Advice Request UbO Filter Lists for Best UbO Performance?

[SearchLight]

I was reading several posts on this site regarding filter lists for UbO with some recommending Custom Filter Lists which I found on the Filter List site and added.

As you can see in the attached image, I have disabled UbO filters because some suggested they are redundant.

My question is do you think my current filter lists are adequate enough for optimal performance of UbO, and browsing? I have not noticed any slowdowns.

 

[SeriousHoax]

Share a full screenshot. Number of network filters and cosmetic filters are not shown here. The amount of network filters don't have impact on performance as tested by gorill himself:

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

Right! :) Do you (anyone) think Google Search facilitates or enables this to happen? It's just sloppy security at the extension store. If anything, Google wouldn't want anyone else competing with its own ad ecosystem.

malwaretips.com

The number of cosmetic filters may have some performance impact but even those a user won't notice. In the test above, on default settings uBlock Origin has 48k cosmetic filters but still no impact on performance. On my uBO I have 95K cosmetic filters at the moment but I never notice any slowdown either. Everything is snappy.
Btw, have you disabled all the 5 built in uBlock specific filters? If yes then don't do that, re-enable those and remove Anti-Anti adblock killer from your list. It's redundant with default uBO filters and gorill has been saying for a long time now whenever he sees someone using this filter.
If rest of the current config of optimized filters are working for you then keep it, no problem.

 

[SearchLight]

Share a full screenshot. Number of network filters and cosmetic filters are not shown here. The amount of network filters don't have impact on performance as tested by gorill himself:

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

Right! :) Do you (anyone) think Google Search facilitates or enables this to happen? It's just sloppy security at the extension store. If anything, Google wouldn't want anyone else competing with its own ad ecosystem.

malwaretips.com

The number of cosmetic filters may have some performance impact but even those a user won't notice. In the test above, on default settings uBlock Origin has 48k cosmetic filters but still no impact on performance. On my uBO I have 95K cosmetic filters at the moment but I never notice any slowdown either. Everything is snappy.
Btw, have you disabled all the 5 built in uBlock specific filters? If yes then don't do that, re-enable those and remove Anti-Anti adblock killer from your list. It's redundant with default uBO filters and gorill has been saying for a long time now whenever he sees someone using this filter.
If rest of the current config of optimized filters are working for you then keep it, no problem.

Thanks. Reactvated 5 UbO specific filters, and removed AAK. Took the AdBlock tester with this config, and scored 79/100. I guess this is good?

 

[redsworn]

Thanks. Reactvated 5 UbO specific filters, and removed AAK. Took the AdBlock tester with this config, and scored 79/100. I guess this is good?

SeriousHoax already mentioned in other thread, that adblock test is meaningless. If you want to test it, just open your frequently visited sites and observe them visually and/or via the logger. If you see unwanted things are getting through then you can add additional filter list(s), report it to the filter list maintainers or even create your own rules in "My Filters".

 

[oldschool]

Same advice as @SeriousHoax and @redsworn. I use all µBO built-in default filters + µBO annoyances + Fanboys enhanced tracking + Frogeye's first-party trackers. YMMV depending on location, etc. Keep it simple whatever you do, and don't overthink it.

Stay safe, not paranoid!

 

[Evjl's Rain]

I highly recommend 1hosts (mini) filter. IMO, it's one of the best filters out there. It's not too big (>40k) but very effective. It can block some domains that all other filters miss
this top3000 filter is also recommended if you live in The US or Europe

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Kees1958/W3C_annual_most_used_survey_blocklist/master/Top3000

by the way, I don't really like using malware filters for ublock because they are usually outdated. They put some strain on ublock performance. A malware extension seems to be better because they are always up-to-date
The higher number of rules, the heavier it gets. I used to have >300k of rules, I did notice an impact on my PC, especially higher CPU usage and some delay in navigation, in contrast to gorhill's test

 

[SearchLight]

I highly recommend 1hosts (mini) filter. IMO, it's one of the best filters out there. It's not too big (>40k) but very effective. It can block some domains that all other filters miss
this top3000 filter is also recommended if you live in The US or Europe

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Kees1958/W3C_annual_most_used_survey_blocklist/master/Top3000

by the way, I don't really like using malware filters for ublock because they are usually outdated. They put some strain on ublock performance. A malware extension seems to be better because they are always up-to-date
The higher number of rules, the heavier it gets. I used to have >300k of rules, I did notice an impact on my PC, especially higher CPU usage and some delay in navigation, in contrast to gorhill's test

Took your suggestion and added these two.

 

[ErzCrz]

The raw.github link for that 1Hosts Mini (Adblock) is https://raw.githubusercontent.com/badmojr/1Hosts/master/mini/adblock.txt Same as the one linked just a raw. link rather than the .io link. Anyway, added that to my list. I'm still running BDTL along side UBO to ensure I have malware covered.

I find if I have a lot of wildcarded My Filters that it slows down page loading but could just been browser or network.

 

[paulderdash]

I highly recommend 1hosts (mini) filter. IMO, it's one of the best filters out there. It's not too big (>40k) but very effective. It can block some domains that all other filters miss

Assuming 1Hosts Mini is reliable / a good idea, which Filterlists.com list is best to subscribe to in UBO - Adblockers, Domains, Domains with wildcards or the complete one (ranging from 43K to 60K entries) - and why?

Edit: I see I may have my answer here: µBlock, a lean and fast blocker
But then I see Adblockers, Domains, Domains with wildcards all have 43K entries - only the 'complete' one has 60K entries, so my question still stands ... which of the first three then?

 

[SeriousHoax]

Assuming 1Hosts Mini is reliable / a good idea, which Filterlists.com list is best to subscribe to in UBO - Adblockers, Domains, Domains with wildcards or the complete one (ranging from 43K to 60K entries) - and why?

Edit: I see I may have my answer here: µBlock, a lean and fast blocker
But then I see Adblockers, Domains, Domains with wildcards all have 43K entries - only the 'complete' one has 60K entries, so my question still stands ... which of the first three then?

Use the Adblockers edition of 1Hosts Mini. The complete list is a bit aggressive and may break some pages.
Edit: Adding one of my comment from the Wilder forum in case anyone having confusion about the different number of filters between Adblockers, host, domains edition:

µBlock, a lean and fast blocker

I think the Notracking blocklist is just overkill. I looked at which lists it consists of, and it includes several abandoned or poorly maintained...

www.wilderssecurity.com

 

[paulderdash]

I did remember that Wilders post and had linked to it in the post above (not sure why it didn't 'format' it like yours).

 

[SeriousHoax]

I did remember that Wilders post and had linked to it in the post above (not sure why it didn't 'format' it like yours).

Ow ok then. You need to copy the link by right clicking there to copy the link of a specific comment from a thread. The same applies to here on MalwareTips.

 

[monkeylove]

Some additional points from R. Hill:



I followed a similar setup but had to add Adguard Annoyances, Easylist Cookie, and uBlock Filters - Annoyances to block popups of videos and cookie or newsletter notifications in some sites.

 

[Moonhorse]

I highly recommend 1hosts (mini) filter. IMO, it's one of the best filters out there. It's not too big (>40k) but very effective. It can block some domains that all other filters miss

I just did add the pro list with 172k filters, but it wont affect into performance since none of them are cosmetics as the gorhill were running 850k without performance hit

 

[plat]

Exactly. That post of his was like a breath of fresh air. I felt I had more elbow room and could do more in uBO with greater flexibility after he posted his benchmarks.

 

[Lenny_Fox]

Thanks. Reactvated 5 UbO specific filters, and removed AAK. Took the AdBlock tester with this config, and scored 79/100. I guess this is good?

for reference:
Edge with tracking protection on strict 63/100
Edge without tracking protection and uBlockOrigin with Kees1958 Top 3000 ONLY (no other blocklists) also 63/100

 

[Lenny_Fox]

I don't notice any advantage of uBo-default compared with Kees1958 Top3000 in my daily browsing.

Therefor I would like to compare 1host mini (thanks @ErzCrz for the link) with Kees1958 Top3000

I ask forum members to so kind to post some websites from North America and West Europe (because that is the claimed regional coverage of the Top3000). I will do a head-to-head comparence with uBO on the first 10 domains posted.

Thanks

 

[plat]

Your DNS can also provide some protection, depending on what you select. After clearing the resolver cache, I used DNS Jumper and selected Norton. So, it's a combined effort.

Looking for desktop wallpapers, for example:

Spoiler

Also have 1Hosts (Mini) since a couple of months. Somebody can see if this list blocks the site independently of Norton DNS.

 

[Evjl's Rain]

I ask forum members to so kind to post some websites from North America and West Europe (because that is the claimed regional coverage of the Top3000). I will do a head-to-head comparence with uBO on the first 10 domains posted.

you can try these

this one is an AIO test: click here

Boston.com: Local breaking news, sports, weather, and things to do

What Boston cares about right now: Get breaking updates on news, sports, and weather. Local alerts, things to do, and more on Boston.com.

www.boston.com

Home | Daily Mail Online

MailOnline - get the latest breaking news, celebrity photos, viral videos, science & tech news, and top stories from MailOnline and the Daily Mail newspaper.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Seattle news, weather, sports, events, entertainment | seattlepi.com

Seattle local news, traffic, weather, business news, sports, real estate, photos and events.

www.seattlepi.com

News, Politics, Sports, Mail & Latest Headlines

Discover the latest breaking news in the U.S. and around the world — politics, weather, entertainment, lifestyle, finance, sports and much more.

www.aol.com

1hosts mini + stevenblack can cover most of the ads

 

[Lenny_Fox]

On default (sorry could not access seattlpi.com from the Netherlands)

With 1 Host mini ONLY

With Kees1958 TOP3000 ONLY

Winner = uBo default (with 74K network and 44K cosmetic rules), close second 1Host Mini (with 50K rules) and with substantial distance Top3000 (with less than 3K rules).


Thanks @Evjl's Rain This mini test shows that 1Host Mini is a good alternative for uBlock default. Kees1958 is at disappointing distance from those two. To Kees1958 credit I did not see advertisements and the network request benefit was less than 4 percent (the blocked percentages are on domain level, not network request - data traffic)