in the browser market to dictate what type of extensions are developed and used. A user commented, “As Chrome is a dominant platform, our work is prevented from reaching users if it does not align with the business goals of Google, and extensions that users want on their devices are effectively censored out of existence.”

I haven't been following this... but I thought a compromise had been reached some time ago.

If our Chrome Overlords take away uBO, that will just speed up my move to a different browser.

Google starts experimenting with Manifest V3 extension in Chrome 80 Canary build | Packt Hub

In spite of the overwhelmingly negative feedback, Google starts experimenting with the Manifest V3 extension in Chrome 80 Canary build.

hub.packtpub.com

 

[oldschool]

If our Chrome Overlords take away uBO, that will just speed up my move to a different browser.

Google starts experimenting with Manifest V3 extension in Chrome 80 Canary build | Packt Hub

In spite of the overwhelmingly negative feedback, Google starts experimenting with the Manifest V3 extension in Chrome 80 Canary build.

hub.packtpub.com

Not "if", but "when" they take it away... What r u waiting for?

 

[ForgottenSeer 823865]

I use Adguard desktop , so i don't care mwahahahaha

 

[oldschool]

µBO tip #2,385 : Some times you encounter an issue such as trouble accessing a website and/or you get its anti-adblock warning. You may find the solution is as simple but not necessarily as obvious as this: Filter Lists > Select > "Purge all caches" > re-enable your chosen filter list, or do this in combination with deleting and adding other filter lists.

When you've found an overall setup that works for you don't forget: Settings > "Back up to file"

And for you tweakers with custom "My filters" or "My rules" remember to > "Export to file".

And last but certainly not least: Stay safe, not paranoid!

 

[Lenny_Fox]

I'm trying these rules (in FireFox) but I don't think it works? (I don't see it switching from blocked to noop I mean)

* * 3p-script noop
* * 3p-frame block

com * 3p-frame noop
inf * 3p-frame noop
net * 3p-frame noop
nl * 3p-frame noop
org * 3p-frame noop

I'm I doing it wrong?

Remarks
uBlock allows first party by (unless you block first-party and inline scripts explicitely), so you don't need the noop rule for scripts
* * 3p-script noop

This is only usefull when you normally visit a lot of Dutch websites (NL = Netherlands)
nl * 3p-frame noop

This means you allow all third-party on com, net, inf and org Top Level Domains, it makes more sense to NOOP (no-operand, or do nothing) the third-party (i)frames to those TLD's, see below

I think you should change this to:

* * 3p-frame block
* com * noop
* inf * noop
* net * noop
* nl * noop
* org * noop

This rule set will BLOCK third-party iframes to BBC.CO.UK on BBC.COM

When you would like to keep your original rulesset (NOOPing frames FROM a few TLD's instead of TO) change your ruleset to

* * 3p-frame block
com * * noop
inf * * noop
net * * noop
nl * * noop
org * * noop

This rule set will NOOP (allow) third-party iframes to BBC.CO.UK on BBC.COM

 

[oldschool]

Remarks
uBlock allows first party by (unless you block first-party and inline scripts explicitely), so you don't need the noop rule for scripts
* * 3p-script noop

This is only usefull when you normally visit a lot of Dutch websites (NL = Netherlands)
nl * 3p-frame noop

This means you allow all third-party on com, net, inf and org Top Level Domains, it makes more sense to NOOP (no-operand, or do nothing) the third-party (i)frames to those TLD's, see below

I think you should change this to:

* * 3p-frame block
* com * noop
* inf * noop
* net * noop
* nl * noop
* org * noop

Yes.

 

[oldschool]

You may wish to add this to your µBO filters (depending on your browser) to counter the very sneaky CNAME trackers, the most recent strategic response to ad blockers. Frogeye 1st party tracker list You may also read the ongoing discussion here µBlock, a lean and fast blocker

 

[SeriousHoax]

Frogeye 1st party tracker list

The page is not loading.

Ok found it. This link is working: https://hostfiles.frogeye.fr/firstparty-trackers-hosts.txt

 

[oldschool]

The page is not loading.

Ok found it. This link is working: https://hostfiles.frogeye.fr/firstparty-trackers-hosts.txt

Oops! something got changed in copy-pasting. Thanks for the correct link.

 

[HarborFront]

You may wish to add this to your µBO filters (depending on your browser) to counter the very sneaky CNAME trackers, the most recent strategic response to ad blockers. Frogeye 1st party tracker list You may also read the ongoing discussion here µBlock, a lean and fast blocker

Add to Chrome/Chromium browsers. Add to other adblocker, if possible, besides uBO in FF. Latest uBO in FF already taken care of this

 

[SeriousHoax]

Latest uBO in FF already taken care of this

Not in stable version yet. It's still in beta gorhill/uBlock

 

[oldschool]

µBO user tip #1,238 : To deal with 1st Party C_NAME trackers, Chrome and Chromium-based browser users may wish to add these lists:

chrome-extension://cjpalhdlnbpafiamejdnhcphjbkeiagm/asset-viewer.html?url=https://hostfiles.frogeye.fr/firstparty-only-trackers-hosts.txt
chrome-extension://cjpalhdlnbpafiamejdnhcphjbkeiagm/asset-viewer.html?url=https://www.orwell1984.today/cname/2o7.net.txt
chrome-extension://cjpalhdlnbpafiamejdnhcphjbkeiagm/asset-viewer.html?url=https://www.orwell1984.today/cname/ebis.ne.jp.txt
chrome-extension://cjpalhdlnbpafiamejdnhcphjbkeiagm/asset-viewer.html?url=https://www.orwell1984.today/cname/eulerian.net.txt
chrome-extension://cjpalhdlnbpafiamejdnhcphjbkeiagm/asset-viewer.html?url=https://www.orwell1984.today/cname/omtrdc.net.txt

Brave is committed to dealing with C_NAME trackers in their built-in ad blocker in the future, and Firefox has a µBO Beta that also addresses this issue.

In fact, I just found a new FF Beta update 1.24.3b7 It's very nice that FF updates extensions alutomatically.

 

[Sammo]

I switched from Chrome to Firefox because UBO will no longer block certain annoying ads in Chrome, such as those on Protopage.

 

[oldschool]

I thought I'd post my current compact filter list for µBO to maintain this thread for updated resource info and discussion .

 

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

My not so compact list:

 

[cryogent]

My Filter List, i dont know how compact it is but is working ok so far.

My Filters: HTTP://*^$third-party,~image,~stylesheet
My Rules:

Spoiler

no-cosmetic-filtering: * true
no-csp-reports: * true
no-large-media: behind-the-scene false
* * 3p-frame block
* * 3p-script block
* com * noop
* net * noop
* org * noop
* ro * noop
behind-the-scene * * noop
behind-the-scene * 1p-script noop
behind-the-scene * 3p noop
behind-the-scene * 3p-frame noop
behind-the-scene * 3p-script noop
behind-the-scene * image noop
behind-the-scene * inline-script noop