News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:PSA: uBlock/AdBlocks on Chrome to lose function thanks to... by xdennis on Saturday December 11, 2021 @02:11PM (#29523382)
> It seems reasonable to require a static list for privacy reasons.

It's rich to cite privacy reasons for not allowing the blocking of ad sites whose goal is to spy on you.

Re:PSA: uBlock/AdBlocks on Chrome to lose function thanks to... by staunch on Saturday December 11, 2021 @02:47PM (#29523658)
The privacy advantage is not giving extensions access to what domains you are browsing. The extension declares a static list but doesn't know what did/did not match.

Because if the extension knows what URLs you're accessing, and can send that data somewhere, that's a major privacy concern.

So this makes sense and seems good for privacy. But if it breaks uBlock Origin significantly, that seems like a very bad thing.

Re:PSA: uBlock/AdBlocks on Chrome to lose function thanks to... by hibbelig on Saturday December 11, 2021 @04:44PM (#29524551)
Ad sites know which urls I’m accessing, too. Google should prohibit those, too.
Re:PSA: uBlock/AdBlocks on Chrome to lose function thanks to... by db48x on Sunday December 12, 2021 @04:54PM (#29534037)
It’s a good theory, but it will still be possible to get an event for every single item that gets loaded. All they removed was the ability to block individual loads in that event. It is still entirely possible to collect that list of urls and snitch on the user.
Re:PSA: uBlock/AdBlocks on Chrome to lose function thanks to... by pseudalopex on Saturday December 11, 2021 @04:39PM (#29524520)
They aren't removing the capability to monitor browsing.