• John Richard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      97
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Not really. UBlock Origin Lite works really well. They even added content scripts recently. From a technical perspective MV3 offers more security by default.

      • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        4 hours ago

        In practice, I found it breaks sites more, lets some things through, triggers more adblock detectors, and doesn’t work as well with the annoyance list.

        It doesn’t work on YouTube. And the maximum number of entries to block is limited.

        Its not catastrophic though.

        So UBO Lite is not wholly ineffective, no. It works great, mostly. Buts its definitely more of a nuisance to use, which is exactly what Google wants.

      • Communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        50
        ·
        12 hours ago

        The following filter options can’t be translated into DNR rules:

        strict1p, strict3p: whether a network request is same-origin as its initiator
        Entity-based values for domain= filter option (webextensions #394)
        redirect-rule=: the DNR API does not support redirect-if-blocked concept (webextensions #493)
        Click-to-load embedded contexts through redirect=click2load.html filter option
        Regex-based removeparam= modifier filter options
        Exceptions for all modifier filter options are not possible
            Workarounds exist for removeparam= and csp= by carefully tuning the priority property.
        Many very useful regex-based filters used in uBO are not allowed, or are rejected by the DNR API (webextensions #344)
        replace=, can't modify the response body (full support is only possible with Firefox MV2)
        ipaddress=, can't use IP address as a condition to block/unblock (full support is only possible with Firefox MV2)
        urlskip=, this requires programmatic steps to extract a URL from another URL (partial support, for strict-blocked pages only)
        

        aside from that it is somewhat better than default ublock but that’s a pretty big list of issues.

        • redjard@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          25 minutes ago

          There’s also pretty restrictive length limits on filter lists iirc, so ubo lite would have to select top filters at some point. This getting worse as websites add more ads or obfuscate more requiring more rules.

        • John Richard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Some of those limitations were never supported in Chrome to begin with. MV3 still supports webRequestBlocking at the engine level but it is gated behind enterprise policy (ExtensionInstallForcelist in the Windows Registry, macOS MDM, or Linux managed policy JSON). If an extension with webRequestBlocking is installed via policy, it restores programmatic interception.