11 ms·

It's kind of crazy to hear that the first mainstream browser to have a built-in adblocker turned on by default is going to be Google Chrome.

ewzimm 9y ago
When you put it that way, it sounds surprising, but of course Google won't block their own ads, so you could say "the first mainstream browser to block other companies' ads by default" and it would sound less strange. Not that I'm against it! This is a big move from the biggest browser that will push its competitors to do the same and change the web, likely for the better. Brave is pushing a similar agenda from behind the front lines.
eli 9y ago
Only a dominant player could pull it off. Detecting ad blockers is kinda hard, but sniffing user agents is easy. If Edge blocked ads by default some sites might choose to block Edge users entirely.
- nradov 9y ago
  And then Edge would just use a different user_agent.
  - eli 9y ago
    What, like steal one from another browser. That seems unlikely
    - ry_ry 9y ago
      http://i.imgur.com/19VEBL7.png http://i.imgur.com/19VEBL7.png Pretty much. Not to mention Safari and IE user agents have included strings like "Mozilla/5.0" and "like Gecko" for years now to 'demonstrate compatibility' with those browsers. User, estate and recruitment agents are all equally untrustworthy!
      - eli 9y ago
        Ship it that way by default? Never gonna happen.
- ry_ry 9y ago
  Not really - detecting ad blockers is pretty straightforward, try to insert a DOM node that triggers their ad pattern matching then check if it's been blocked. Not to mention spoofing your user agent is very easy! It's built into the devtools of most desktop browsers (including Edge), or can be modified by a proxy like Fiddler. I wouldn't ever want to rely on useragent to identify a browser if the idea was to completely block that software from accessing your site.
  - eli 9y ago
    Disagree. As blockers actively try to thwart ad block detection. Especially for popular sites, it's a losing proposition. And Microsoft is never going to ship a browser that completely steals another browser's user agent.
    - ry_ry 9y ago
      It's a catch 22 really - If adverts are modified or removed, the dom will reflect that. If you completely spoof that you effectively break the dom for everything else. If you only spoof the advert's own properties, you can infer state from other inline elements. If you block domains you can check for their response on the client. If you proxy the incoming asset before it hits the browser and replace it's content is harder to detect client side but the ad provider will be able to see what happened and would most likely not display your modified content, taking you back to the conventional detection strategies.
jmkni 9y ago
I thought Opera already had one?
- bobajeff 9y ago
  They do but it's off by default.

ewzimm 9y ago

When you put it that way, it sounds surprising, but of course Google won't block their own ads, so you could say "the first mainstream browser to block other companies' ads by default" and it would sound less strange. Not that I'm against it! This is a big move from the biggest browser that will push its competitors to do the same and change the web, likely for the better. Brave is pushing a similar agenda from behind the front lines.

eli 9y ago

Only a dominant player could pull it off. Detecting ad blockers is kinda hard, but sniffing user agents is easy. If Edge blocked ads by default some sites might choose to block Edge users entirely.

nradov 9y ago
And then Edge would just use a different user_agent.
- eli 9y ago
  What, like steal one from another browser. That seems unlikely
  - ry_ry 9y ago
    http://i.imgur.com/19VEBL7.png http://i.imgur.com/19VEBL7.png Pretty much. Not to mention Safari and IE user agents have included strings like "Mozilla/5.0" and "like Gecko" for years now to 'demonstrate compatibility' with those browsers. User, estate and recruitment agents are all equally untrustworthy!
    - eli 9y ago
      Ship it that way by default? Never gonna happen.
ry_ry 9y ago
Not really - detecting ad blockers is pretty straightforward, try to insert a DOM node that triggers their ad pattern matching then check if it's been blocked. Not to mention spoofing your user agent is very easy! It's built into the devtools of most desktop browsers (including Edge), or can be modified by a proxy like Fiddler. I wouldn't ever want to rely on useragent to identify a browser if the idea was to completely block that software from accessing your site.
- eli 9y ago
  Disagree. As blockers actively try to thwart ad block detection. Especially for popular sites, it's a losing proposition. And Microsoft is never going to ship a browser that completely steals another browser's user agent.
  - ry_ry 9y ago
    It's a catch 22 really - If adverts are modified or removed, the dom will reflect that. If you completely spoof that you effectively break the dom for everything else. If you only spoof the advert's own properties, you can infer state from other inline elements. If you block domains you can check for their response on the client. If you proxy the incoming asset before it hits the browser and replace it's content is harder to detect client side but the ad provider will be able to see what happened and would most likely not display your modified content, taking you back to the conventional detection strategies.

jmkni 9y ago

I thought Opera already had one?

bobajeff 9y ago
They do but it's off by default.