8 ms·

For people that have somehow missed the story, manifest v3 removed support for certain powerful network apis, severly limiting ad-blockers capabilities. uBlock

by emaro 2y ago

For people that have somehow missed the story, manifest v3 removed support for certain powerful network apis, severly limiting ad-blockers capabilities. uBlock Origin will not work anymore without manifest v2 (there's a v3 compatible lite version of uBlock Origin).

jokoon 2y ago
I saw there is a manifest v3 ublock lite. I don't understand why and how it would be less capable, and so far I have not read the details of how/why. So far, it's just rumors to me. I will keep using firefox anyway, but honestly I am still waiting for a clearer explanation.
- kristofferR 2y ago
  You can't just call stuff you simply don't bother to look up "rumors". Read up here: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-asked-questions-(FAQ) https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-as...
- sjnonweb 2y ago
  With manifest v2, the extension could dynamically intercept requests and block them based on a custom rule. With v3, extensions have to predefine the rules for blocking. Which is the limiting factor
  - hypeatei 2y ago
    That and certain features like the element zapper in uBO aren't available in Lite.
  - sho 2y ago
    > extensions have to predefine the rules for blockin And there's a limit of 5000 such rules.
    - nolist_policy 2y ago
      The limit is 330000 rules: "Based on input from the extension community, we also increased the number of rulesets for declarativeNetRequest, allowing extensions to bundle up to 330,000 static rules and dynamically add a further 30,000." https://blog.chromium.org/2024/05/manifest-v2-phase-out-begins.html#:~:text=Based%20on%20input%20from%20the%20extension%20community%2C%20we%20also%20increased%20the%20number%20of%20rulesets%20for%20declarativeNetRequest%2C%20allowing%20extensions%20to%20bundle%20up%20to%20330%2C000%20static%20rules%20and%20dynamically%20add%20a%20further%2030%2C000 https://blog.chromium.org/2024/05/manifest-v2-phase-out-begi....
      - lyu07282 2y ago
        even if it was infinite that wasn't really the issue, you can't express the algorithms uBlock Origin is using as a static list
      - EasyMark 2y ago
        Given the size and complexity of modern ad malware I doubt if 330,000 rules is enough, so why limit it?
- byteknight 2y ago
  So because you don't understand it, its rumors? A Simple google search would answer all of your questions in a literal sentence. It removes APIs used by ad blockers. https://gprivate.com/6dp1q https://gprivate.com/6dp1q
btown 2y ago
It's worth noting that the maintenance of the "lite" version is at some nonzero risk of burnout for its developers, ironically in part due to Mozilla being unnecessarily hostile: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/issues/197#issuecomment-2377395301 https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/issues/197#issueco... discussed at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41707418 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41707418 - and while there's no plan yet to discontinue the Chrome MV3 compatible version, there are a million ways that this could go wrong. My only long-term hope for this space is that a nonzero segment of congressional representatives have had ad blockers installed by their aides, realize that their experience online takes a nosedive when MV2 is discontinued, and calls for hearings! Blocking isn't just about not seeing ads, it's about a user's freedom to set up their "user agent" to preserve their privacy online from sites that don't respect their wishes. That's a right that Google is using its market power to erode, and it's not something we should take sitting down. More on MV3 from a few years ago: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/12/chrome-users-beware-manifest-v3-deceitful-and-threatening https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/12/chrome-users-beware-ma...
- sieabahlpark 2y ago
  [dead]
- Kbelicius 2y ago
  > It's worth noting that the maintenance of the "lite" version is at some nonzero risk of burnout for its developers, ironically in part due to Mozilla being unnecessarily hostile: Why would you even use the lite version on firefox when the original works?
  - bad_user 2y ago
    Security and possibly performance, which is the selling point of MV3.
    - chlorion 2y ago
      Yup, the MV3 version requires zero permissions and in theory should be faster. These are real benefits that for some reason nobody will admit exist. Saying anything positive about MV3 or the lite extension seems to get you downvoted without explanation though, which is a nice example of how absurd this site is when it comes to anything related to Google. Sometimes I think downvoting should require leaving a comment and reason, because I can't see any reason to downvote this other than "google bad".

by emaro 2y ago

jokoon 2y ago

I saw there is a manifest v3 ublock lite. I don't understand why and how it would be less capable, and so far I have not read the details of how/why. So far, it's just rumors to me. I will keep using firefox anyway, but honestly I am still waiting for a clearer explanation.

kristofferR 2y ago
You can't just call stuff you simply don't bother to look up "rumors". Read up here: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-asked-questions-(FAQ) https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-as...
sjnonweb 2y ago
With manifest v2, the extension could dynamically intercept requests and block them based on a custom rule. With v3, extensions have to predefine the rules for blocking. Which is the limiting factor
- hypeatei 2y ago
  That and certain features like the element zapper in uBO aren't available in Lite.
- sho 2y ago
  > extensions have to predefine the rules for blockin And there's a limit of 5000 such rules.
  - nolist_policy 2y ago
    The limit is 330000 rules: "Based on input from the extension community, we also increased the number of rulesets for declarativeNetRequest, allowing extensions to bundle up to 330,000 static rules and dynamically add a further 30,000." https://blog.chromium.org/2024/05/manifest-v2-phase-out-begins.html#:~:text=Based%20on%20input%20from%20the%20extension%20community%2C%20we%20also%20increased%20the%20number%20of%20rulesets%20for%20declarativeNetRequest%2C%20allowing%20extensions%20to%20bundle%20up%20to%20330%2C000%20static%20rules%20and%20dynamically%20add%20a%20further%2030%2C000 https://blog.chromium.org/2024/05/manifest-v2-phase-out-begi....
    - lyu07282 2y ago
      even if it was infinite that wasn't really the issue, you can't express the algorithms uBlock Origin is using as a static list
    - EasyMark 2y ago
      Given the size and complexity of modern ad malware I doubt if 330,000 rules is enough, so why limit it?
byteknight 2y ago
So because you don't understand it, its rumors? A Simple google search would answer all of your questions in a literal sentence. It removes APIs used by ad blockers. https://gprivate.com/6dp1q https://gprivate.com/6dp1q

btown 2y ago

It's worth noting that the maintenance of the "lite" version is at some nonzero risk of burnout for its developers, ironically in part due to Mozilla being unnecessarily hostile: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/issues/197#issuecomment-2377395301 https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/issues/197#issueco... discussed at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41707418 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41707418 - and while there's no plan yet to discontinue the Chrome MV3 compatible version, there are a million ways that this could go wrong. My only long-term hope for this space is that a nonzero segment of congressional representatives have had ad blockers installed by their aides, realize that their experience online takes a nosedive when MV2 is discontinued, and calls for hearings! Blocking isn't just about not seeing ads, it's about a user's freedom to set up their "user agent" to preserve their privacy online from sites that don't respect their wishes. That's a right that Google is using its market power to erode, and it's not something we should take sitting down. More on MV3 from a few years ago: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/12/chrome-users-beware-manifest-v3-deceitful-and-threatening https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/12/chrome-users-beware-ma...

sieabahlpark 2y ago
[dead]
Kbelicius 2y ago
> It's worth noting that the maintenance of the "lite" version is at some nonzero risk of burnout for its developers, ironically in part due to Mozilla being unnecessarily hostile: Why would you even use the lite version on firefox when the original works?
- bad_user 2y ago
  Security and possibly performance, which is the selling point of MV3.
  - chlorion 2y ago
    Yup, the MV3 version requires zero permissions and in theory should be faster. These are real benefits that for some reason nobody will admit exist. Saying anything positive about MV3 or the lite extension seems to get you downvoted without explanation though, which is a nice example of how absurd this site is when it comes to anything related to Google. Sometimes I think downvoting should require leaving a comment and reason, because I can't see any reason to downvote this other than "google bad".