News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:No to Chrome by thejohnconway on Friday December 06, 2019 @06:28AM (#21720840)
But Safari still supports extensions, surely? I’m using it with extensions, there are not stories I can see about them removing support, and their Développement pages are still up.
Re:No to Chrome by tyingq on Friday December 06, 2019 @06:36AM (#21720907)
Their apis only support declarative static blocking lists. No heuristics, right click to block, IAB ad size detection, etc. Similar to what chrome plans to do with manifest v3.

Advertisers are already figuring out how to get around that. CNAME cloacking, proxying with same domain, etc.

Re:No to Chrome by jakelazaroff on Friday December 06, 2019 @09:07AM (#21721831)
But on the other hand, it prevents malicious extensions from exfiltrating your browsing data.
Re:No to Chrome by Karunamon on Friday December 06, 2019 @09:27AM (#21722002)
A powered off computer is completely unhackable.

This idea of removing usability in the name of safety has gone way, way too far. It was crap when Mozilla did it, it's crap when Apple does it.

Re:No to Chrome by jakelazaroff on Friday December 06, 2019 @12:02PM (#21723686)
Privacy is half the point of an ad blocker. I don’t think it’s ridiculous to enforce privacy constraints on something that ostensibly protects your privacy.
Re:No to Chrome by tyingq on Friday December 06, 2019 @02:17PM (#21725048)
Given that both Safari and Chrome will continue to allow extensions to inject arbitrary JavaScript into any web page, I don't buy the privacy angle.
Re:No to Chrome by S_A_P on Friday December 06, 2019 @07:37AM (#21721238)
More specifically, they blocked extensions that work a certain way. The deal breaker for me was when uBlock origin was no longer able to run. I immediately switched to Firefox and Brave.
Re:No to Chrome by FussyZeus on Friday December 06, 2019 @09:06AM (#21721826)
I have uBlock running on Safari...? Newest version. Or is uBlock not the same as uBlock origin?
Re:No to Chrome by scholia on Friday December 06, 2019 @09:23AM (#21721955)
No, uBlock is not the same as uBlock Origin.

Quote:

In July 2018, uBlock.org was acquired by AdBlock,[19] and began allowing "Acceptable Ads",[20] a program run by Adblock Plus that allows some ads which are deemed "acceptable", and the publisher pays Adblock Plus.[21]

EndQuote

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBlock_Origin

Re:No to Chrome by FussyZeus on Friday December 06, 2019 @09:27AM (#21722001)
Well, damnit. Thanks for the info.
Re:No to Chrome by MichaelConlon on Friday December 06, 2019 @09:28AM (#21722010)
They are not the same product[1].

uBlock was the original tool but was handed over to another maintainer some time ago. The original developer of uBlock, being unhappy with the direction of the tool, forked the repo and made uBlock Origin which he maintains and is often considered the better product by people here

[1]https://ublock.org/faq/

Re:No to Chrome by saagarjha on Friday December 06, 2019 @06:54AM (#21721009)
Safari does still support extensions, but they operate differently now.
Re:No to Chrome by vehemenz on Friday December 06, 2019 @09:42AM (#21722130)
True, but the extension ecosystem is poor now.

1. Extensions in the app store are not easily searchable. They aren't indexed/sorted on the store properly, and many only show up on Google.

2. Many of the good extensions are no longer available, e.g., UBO and KeePass, Vimium (there is a Vim extension, but it's a poor replacement so far).

3. The store promotes junkware and throwaway extensions.