5 ms·
Who is this for, what's the point? If you're using a computer on which installing this software is an alternative, you can install a web browser with an ad blo
by swinglock 7y ago
Who is this for, what's the point?
If you're using a computer on which installing this software is an alternative, you can install a web browser with an ad blocker, which performs much better than DNS based filters.
If you're not using such a computer, Pi-Hole proves DNS filtering and this software doesn't.
What's the use-case between these two that isn't already covered?
- imglorp 7y agoChrome, for example, has banned some adblockers. Makes sense to me.
- martimarkov 7y agoOut of curiosity which ones and is there a common pattern in their blockage philosophy?
- imglorp 7y agohttps://www.zdnet.com/article/opera-brave-vivaldi-to-ignore-chromes-anti-ad-blocker-changes-despite-shared-codebase/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/opera-brave-vivaldi-to-ignore-...
- Larrikin 7y agoThey banned the best one in my opinion https://adnauseam.io/ https://adnauseam.io/ Blocks ads and helps poison the data they have collected on you
- t0astbread 7y agoSoftware that's not running in a web browser but on a machine where you can install a local DNS proxy. It's not a broad use case but it's also really cheap to do and doesn't have a lot of maintenance cost.
- littleweep 7y agoA lot of websites (news sites especially) detect in-browser ad blockers and urge users to whitelist the site before continuing to read the article. This is a good workaround for that use case.
- fuzzy2 7y agoThis is also easily detectable.
- op00to 7y agoNo, the websites detect that a resource wasn't loaded which triggers the annoying stuff. This happens with a pihole, adblocker, maza, or plain ol' hosts file. Ad blockers aren't magic.
- shawnz 7y agoIn fact it's a good argument for using in-browser adblockers, since in-browser adblockers are capable of blocking such nag screens whereas DNS-based ones are not
- huhtenberg 7y agoJust for the sake of argument - to block trackers that are built into other software, eg. chat clients and some such.
- op00to 7y agoI mean, ok. But you're allowing a chat client to run code on your PC... in the case I saw it was sudo. You can do a shitload more with sudo than you can with a browser extension. I still don't get it.
- ignoramous 7y ago> I still don't get it. Think of it like a DNS-layer firewall. Plenty ways to get circumvent it, but works wonderfully, nonetheless. > in the case I saw it was sudo This isn't an all-in-one security product. Just one way to firewall trackers, ads, and whatever else one wants.
- lonelappde 7y agoPi-hole already does that. You can run pi-hole on your local OS with Docker. It's 5 minutes to install.
- brigandish 7y agoAside from competition being a good thing, Docker itself introduces attack vectors.
- swinglock 7y agoSurely not more so than curling scripts from the web and executing them as root, which is the exact install procedure described for this program.
- mega_tux 7y agoIMHO, it's way easier to check the script content before sudoing and validate its security than validate the Docker ecosystem.
- schwartzworld 7y agoIf it functions like pihole, one benefit is blocking ads in ad-supported software outside the browser.
- eikenberry 7y ago> Who is this for, what's the point? People who want to learn and/or want something simple. This version is super simple with the whole application being a ~150 line shell script. This makes it very easy to understand and adapt. Eg. I have a file-server that runs our DHCP and DNS. I've looked into using Pi-hole's setup on it before and it just wasn't worth the trouble due to mismatches between their setup and mine. OTOH this version is very easy to understand and tweak to my needs (eg. using unbound vs. dnsmasq).