Too much divergence from your "Less is more" approach? Maybe ...
Last edited:
uBlock Stripped - Dynamic Filtering is available on the webstore
- Thread starter LinuxFan58
- Start date
Please, not more default filters. Especially not the weak Disconnect filters. Optional filters (I will probably not use) should also not be below Adguard - and Hagezi level.
I thought Disconnect filters were behind Edge and Firefox anti-tracking.When I last had a look at it (years ago) it were around 3500 domains in 6 categories. Problem with Disconnect filters is that Firefox (sponsored by Google) and Microsoft weeded out the Google and Microsoft advertising networks. That is why the feel week because you allowed nr 1 and 4 biggest ad networks. Add the facebook tracking system (allowed for facebook login) and you don't get protection for 1,2 and 4 adnetworks.
I will move Disconnect to optional filters.
I will move Disconnect to optional filters.
You describe it well. Thx. As usual a wise decision. For people who keep using f.i. Edge's ad- and tracker blocking beside the extension, adding Disconnect filters is rather useless, despite the filters are not 100% identical.
Last edited:
Just awoke (was in 6 in the morning), now on my second coffee.
@oldschool and @Morro and @Jan Willy
1. About Disconnect
I thought Disconnect filters were behind Edge and Firefox anti-tracking.When I last had a look at it (years ago) it were around 3500 domains in 6 categories. Problem with Disconnect filters is that Firefox (sponsored by Google) and Microsoft weeded out the Google and Microsoft advertising networks. That is why the feel week because you allowed nr 1 and 4 biggest ad networks. Add the facebook tracking system (allowed for facebook login) and you don't get protection for 1,2 and 4 . Some other ad networks were also moved to the essential category (which was not enabled by default).
I will move Disconnect to optional filters or drop adding them completely after doing some fact checking.
2. About quality filters
The other 3P-tracking and 3P-adnetwork filters are subsets of Easylist and AdGuard filters, which I will clean up (only select simple no exception 3P's.
What I heard through the marketing community is that adnetworks are using a list of falback domains with randomized names when there initial ad-bidding fetch (more modern version of xmlhttprequest) was blocked, they use the same tactic as Admiral anti adblock.
I found a list (hey customers this is our fallback for you to generate ad income when the JS module arranging the ad auction mechanism did not load, so allow these odd looking domains in your firewall) which contains currently 46.000 domains. Because it are temporary domains this list contains around 13% dead domains. I will clean this up automatically when I automate the filter update mechanism on Github.
I found another (unmaintained) extension which created a test set with 230.000 domains. Although this can technically be implemented with 1 DNR rule, they split it into containers of 5000 domains (so 46 DNR rules).
Because I used OISD small filter with free ControlD DNS service always without any issue, I thought when I have to block this why also not include the anti-admiral list. When I asked AI can you find a list like OISD small with similar very low website breakage and is also well maintained, it came with Hagezi smallest list.
3. About dropping the less is more approach.
Maybe I got carried away, but as posted earlier Chrome's internal adblocker processes simple DNR insanely fast and simple old ABP big list translate to small new DNR list (when you do it smartly only using requestDomains).
So the answer is yes and no. Yes I have to import a big old hostfile static blocklist to catch the fallback mechanism. But no I do it in smart way to generate a (small) list of in future maximum 100 DNR rules.
4. Alternative suggestion
I need to add the fallback list, so I might as well add the anti-admiral list. Let's make them options in new default list. I would also offer an option to use Disconnect Ads, trackers, video and adult categories in stead of Kees1958 most used ad&tracking networks.
By default these lists are enabled;
Logic behind this two step approach. I ran the idea first posted by @oldschool who used Privacy Badger on Brave with adshield Shields normally off. PB badger did an excellent job in finding a middle ground between anti tracking with some adblocking and zero websites breakage. When I did random surfing I enabled the adshield with extra annoyances filters enabled to nuke and strip websites while random surfing.
This still would apply the less is more approach only adding additional filters when doing random surfing.
@Jan Willy
in future I could add 3P-matrix lite easy medium mode and (automate the setup) when in NEVER CONSENT MODE to add additional protection while random surfing (e.g. just another idea I am adding to your idea is automatically raise protection level to 4 for adult websites when never consent mode is active and drop to level 2 when you are browsing a website which is in top 1 million most visited websites, to make it an automatic adaptive extra security layer only enabled when random surfing).
I drop your idea (and added the extra adoptive protection element) to see how it lands with other members.
@oldschool and @Morro and @Jan Willy
1. About Disconnect
I thought Disconnect filters were behind Edge and Firefox anti-tracking.When I last had a look at it (years ago) it were around 3500 domains in 6 categories. Problem with Disconnect filters is that Firefox (sponsored by Google) and Microsoft weeded out the Google and Microsoft advertising networks. That is why the feel week because you allowed nr 1 and 4 biggest ad networks. Add the facebook tracking system (allowed for facebook login) and you don't get protection for 1,2 and 4 . Some other ad networks were also moved to the essential category (which was not enabled by default).
I will move Disconnect to optional filters or drop adding them completely after doing some fact checking.
2. About quality filters
The other 3P-tracking and 3P-adnetwork filters are subsets of Easylist and AdGuard filters, which I will clean up (only select simple no exception 3P's.
What I heard through the marketing community is that adnetworks are using a list of falback domains with randomized names when there initial ad-bidding fetch (more modern version of xmlhttprequest) was blocked, they use the same tactic as Admiral anti adblock.
I found a list (hey customers this is our fallback for you to generate ad income when the JS module arranging the ad auction mechanism did not load, so allow these odd looking domains in your firewall) which contains currently 46.000 domains. Because it are temporary domains this list contains around 13% dead domains. I will clean this up automatically when I automate the filter update mechanism on Github.
I found another (unmaintained) extension which created a test set with 230.000 domains. Although this can technically be implemented with 1 DNR rule, they split it into containers of 5000 domains (so 46 DNR rules).
Because I used OISD small filter with free ControlD DNS service always without any issue, I thought when I have to block this why also not include the anti-admiral list. When I asked AI can you find a list like OISD small with similar very low website breakage and is also well maintained, it came with Hagezi smallest list.
3. About dropping the less is more approach.
Maybe I got carried away, but as posted earlier Chrome's internal adblocker processes simple DNR insanely fast and simple old ABP big list translate to small new DNR list (when you do it smartly only using requestDomains).
So the answer is yes and no. Yes I have to import a big old hostfile static blocklist to catch the fallback mechanism. But no I do it in smart way to generate a (small) list of in future maximum 100 DNR rules.
4. Alternative suggestion
I need to add the fallback list, so I might as well add the anti-admiral list. Let's make them options in new default list. I would also offer an option to use Disconnect Ads, trackers, video and adult categories in stead of Kees1958 most used ad&tracking networks.
By default these lists are enabled;
- Kees1958 most used ad & tracking networks
- Kees1958 most used remove parameters (reason to use my less is more subset in stead of AG remove tracking parms, is that removing these parameters is expensive in terms of processing and memory use)
- Brave Base filter stripped for only top 1 million websites (qua visitors) and domains coming from 5Eyes and extended EU-zone.
- AG anti adblock sub filter
- EL anti admiral sub filter
- New fallback ad server list
- Deduped host files (Peter Low, Hagezi and OISD)
- Deduped additional subfilters from AG and EL blocking (third-party) advertising & tracking networks for 5eyes and EU-zone
- Block login with (blocks additional trackers from social networks)
- Use anti-cookie blocklist NOT requiring trusted scriptlets.
Logic behind this two step approach. I ran the idea first posted by @oldschool who used Privacy Badger on Brave with adshield Shields normally off. PB badger did an excellent job in finding a middle ground between anti tracking with some adblocking and zero websites breakage. When I did random surfing I enabled the adshield with extra annoyances filters enabled to nuke and strip websites while random surfing.
This still would apply the less is more approach only adding additional filters when doing random surfing.
@Jan Willy
in future I could add 3P-matrix lite easy medium mode and (automate the setup) when in NEVER CONSENT MODE to add additional protection while random surfing (e.g. just another idea I am adding to your idea is automatically raise protection level to 4 for adult websites when never consent mode is active and drop to level 2 when you are browsing a website which is in top 1 million most visited websites, to make it an automatic adaptive extra security layer only enabled when random surfing).
I drop your idea (and added the extra adoptive protection element) to see how it lands with other members.
Last edited:
What I read was for pushing advertisements so only ad networks, but for an advertisement auction you need interest based analysis of the user´s clicking behavior so advertisers can bid on the availble ad space on that website (this underwater process is always done while you are on commercial websites), but as far as I understand the tracking is only for the website you are browsing (first party data).
Okay heading of to Low Lands again. I noticed that V8.3 has landed in the chrome webstore (with wait and refresh when you add 2 automate cookie consent clicker rules for the same domain and new never consent mode in cookie clicker, which always chooses deny for 25 cookie management platforms).
@Sampei.Nihira
Now websites with age verification and cookie consent prompt can be automated by choosing the cookie consent clicker, select the button of choice and create rule for both age verification. Repeat the process for cookie wall prompt.
No need for using unsafe scriptlets (requiring trust) in an outdated mv2 extension anymore. Open your mind and embrace the future (this extension will get adaptive protection and block fallback ad infrastructure in v8.4).
@Sampei.Nihira
Now websites with age verification and cookie consent prompt can be automated by choosing the cookie consent clicker, select the button of choice and create rule for both age verification. Repeat the process for cookie wall prompt.
No need for using unsafe scriptlets (requiring trust) in an outdated mv2 extension anymore. Open your mind and embrace the future (this extension will get adaptive protection and block fallback ad infrastructure in v8.4).
@LinuxFan58
I like the past; the future is often uncertain and fallible.
There’s no doubt that the Consent Cookie feature in uBlock Stripped—Dynamic Filtering surpasses the capabilities of uBol/AG.
You wrote that it covers 50% of websites,is that statement still accurate with the new version?
I notice differences in the automatically generated rules compared to the website analysis (consent cookies) performed using the browser’s developer tools when I create a custom rule.
Even when using ES Cookie Notices, I’m forced to create custom rules from time to time because websites often change.
And this also happens when using uBlock Stripped - Dynamic Filtering.
It’s just that no one has pointed this out yet.
As a dinosaur myself, to achieve 100% coverage of the consent cookies websites I visit, I prefer to have access to updated filter lists or, from time to time, to manually create rules that can compensate for any lack of updates when they occur.
Even today, I created a custom consent cookies rule for a website that, until yesterday, was covered by the filter list.
I like the past; the future is often uncertain and fallible.
There’s no doubt that the Consent Cookie feature in uBlock Stripped—Dynamic Filtering surpasses the capabilities of uBol/AG.
You wrote that it covers 50% of websites,is that statement still accurate with the new version?
I notice differences in the automatically generated rules compared to the website analysis (consent cookies) performed using the browser’s developer tools when I create a custom rule.
Even when using ES Cookie Notices, I’m forced to create custom rules from time to time because websites often change.
And this also happens when using uBlock Stripped - Dynamic Filtering.
It’s just that no one has pointed this out yet.
As a dinosaur myself, to achieve 100% coverage of the consent cookies websites I visit, I prefer to have access to updated filter lists or, from time to time, to manually create rules that can compensate for any lack of updates when they occur.
Even today, I created a custom consent cookies rule for a website that, until yesterday, was covered by the filter list.
Last edited:
@Sampei you are mixing things up; cookie consent clicker has two modes: automate and never consent.
The automate part works on every website (that is where you are writing rules for). The automate is point and click and very easy to create rules for age certification and cookie walls. The automate is for websites you visit often and you can choose to allow (when you login to that website) or decline (when you never login to these websites).
The never consent had a coverage of 50% when we handled 10 Cookie Management Platforms) but in 8.3 it is already extended to 25 CMP's which has a coverage of 80% of the commercial websites in 5eyes and extended EU.When you choose Never Consent mode you can choose for how long you want to use it during random surfing: 10, 30 or 60 minutes.
Automate rules have precedence over Never Consent mode, so when you want to login during a random surfing session into for instance MT, you don't have to do anything because the automate rule accepts the cookie prompt (and when you use a pasword manager you are logged in automatically).
But when you like to continue the hassle you explained go ahead and have fun writing rules and searching for updated cookie blocklist:
As posted in future never consent might also get adaptive security from 3P-Matrix-lite when members of MT like this idea.
The automate part works on every website (that is where you are writing rules for). The automate is point and click and very easy to create rules for age certification and cookie walls. The automate is for websites you visit often and you can choose to allow (when you login to that website) or decline (when you never login to these websites).
The never consent had a coverage of 50% when we handled 10 Cookie Management Platforms) but in 8.3 it is already extended to 25 CMP's which has a coverage of 80% of the commercial websites in 5eyes and extended EU.When you choose Never Consent mode you can choose for how long you want to use it during random surfing: 10, 30 or 60 minutes.
Automate rules have precedence over Never Consent mode, so when you want to login during a random surfing session into for instance MT, you don't have to do anything because the automate rule accepts the cookie prompt (and when you use a pasword manager you are logged in automatically).
But when you like to continue the hassle you explained go ahead and have fun writing rules and searching for updated cookie blocklist:
As posted in future never consent might also get adaptive security from 3P-Matrix-lite when members of MT like this idea.
@Sampei you are mixing things up; cookie consent clicker has two modes: automate and never consent.
The automate part works on every website (that is where you are writing rules for). The automate is point and click and very easy to create rules for age certification and cookie walls. The auto mate is for websites you visit often and you can choose to allow (when you login to that website) or decline (when you never login to these websites).
The never consent had a coverage of 50% when we handled 10 Cookie Management Platforms) but in 8.3 it is already extended to 25 CMP's which has a coverage of 80% of the commercial websites in 5eyes and extended EU.When you choose Never Consent mode you can choose for how long you want to use it during random surfing: 10, 30 or 60 minutes.
Automate rules have precedence over Never Consent mode, so when you want to login during a random surfing session into for instance MT, you don't have to do anything because the automate rule accepts the cookie prompt (and when you use a pasword manager you are logged in automatically).
But when you like to continue the hassle you explained go ahead and have fun writing rules and searching for updated cookie blocklist:
The automate part works on every website (that is where you are writing rules for). The automate is point and click and very easy to create rules for age certification and cookie walls. The auto mate is for websites you visit often and you can choose to allow (when you login to that website) or decline (when you never login to these websites).
The never consent had a coverage of 50% when we handled 10 Cookie Management Platforms) but in 8.3 it is already extended to 25 CMP's which has a coverage of 80% of the commercial websites in 5eyes and extended EU.When you choose Never Consent mode you can choose for how long you want to use it during random surfing: 10, 30 or 60 minutes.
Automate rules have precedence over Never Consent mode, so when you want to login during a random surfing session into for instance MT, you don't have to do anything because the automate rule accepts the cookie prompt (and when you use a pasword manager you are logged in automatically).
But when you like to continue the hassle you explained go ahead and have fun writing rules and searching for updated cookie blocklist:
You may also like...
-
Need testers for the new V5.0 of uBol-stripped which has a new feature called Privacy Inspector- Started by LinuxFan58
- Replies: 80
-
Who is willing to test a new uBlock Stripped with dynamic filtering?
- Started by LinuxFan58
- Replies: 63
-
On may 31th 2025 Chrome disabled Mv2 extensions, a year has gone. How did it impact your favorite extensions?
- Started by LinuxFan58
- Replies: 60
-
3P-Matrix-lite version 2 available in the webstore (easy to use uMatrix like security using Mv3 DNR rules)
- Started by LinuxFan58
- Replies: 62
-
3P-Matrix-lite : uMatrix revived for Chromium browsers using DNR
- Started by LinuxFan58
- Replies: 42