Google ramps up its campaign against ad blockers on Chrome.
Google's campaign against ad blockers across its services just got more aggressive. According to a report by PC World, the company has made some alterations to its extension support on Google Chrome.
Google Chrome recently changed its extension support from the Manifest V2 framework to the new Manifest V3 framework. The browser policy changes will impact one of the most popular adblockers (arguably), uBlock Origin.
The transition to the Manifest V3 framework means extensions like uBlock Origin can't use remotely hosted code. According to Google, it "presents security risks by allowing unreviewed code to be executed in extensions." The new policy changes will only allow an extension to execute JavaScript as part of its package.
Over 30 million Google Chrome users use uBlock Origin, but the tool will be automatically disabled soon via an update. Google will let users enable the feature via the settings for a limited period before it's completely scrapped. From this point, users will be forced to switch to another browser or choose another ad blocker.
Totally agree. Many people who keep using Chrome have a VERY outdated view of what Firefox can do. That's a shame, but it's unfortunately an aspect of human nature that negative impressions are SUPER hard to change.
Using the internet without an adblocker is genuinely dangerous. Everyone really should be using uBlock Origin. Using a web browser that prevents uBlock Origin puts you in danger
It’s not perfect but PiHole will still catch a lot of the ads if you have the know-how to set one up. Tis a relatively cheap and easy solution that has the benefit of being able to block ads network-wide, providing your router lets you set a custom DNS.
My provider, small one from my town, or the attendant just decided to give me the password. After months, I found out how to extract the configurations and used my old router instead.
Firefox is now owned by ads company. By default there are enabled telemetrics and moreover companies starts to ignore compability of their web services with browser which market share is lower than 2% even goverments stops considering that browser. Mozzila instead of optimization of their browser spend time introduceing features like AI.
I was trying to like that browser but mozzila effectively does not allow me.
Now btw. I use just vivaldi. I know this is not fully open source.
At this rate people should just cut the cord with google. Modifying reg files is almost as annoying as moving bookmarks over. Firefox + uBlock + pihole (if you’re feeling ambitious/want to block other crap that’s non-browser related) and you’re chillin.
I'm not sure what Mullvad is based on - i think it's on Tor, which is Firefox based?
I do use mostly LibreWolf, but if FF also went to shit, I wonder if Tor, and thus Mullvad, would keep on going or not. Because I suppose LibreWolf would have troubles with keeping up, if Mozilla would enshitify FF, since they would probably have to fork and continue development on their own.
Browser engines are ridiculously complex, nearly on the level of operating systems. All of the Firefox forks are really just different UIs built around Gecko/Quantum - those other projects aren't really maintaining their own engines, they're dependent on Mozilla's work to remain stable, secure and relevant.
Yeah, I know and that's what I'm afraid of. I guess I'll just have to come to terms with most websites not working in some obscure web browser that's not feature-complete. Would actually help with my addiction, so it won't be so bad, I guess.
The title should be "Google pulls plug out of Chromium"
Too bad that even when people start switching, people writing drafts for the W3 spec are mostly Google employees.
I'm sure that'll be their next battleground.
This reminds me that Microsoft and Google have been intensely "collaborating" with code for Linux kernel as well... Too good to be true good-hearted actions from those corporations...
Editors:
Joey Parrish (Google Inc.)
Greg Freedman (Netflix Inc.)
Former editors:
Mark Watson (Netflix Inc.) (Until September 2019)
David Dorwin (Google Inc.) (Until September 2017)
Jerry Smith (Microsoft Corporation) (Until September 2017)
Adrian Bateman (Microsoft Corporation) (Until May 2014)
Lynx is still actively maintained. I use it from time to time when I don't feel like leaving the command line to look something up or whatever. It works really well still. So long as all you care about is text.
If you like to use reader mode you'll probably like Lynx.
Elinks for can do basic CSS & JS. I wish there were better support for like 256 or 16 color modes for CSS to better support TUIs. The reading UX is generally pretty good, but stuff like syntax highlighting really helps. …That is if website makers did their job correctly & treated JavaScript as an enhancement. The bigger issue is even in the case of limited JS support like Netsurf, most developers aren’t going to be writing ES3 or ES5-compatible code which is about all most of these systems can support which means the JS will be broken anyhow without keeping their engines up to date.
Does this affect edge as well? Pushing out ublock via policy to both edge and chrome has saved me a lot of headaches at work, this is gonna be a pain in the dick.
Microsoft still hasn't made a stance. However, Edge isn't private and is an advertising platform.
Maybe figure out if you can do a very customized version of Firefox. I would take inspiration from Librewolf but keep in mind things will break if you start applying privacy patches.
the big companies, technological or not, always do the same thing... they launch a good product, very cheap (or free). When they already have a big market, they start cutting back. In the case of food, they raise prices, cut products, slightly change the taste...
In the case of technology, they raise prices, cut the product, eliminate features....
That a company like Google, dedicated to data, has its own browser and pays to include it as standard in cell phones, it is clear that it is not going to stand still when an addon for its browser blocks part of its business...In this case, very few will switch browsers. That means changing habits. Already did with Google Photos.... . Tiene miles de millones de fotos y vídeos de menores, de fiestas, íntimas... Ofrece espacio gratuíto y después, le pagas por ello, porque tienes tu vida ahí....
Or with Google Maps. It's a great service, but it knows where you go, what for, your schedules... a brutal security problem...or with email.... it reads everything. Because otherwise it will add you to the calendar when you take a flight without having opened the confirmation email...
I've never stopped using Firefox. Google pays it too, but it's the only one that's independent. And then there's Waterfox, Librewolf, PaleMoon...
Run away from Google... there are alternatives.
Netscape Navigator is clearly superior to Internet Explorer. except that Andreessen guy became a Facebook bro. Shame nothing came of that. Oh well, guess I'll use Firefox.
Sadly yes. Almost all, if not all derivates are affected since they inherit the codebase from it. Unless they implement manual Manifest v2 patches + have their own extension store they manage
all chromium browsers are affected, so if a chromium browser wants to support manifest v2, they have to manually maintain it separately from the main chromium build. whether individual companies will do so ofc is tbd. braves built in browser probably not affe ted
DNS blocker will be as useful or maybe even less than ubo lite. E.g. it just cannot block youtube ads like ubo does.
Also Google and removed both bypass your DNS blocker. They use their own DNS server and DoH protocol to resolve their ad servers. DoH is also hard to block because it uses port 443 with https.
The best bet right now is to use either a DNS or even better: packet filter level blocker such as zenarmor; together with ublock origin on firefox. Nothing else will not really block tracking in 2024.
Because the ads constantly change across the websites. Adblocking is naturally a cat-and-mouse dynamic. However, the "remotely hosted code" Adblockers use is not exactly "code" (as in a JavaScript code, for example), it's more a Regex code containing patterns for the different websites and different behaviors (for example, the pattern for the pesky HTML element containing the ad, or the pattern for some ad-serving domain). Google is extrapolating their meaning of "remotely hosted code" purposely, so they can "justify" their measures.
Honestly, I blame developers who, some years ago, decided it was a good idea to centralize the browsers into the same engine. Yeah, it was hellish to maintain code for all browsers at the time (IE5, IE6, Firefox, Safari, etc), but it was paradise compared to our current scenario: at least we really had options: WebKit, Trident, Gecko, as well as lots of smaller, almost unknown engines. Now, all modern browsers are different wrappings of Chromium or Firefox, while most modern sites are developed without the active worry to keep Firefox compatible (one can notice how modern HTML5 features varies across both of them). It has no easy solution. Don't update, maybe? (Until sites start to complain about the outdated version)