- Aug 15, 2018
- 634
Which will be better for Chrome? Members here seem to be fan of uBo. Is it better than Nano AdBlocker?
Please provide comments and solutions that are helpful to the author of this topic.
Sorry to inform you that at least uBlock Origin never passed that test, the developer simply added a rule for that website, which he does a lot to cheat results.Lately ive noticed that ublock origin alone or either with nano defender couldnt pass this test anymore
View attachment 211669
Any ideas how to pass(?), since nano defender had the site blacklisted to pass the test before
@Windows_Security sorry for tagging you, but youre the expert here
To be clear it was the developper of Nano who cheated, not the developper of uBlock origin.Sorry to inform you that at least uBlock Origin never passed that test, the developer simply added a rule for that website, which he does a lot to cheat results.
But in the wild the results where always different obviously, adding rules to a test website to fool your userbase to think they protected is a toxic behaviour.
I vote nano from these two, but I rather use Adguard Desktop anyday.
Well ublock origin is enough , so why need to have nano anyways..gorhill probably wouldve done nano defender like extension if he had to, theres no need to do one. He has done umatrix, scope etc. wich are more impressive than ublock alone/ nano defenderTo be clear it was the developper of Nano who cheated, not the developper of uBlock origin.
IMO a reason to go for uBlock Origin instead of Nano.
I don't know about Nano, but uBlock Origin did cheat, the same way it cheated in the CSS Exfil test page, Stealing Data With CSS: Attack and DefenseTo be clear it was the developper of Nano who cheated, not the developper of uBlock origin.
IMO a reason to go for uBlock Origin instead of Nano.
How common even is the CSS vulnerability, since disabling javascript wont block it? Some people said the extension is useless on GHACKS, but never did research about it. Ive mainly just followed the @Windows_Security opinions on extensionsI don't know about Nano, but uBlock Origin did cheat, the same way it cheated in the CSS Exfil test page, Stealing Data With CSS: Attack and Defense
Okay, don't really understand what happens there, but that leaves us with AdGuard only, or did they cheat also?I don't know about Nano, but uBlock Origin did cheat, the same way it cheated in the CSS Exfil test page, Stealing Data With CSS: Attack and Defense
It's dangerous for relying solely in CSS, but shouldn't be common.How common even is the CSS vulnerability, since disabling javascript wont block it? Some people said the extension is useless on GHACKS, but never did research about it. Ive mainly just followed the @Windows_Security opinions on extensions
I know Adguard with default settings will be detected, but I really don't care, I'll just create a rule to remove the Anti-Adblock script.Okay, don't really understand what happens there, but that leaves us with AdGuard only, or did they cheat also?
I prefer AdGuard. But between uBo & Nano --> Nano.
I had occasion to use AdGuard on Edge since uBO had stopped working on it. I found AdGuard for Edge pleasantly light on resources, though its default lists don't block some of Microsoft's more aggressive ad reinsertions (Instart Logic).I tried AdGuard AdBlocker for several days, and for me, the internet became slower but I admit that it blocks all ads.
The problem is the slowness.