6 ms·

The issue with v3 is when it's the only solution. Which is not the case here : > However, uBOL allows you to explicitly grant extended permissions on specific

The issue with v3 is when it's the only solution. Which is not the case here : > However, uBOL allows you to explicitly grant extended permissions on specific sites of your choice so that it can better filter on those sites using cosmetic filtering and scriptlet injections. Which I would expect allow it to work as well as uBO.

zamalek 3y ago
> Which I would expect allow it to work as well as uBO. Note that there are still some adblocker workarounds that will foil MV3, such as CNAMEs. uBO will always be more effective than MV3, unless some substantial improvements are made to MV3.
- cookiengineer 3y ago
  Note that CNAMEs is literally caused by GDPR, and the pathway every single ad or tracking company seems to go sooner or later. For people not understanding how it works: you can set a CNAME entry on your tracker.domain.tld to bypass all Browser's third-party tracking preventions, and make it look like it's a normal subdomain of your website. You need to make a CNAME tracker database manually by resolving the reverse entries for known IPs. Usually there is hundreds or thousands of CNAME entries pointing to the same IP address. The AdGuard team also made a database for this, in case anyone needs it for UBOL [1] Most, if not all of those trackers use assets that they serve from there (like a tracking pixel gif socket), so I highly doubt that uBOL will catch those; because the cat and mouse game is now in the ad tracker's favor and it is impossible to keep up now. And that was the intended purpose. We now have to play our hand with marked cards. [1] https://github.com/AdguardTeam/cname-trackers https://github.com/AdguardTeam/cname-trackers
  - eurg 3y ago
    > Note that CNAMEs is literally caused by GDPR How so?
    - cookiengineer 3y ago
      > How so? Because it shifts the contractual obligations and the "legitimate interest" of data to a seemingly first party, which all companies seem to think they can get away with. Well, until the tracked subjects do a reverse DNS lookup anyways.
      - Sander_Marechal 3y ago
        Adding a CNAME does not make tracking first-party. You can simply report them to the relevant DPO.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - dathinab 3y ago
        no it doesn't CNAME is just an alias nothing more and even if it would make it first party it still wouldn't make it legal, like at all you are allowed to track some information first party for certain purposes without user agreement (e.g. fingerprinting for DDOS protection) but you are ONLY allowed to use it for that purpose and have to use _as little data as possible, store it as short as possible_ etc. You also still have to inform the user about it, give them a way to delete it (through because you also have to keep that data as little and as short as possible you often delete it faster then the time you have to process such deletion requests so that tends to be a non issue) this section of GDPR pretty much never applies to anything ad related ever, because even if you collected some fingerprints for DDOS protection you MUST NOT use them for ads, not are you allowed to pass them to anyone else especially not if that entity does use them for something else. pretty much nothing in the law text of GDPR ever implied you might get away with aliasing tracker domains, actually very clearly the opposite generally GDPR is not technology specific, so pretty much any case of "this technical trick to work around GDPR limitations" is pretty much not legal as long as the trick is not to not collect data
        cookiengineer 3y ago
  - warpspin 3y ago
    > Note that CNAMEs is literally caused by GDPR No. The migration to CNAMEs has to do with the phasing out of third party cookies. The GDPR literally does not care about how the technology works.
  - dathinab 3y ago
    > Note that CNAMEs is literally caused by GDPR nonsense GDPR is not technology specific weather you use aliases or not makes not difference (neither weather you use cookies or other e.g. heuristic methods for fingerprinting btw.)
  - PoignardAzur 3y ago
    These "it's the fault of GDPR" posts feel like the comic book caricatures where angry citizens rant that Batman is the cause for all the crimes in Gotham City.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
eipi10_hn 3y ago
No, it won't work as well as uBO. Many features from uBO are missing in uBOL even in full mode, more prone to anti-adblock/ads-reinsertion (problems with `redirect-rule` and unable to fast updates) and ads/trackers/popups can slip through if cannot be caught by regex filters.

zamalek 3y ago

> Which I would expect allow it to work as well as uBO. Note that there are still some adblocker workarounds that will foil MV3, such as CNAMEs. uBO will always be more effective than MV3, unless some substantial improvements are made to MV3.

cookiengineer 3y ago
Note that CNAMEs is literally caused by GDPR, and the pathway every single ad or tracking company seems to go sooner or later. For people not understanding how it works: you can set a CNAME entry on your tracker.domain.tld to bypass all Browser's third-party tracking preventions, and make it look like it's a normal subdomain of your website. You need to make a CNAME tracker database manually by resolving the reverse entries for known IPs. Usually there is hundreds or thousands of CNAME entries pointing to the same IP address. The AdGuard team also made a database for this, in case anyone needs it for UBOL [1] Most, if not all of those trackers use assets that they serve from there (like a tracking pixel gif socket), so I highly doubt that uBOL will catch those; because the cat and mouse game is now in the ad tracker's favor and it is impossible to keep up now. And that was the intended purpose. We now have to play our hand with marked cards. [1] https://github.com/AdguardTeam/cname-trackers https://github.com/AdguardTeam/cname-trackers
- eurg 3y ago
  > Note that CNAMEs is literally caused by GDPR How so?
  - cookiengineer 3y ago
    > How so? Because it shifts the contractual obligations and the "legitimate interest" of data to a seemingly first party, which all companies seem to think they can get away with. Well, until the tracked subjects do a reverse DNS lookup anyways.
    - Sander_Marechal 3y ago
      Adding a CNAME does not make tracking first-party. You can simply report them to the relevant DPO.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
    - dathinab 3y ago
      no it doesn't CNAME is just an alias nothing more and even if it would make it first party it still wouldn't make it legal, like at all you are allowed to track some information first party for certain purposes without user agreement (e.g. fingerprinting for DDOS protection) but you are ONLY allowed to use it for that purpose and have to use _as little data as possible, store it as short as possible_ etc. You also still have to inform the user about it, give them a way to delete it (through because you also have to keep that data as little and as short as possible you often delete it faster then the time you have to process such deletion requests so that tends to be a non issue) this section of GDPR pretty much never applies to anything ad related ever, because even if you collected some fingerprints for DDOS protection you MUST NOT use them for ads, not are you allowed to pass them to anyone else especially not if that entity does use them for something else. pretty much nothing in the law text of GDPR ever implied you might get away with aliasing tracker domains, actually very clearly the opposite generally GDPR is not technology specific, so pretty much any case of "this technical trick to work around GDPR limitations" is pretty much not legal as long as the trick is not to not collect data
      - cookiengineer 3y ago
- warpspin 3y ago
  > Note that CNAMEs is literally caused by GDPR No. The migration to CNAMEs has to do with the phasing out of third party cookies. The GDPR literally does not care about how the technology works.
- dathinab 3y ago
  > Note that CNAMEs is literally caused by GDPR nonsense GDPR is not technology specific weather you use aliases or not makes not difference (neither weather you use cookies or other e.g. heuristic methods for fingerprinting btw.)
- PoignardAzur 3y ago
  These "it's the fault of GDPR" posts feel like the comic book caricatures where angry citizens rant that Batman is the cause for all the crimes in Gotham City.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]

eipi10_hn 3y ago

No, it won't work as well as uBO. Many features from uBO are missing in uBOL even in full mode, more prone to anti-adblock/ads-reinsertion (problems with `redirect-rule` and unable to fast updates) and ads/trackers/popups can slip through if cannot be caught by regex filters.