> it makes no sense to have an ad blocker that requires permission from the ad-blocked websites. I don't follow what you mean by this. Under the current V3 sp

> it makes no sense to have an ad blocker that requires permission from the ad-blocked websites. I don't follow what you mean by this. Under the current V3 specification, as currently proposed, Privacy Badger (assuming they stick it out and keep maintaining a Chrome version) will need to be granted observation permissions on every single website, adblocked or not. The way Privacy Badger works is by determining at runtime based on request observation which domains it should blacklist. This is not going to be a fringe usecase. Are you misunderstanding how the proposed permissions system works by some chance, or am I misunderstanding your argument? It's not the website you request permissions from -- it's the user you request permissions from for domains/domain patterns. Why doesn't it make sense for a user to grant an ad blocker permission to operate on domains where they want it to block ads?