3 ms·

It's absolute spin. If the extension can't inspect the traffic it can't meaningfully filter content. Now there is a security hole, yes, but closing it comes a

by ivl 7y ago

It's absolute spin. If the extension can't inspect the traffic it can't meaningfully filter content. Now there is a security hole, yes, but closing it comes at a huge cost: the removal of useful ad blocking. I suspect more and more uBO users will be forced to move to Firefox and/or install a pihole.

lotsofpulp 7y ago
There is no spin. Apple is pretty open about restricting freedom to increase security. Many people don’t have time or inclination to check which extension is doing what. Proof is the fact that ublock and adblock are bad, but ublock origin is good. Whose non-techy friends and family are going to spend time to figure that one out? In that case, the macOS and iOS content blocking system is better for those users.
pcr910303 7y ago
> If the extension can't inspect the traffic it can't meaningfully filter content. I’m sorry, but does uBlock Origin detects & filter ads based on contents? I thought they maintained a database of URLs that serve ads & page elements... and Safari content blockers also have the same capability to block content based on URLs (hence can block YouTube ads). BTW, PiHole blocks ads based on hostname... and is more incapable than Safari content blockers.
- ivl 7y ago
  uBlock Origin can be configured to do much more than a simple list based filter (like EasyList, etc). [1] It's not quite the same as detecting, but it's incredibly configurable, and that functionality can't be used when list based filtering is all that's allowed. And I'm aware PiHole is just DNS filtering, but an extra layer of blocking is useful. 1. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dynamic-filtering https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dynamic-filtering
saagarjha 7y ago
> If the extension can't inspect the traffic it can't meaningfully filter content. Have you ever used a content blocker? For all their restrictions, they’re still quite effective.

by ivl 7y ago

lotsofpulp 7y ago

There is no spin. Apple is pretty open about restricting freedom to increase security. Many people don’t have time or inclination to check which extension is doing what. Proof is the fact that ublock and adblock are bad, but ublock origin is good. Whose non-techy friends and family are going to spend time to figure that one out? In that case, the macOS and iOS content blocking system is better for those users.

pcr910303 7y ago

> If the extension can't inspect the traffic it can't meaningfully filter content. I’m sorry, but does uBlock Origin detects & filter ads based on contents? I thought they maintained a database of URLs that serve ads & page elements... and Safari content blockers also have the same capability to block content based on URLs (hence can block YouTube ads). BTW, PiHole blocks ads based on hostname... and is more incapable than Safari content blockers.

ivl 7y ago
uBlock Origin can be configured to do much more than a simple list based filter (like EasyList, etc). [1] It's not quite the same as detecting, but it's incredibly configurable, and that functionality can't be used when list based filtering is all that's allowed. And I'm aware PiHole is just DNS filtering, but an extra layer of blocking is useful. 1. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dynamic-filtering https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dynamic-filtering

saagarjha 7y ago

> If the extension can't inspect the traffic it can't meaningfully filter content. Have you ever used a content blocker? For all their restrictions, they’re still quite effective.