ameshkov

6 ms·

31.
by ameshkov 2y ago
Will be fixed in the next filters update
32.
by ameshkov 2y ago
I made a similar thing once to relay UDP traffic over WebSocket and it supports Cloudflare if needed: https://github.com/ameshkov/udptlspipe The use case is to relay WireGuard over TCP/CF in a restrictive network,
33.
AdGuard DNS Now Supports Structured DNS Errors(adguard-dns.io)
3 points by ameshkov 2y ago|0 comments
34.
by ameshkov 2y ago
Ops, we'll fix it in a moment
35.
by ameshkov 2y ago
We don't use GH as a CDN, it's used solely for developing filter lists and issue reports.
36.
by ameshkov 2y ago
The issue is resolved now, the repo is available again. We have not received any response to the support case that we opened, but we assume that it was a false positive of some automatic algorithm. As a consequence of this we're going
37.
by ameshkov 2y ago
We opened an appeal on Github and are waiting for their response. So far we have absolutely no idea what's wrong and what is the violation they're referring to. I'll be surprised if this is a copyright issue as Github accordi
38.
by ameshkov 3y ago
Could you please explain what auto-reverse and multiple record types mean? The reason for asking is to learn what's missing from AG Home/DNS and maybe adding it in the future.
39.
by ameshkov 3y ago
My point is that reporting must be accurate and factually correct.
40.
by ameshkov 3y ago
The “safe rules” concept is a little strange indeed, not very consistent. I actually agree that for an MV3 ad blocker I’d better have a fully declarative default (emphasis on default), but I’d like to provide an option to grant more permiss
41.
by ameshkov 3y ago
It isn’t “nothing else”, cosmetic rules can still be updated independently “over-the-air”. One more approach (a bit “hacky”) is to distribute cosmetic rules inside static rulesets (hide them in a separate “metadata” field). I personally lik
42.
by ameshkov 3y ago
> Cosmetic meaning what exactly? Filter lists are composed of two types of rules: “cosmetic” and “network”. Network rules define what needs to be done with web requests (block or redirect). In MV3 these rules should now be implemented vi
43.
by ameshkov 3y ago
The article’s claim is factually incorrect, self-update will also still be possible to implement even without the fast track. It will be more complicated than it is now as we’ll need to do that via differential updates, but nevertheless.
44.
by ameshkov 3y ago
JS is important, but it’s only a part of what’s required. webRequest allows the extension to manipulate web requests: blocking or redirecting them. MV3 tries to replace the old webRequest with a declarative alternative and it’s almost impos
45.
by ameshkov 3y ago
The most problematic part of MV3 (removing part of the webRequest API functionality) is a part of the platform. This remote JS stuff is a CWS policy.
46.
by ameshkov 3y ago
Firefox kinda also does. In both cases side loading is rather painful experience, thanks to all the malware that is exploiting the extensions feature.
47.
by ameshkov 3y ago
If the server is yours it will probably be rejected. Definitely will be rejected by Mozilla. Userscripts is a notable exception of this rule as in this case the user instructs the extension what JS to execute.
48.
by ameshkov 3y ago
I like that Ars tries to defend ad blocking, but please, prepare better, maybe talk to actual developers and avoid false accusations. It’s completely okay to criticize Google for doing really controversial (to say the least) stuff like gett
49.
by ameshkov 3y ago
Here’s what I heard: they are okay with such a workaround for now because they realize how hard it is to adapt to the new model, but in the future they’d prefer to see extensions adapt and be able to quickly reinit.
50.
by ameshkov 3y ago
> MV3 now brings "offscreen documents" Yeah, at first I thought of using offscreen documents as a replacement, but it appears that: 1. They're not persistent too. 2. They have a different purpose, they're supposed to
51.
by ameshkov 3y ago
> Isn't this basically the same concept they already used with ordinary content scripts for years? It was implicit, now it's explicit and it gives more control and better understanding. It also allows introducing more levels of
52.
by ameshkov 3y ago
MV3 is basically MV2 with one tectonic change: replacing persistent background pages with ephemeral service workers. So a large part of this effort actually DID go into MV2. There's a better question: what if instead of investing huge
53.
by ameshkov 3y ago
It's natural for Google in their public communication to quote positive stuff and not quote anything critical. Recently I tried to explain the current state of MV3 objectively: https://adguard.com/en/blog/chro
54.
by ameshkov 3y ago
I would argue that new APIs are better thought through and cover the use cases that the extensions actually need. Let me name a few examples. 1. chrome.scripting API and the concept of "isolated worlds" is easier to use and unders
55.
by ameshkov 3y ago
Good comment. I guess it’s a matter of hope :) I really want to believe that the extensions platform will continue to develop with at least the same pace, and eventually comes to Android. Maybe I am over optimistic though, we’ll see, but ot
56.
by ameshkov 3y ago
For the most part I agree with your quote save for the “stuck in the past, unable to adapt” part, I’d replace with “lag behind”. If the things continue to develop the way they are now, the new features will be eventually incorporated into D
57.
by ameshkov 3y ago
Sorry for jumping in but since AG is mentioned. If you want to have all the data under you control, there's this: https://github.com/AdguardTeam/AdGuardHome Regarding open source, AdGuard DNS actually is: https:&
58.
by ameshkov 3y ago
Cool, we'll add a link to this to AGH readme: https://github.com/AdguardTeam/AdGuardHome/issues/5858
59.
AGLint – ESLint for ad blocking filter lists(adguard.com)
2 points by ameshkov 3y ago|0 comments
60.
by ameshkov 3y ago
Fixed it, thanks

More ›