Re:Google relents slightly on blocking ad-blockers – for pai...
by lern_too_spel on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @11:13AM
(#20041114)
Now Chrome will have the crippled adblocking capabilities of Safari. This is the browser equivalent of removing the headphone jack — removing a feature many people use to get some security benefit for a few. The problem for Google is that unlike Apple's customers, you can't pee on a Chrome or Android user's back and tell them it's raining. No Android user was happy the headphone jack went away just because there are wireless options.
Since Google controls the extension distribution system, it could just as easily plastered extensions that use this API with scary warnings, so only users who knew what they were getting into would install them. It's not like users install so many extensions that use this API that they would start to ignore the warnings.
Re:Google relents slightly on blocking ad-blockers – for pai...
by danShumway on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @11:21AM
(#20041198)
Domain-based filtering isn't enough to block all ads and trackers -- unless Pi-hole is doing more than just acting as a DNS server nowadays; I haven't checked in a while.
In particular, using Pi-hole forces you to decide globally what domains you'll block -- so you can't (for example) block Twitter/Facebook on 3rd-party domains but allow it when you directly visit them. DNS blocking also can't handle individual URLs within a domain -- so you won't be able to block ads on sites like Youtube or Facebook.
Aside from lacking granularity for when domains are allowed or disallowed, Pi-hole also won't protect you from the majority of first-party tracking. That's less of a concern though because (at least for now) the V3 manifest isn't stopping extensions from blocking tracking cookies or disabling features like Canvas, so you can still rely on them for that.
Typically though, I advise people to prefer extensions like UMatrix and Ublock Origin, and to fall back on Pi-hole as a backup strategy when nothing else is available. It's useful (particularly to help with native apps and IOT devices), but I don't think it's a substitute for a good browser-based ad blocker.
Since Google controls the extension distribution system, it could just as easily plastered extensions that use this API with scary warnings, so only users who knew what they were getting into would install them. It's not like users install so many extensions that use this API that they would start to ignore the warnings.
In particular, using Pi-hole forces you to decide globally what domains you'll block -- so you can't (for example) block Twitter/Facebook on 3rd-party domains but allow it when you directly visit them. DNS blocking also can't handle individual URLs within a domain -- so you won't be able to block ads on sites like Youtube or Facebook.
Aside from lacking granularity for when domains are allowed or disallowed, Pi-hole also won't protect you from the majority of first-party tracking. That's less of a concern though because (at least for now) the V3 manifest isn't stopping extensions from blocking tracking cookies or disabling features like Canvas, so you can still rely on them for that.
Typically though, I advise people to prefer extensions like UMatrix and Ublock Origin, and to fall back on Pi-hole as a backup strategy when nothing else is available. It's useful (particularly to help with native apps and IOT devices), but I don't think it's a substitute for a good browser-based ad blocker.