5 ms·

> BlockingResponse not supported. > Blocking requests not supported. so uBlock Origin is not going to happen. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/safar

by shpx 6y ago

> BlockingResponse not supported. > Blocking requests not supported. so uBlock Origin is not going to happen. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/safariservices/safari_web_extensions/assessing_your_safari_web_extension_s_browser_compatibility https://developer.apple.com/documentation/safariservices/saf... https://www.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/hdz0bo/will_ublock_origin_back_to_macos_big_sur/fvoc7wk/ https://www.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/hdz0bo/will_u...

stephen_g 6y ago
I really hope they will eventually come up with some arrangement to fix that (like being able to explicitly grant extra permissions to individual extensions). I've really missed uBlock Origin these last couple of years and the content blocking framework app I have instead just isn't anywhere near as good, and not being able to easily see what's being blocked is really annoying...
JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago
Couldn't an extension override window.fetch or window.XMLHttpRequest and kill requests, rewrite them to localhost, etc?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- silverwind 6y ago
  Won't work. Browsers don't use those APIs for when downloading page content.
rayuela 6y ago
Fuuuuuckkk! I got so excited for a minute there. My biggest regret moving from droid to apple was giving up ublock.
- bartvk 6y ago
  Have you tried alternative solutions? I currently use NextDNS. It's DNS-based blocking and works decent enough on iOS devices. Not as good as uBlock, but I'm hoping that this will improve once we get OS-level configurable browsers in iOS 14.
nuker 6y ago
Im using "AdGuard For Safari". Its open source, in Mac App Store and works well enough to keep using Safari. Trick is to disable two out of 8 extensions that require full page access, leaving on only passive, content blocking ones.
- hivacruz 6y ago
  What are the two extensions you mentioned?
  - DavideNL 6y ago
    Adguard for Safari: https://apps.apple.com/nl/app/adguard-for-safari/id1440147259 https://apps.apple.com/nl/app/adguard-for-safari/id144014725...
  - nuker 6y ago
    When you install it, it creates like 8-9 extensions in Safari, depending on selected filters, and two special ones, like Safari Icon and another. Click on each and check permissions
- michelb 6y ago
  Good deal here, no affiliation/affiliate link: https://stacksocial.com/sales/adguard-family-plan-lifetime-subscription https://stacksocial.com/sales/adguard-family-plan-lifetime-s... Best purchase I've made in a long time.
  - nuker 6y ago
    This is different thing to one i posted above, just a note.
  - ffpip 6y ago
    Wrong site? https://adguard.com/en/welcome.html https://adguard.com/en/welcome.html
xbenjii 6y ago
This is why I block at the router level with AdGuard/PiHole.
- ascagnel_ 6y ago
  The issue with deeper and deeper ad blocking technology is that you're going to end up putting more and more trust into your ad blocker. uBlock Origin requires access to the DOM, where it can do nasty things like overwrite window.fetch or window.XmlHttpRequest and intercept network traffic. PiHole, just based on the way it operates, has to route all your network traffic along a different route, and it's up to you to watch its upstream output to make sure it's not doing something bad. I think there's some benefit to the way Apple is intentionally limiting the available surface for content blockers, but it'd be nice to expand on that surface in limited means (eg: freeze library functions so more of the DOM can be accessed, but at the risk of breaking badly-behaved websites) or at least to get a better, plain-English explanation as to _why_ those decisions are being made.
  - _qulr 6y ago
    > The issue with deeper and deeper ad blocking technology is that you're going to end up putting more and more trust into your ad blocker. To be honest, I trust my ad blocker more than I trust Apple. This is not a joke. Remember that Apple takes literally billions of dollars per year in payoff to make Google the default search engine in Safari. Apple's interests are not exactly aligned with mine.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - danielscrubs 6y ago
      But it’s not about trusting Apple or the content blocker. It’s about trusting Apple AND the content blocker and all its dependencies.

by shpx 6y ago

stephen_g 6y ago

I really hope they will eventually come up with some arrangement to fix that (like being able to explicitly grant extra permissions to individual extensions). I've really missed uBlock Origin these last couple of years and the content blocking framework app I have instead just isn't anywhere near as good, and not being able to easily see what's being blocked is really annoying...

JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago

Couldn't an extension override window.fetch or window.XMLHttpRequest and kill requests, rewrite them to localhost, etc?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
silverwind 6y ago
Won't work. Browsers don't use those APIs for when downloading page content.

rayuela 6y ago

Fuuuuuckkk! I got so excited for a minute there. My biggest regret moving from droid to apple was giving up ublock.

bartvk 6y ago
Have you tried alternative solutions? I currently use NextDNS. It's DNS-based blocking and works decent enough on iOS devices. Not as good as uBlock, but I'm hoping that this will improve once we get OS-level configurable browsers in iOS 14.

nuker 6y ago

Im using "AdGuard For Safari". Its open source, in Mac App Store and works well enough to keep using Safari. Trick is to disable two out of 8 extensions that require full page access, leaving on only passive, content blocking ones.

hivacruz 6y ago
What are the two extensions you mentioned?
- DavideNL 6y ago
  Adguard for Safari: https://apps.apple.com/nl/app/adguard-for-safari/id1440147259 https://apps.apple.com/nl/app/adguard-for-safari/id144014725...
- nuker 6y ago
  When you install it, it creates like 8-9 extensions in Safari, depending on selected filters, and two special ones, like Safari Icon and another. Click on each and check permissions
michelb 6y ago
Good deal here, no affiliation/affiliate link: https://stacksocial.com/sales/adguard-family-plan-lifetime-subscription https://stacksocial.com/sales/adguard-family-plan-lifetime-s... Best purchase I've made in a long time.
- nuker 6y ago
  This is different thing to one i posted above, just a note.
- ffpip 6y ago
  Wrong site? https://adguard.com/en/welcome.html https://adguard.com/en/welcome.html

xbenjii 6y ago

This is why I block at the router level with AdGuard/PiHole.

ascagnel_ 6y ago
The issue with deeper and deeper ad blocking technology is that you're going to end up putting more and more trust into your ad blocker. uBlock Origin requires access to the DOM, where it can do nasty things like overwrite window.fetch or window.XmlHttpRequest and intercept network traffic. PiHole, just based on the way it operates, has to route all your network traffic along a different route, and it's up to you to watch its upstream output to make sure it's not doing something bad. I think there's some benefit to the way Apple is intentionally limiting the available surface for content blockers, but it'd be nice to expand on that surface in limited means (eg: freeze library functions so more of the DOM can be accessed, but at the risk of breaking badly-behaved websites) or at least to get a better, plain-English explanation as to _why_ those decisions are being made.
- _qulr 6y ago
  > The issue with deeper and deeper ad blocking technology is that you're going to end up putting more and more trust into your ad blocker. To be honest, I trust my ad blocker more than I trust Apple. This is not a joke. Remember that Apple takes literally billions of dollars per year in payoff to make Google the default search engine in Safari. Apple's interests are not exactly aligned with mine.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - danielscrubs 6y ago
    But it’s not about trusting Apple or the content blocker. It’s about trusting Apple AND the content blocker and all its dependencies.