Chrome will block one of its biggest ad blockers

⁨394⁩ ⁨likes⁩

Submitted ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩ by ⁨remington@beehaw.org⁩ to ⁨technology@beehaw.org⁩

https://www.pcworld.com/article/2423294/google-is-killing-one-of-chromes-biggest-ad-blockers.html

uBlock Origin will soon stop functioning in Chrome as Google transitions to new browser extension rules.

source

Comments

Sort:hotnew top

Cube6392@beehaw.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
The ad company blocking an ad blocker is totally about security

- Google stans

source
- skullgiver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  [deleted]
  source
  - p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    
    With this change, extensions can “only” alter/inspect/redirect/block 30,000 domains if they use the webRequest API. That’s not enough to build uBlock Origin with, but at least there’s limit now.
    
    That seems like an arbitrary number.
    
    Remember, politicians don’t pass racist laws by directly saying they are excluding PoC into the law. They do it by targeting commonalities that happen to apply to PoC.
    
    Google isn’t going to flat-out say they are blocking uBlock Origin. They are going to do it by implementing “security features” that just so happen to target only uBlock Origin.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
  - coffeetest@beehaw.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    “For the security” is starting to sound a lot like “for the children”. I hope this works out better than secure boot. When these new ideas emerge that have, let’s call them, “side effects” like disabling ad-blockers or preventing Linux from being installed I am suspicious.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
  - BumpingFuglies@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    This is the most succinct, unbiased explanation I’ve seen for this change. Thank you for this! It’s good to know there’s an unintended security improvement in their otherwise brazen attempt to kill ad blockers on Chrome.
    
    Fuck Google.
    
    source
HK65@sopuli.xyz ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
At this point, using Firefox and an ad blocker does more for the climate than paper straws or recycling.

Even with ad blocking, half of consumer internet traffic is ads. Google is contributing to increasing this ratio, where most traffic on the internet will be stuff the client did not request, contributing more to climate change than Bitcoin - not that this makes crypto look better, they are just a useful milestone to compare to with the press they get.

And this doesn’t include the idiotic AI shit they do.

source
- Ashelyn@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  I’m pretty sure the traffic for the ads still gets sent to your device over the Internet, it’s just that the ad blocker keeps it from rendering in your browser.
  
  source
  - Rinox@feddit.it ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    No, the adblocker usually blocks the request before the data gets sent to the device. It’s why pages load faster with an adblocker
    
    source
  - HK65@sopuli.xyz ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    It’s a mixed bag. Some ads are bundled and filtered, but most actually rely on external requests to ad exchanges. What happens mostly is that when there is an ad spot in the page you downloaded, that is in fact a generic request to an ad broker to send an ad instead of a specific ad. That then starts a real time bidding process inside multiple broker networks to find the most expensive (for the advertiser) ad they can show you based on your tracking information and demographics.
    
    And that’s for every ad spot. It’s insanely intricate and frankly wasteful.
    
    source
thingsiplay@beehaw.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
More people should use Firefox. Anyone who does not want Google to control the web browser space with a single base. Firefox will continue support uBlock Origin in its full strength. Notice, Google does not “kill” uBlock Origin, but rather weaken it substantially with a new protocol.

But I get it. With such headlines more people will read it. At least it has a good effect of getting attention of people, who would otherwise ignore it.

source
- ivn@jlai.lu ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  They do kill uBlock Origin. The Lite version is a different extension.
  
  source
  - thingsiplay@beehaw.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Its still the same extension, same source code, same logic, just less capable; hence the addition of “Lite” to the name. Originally they wanted release the Lite version with same name, but changed it Lite, so people don’t get confused why its not longer blocking everything it blocked before.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
FreeBooteR69@lemmy.ca ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Fuck chrome, FF ftw.

source
CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Enshittification goes brrrr.

source
kubica@fedia.io ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Google was declared a monopoly. Next step: Let the monopoly keep doing the monopoly stuff.

source
- some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  The judge has yet to rule on how this should be addressed. Even after he makes a decision on that, there will be appeals. So long as the orange shitbag isn’t reelected, things look better for the industry than they have in a long time: at least something is finally happening.
  
  source
- ShepherdPie@midwest.social ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Declared a monopoly only in the search engine space AFAIK. Browsers don’t have anything to do with that other than maybe setting Google as the default search engine.
  
  source
avidamoeba@lemmy.ca ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Perhaps this will bug people who currently use Chrome and uBO to switch browsers.

source
- ColonelPanic@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  This coming down the line finally got me off of my incredibly lazy ass and forced me to switch a few months ago. It was easy, and I don’t know why I didn’t do it sooner.
  
  source
- stealth_cookies@lemmy.ca ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  I wish I could for work. But stupid corporate policy demands otherwise, Google workspace is so shit.
  
  source
  - avidamoeba@lemmy.ca ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Oh no judgment at all, I’m also using Chrome.
    
    source
- LiveLM@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  They switch from Chrome to Cryptocurrency flavored Chrome and think all is well in the world.
  
  source
- ShepherdPie@midwest.social ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  I use Firefox everywhere except work where my only options are Chrome or Edge (both chromium). Apparently uBlock lite is supposed to work on the new version of Chrome and hopefully still functions roughly the same. Apart from block web ads, I rely on it to block YouTube ads.
  
  source
- adarza@lemmy.ca ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  i did read somewhere that affected chrome users are being presented with alternatives from the chrome extension ‘store’ that are mv3-ready.
  
  whether or not they’re capable of clicking the right buttons on the right screens and windows to do it is another story.
  
  ubo, abp and adguard all have mv3 variants. there are others, but i think those are the ‘big three’. ublock origin lite is what i’ve been moving people to here, if not to firefox. so far, so good.
  
  source
  - viking@infosec.pub ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    I think the lite versions don’t allow scripted blocking, only static or something. So a whole lot of the adaptive blocks for persistent ads you encounter on facebook, instagram and other shitty socials that behave like viruses will be hard to impossible to kill.
    
    I’m glad I never had to deal with that as I have never used Chrome on desktop, but I’m pretty sure there will be many folks out there who don’t know how to switch.
    
    source
Mio@feddit.nu ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Block Chrome and use anything not Chrome based. In other words use Firefox.

source
- LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  But Firefox is about to loose it’s funding because google is a monopoly lol
  
  source
  - fwygon@beehaw.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Firefox is open source. It’s not going anywhere; even if Mozilla Co. goes broke and closes down the Mozilla Foundation.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
  - Mio@feddit.nu ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    So Google is a monopoly and removing funding to Firefox will help them not to be a monopoly? That does not sound right. Rather the opposite.
    
    Nothing has been decided or done yet. Most likely they will just be forced to not abuse their position, for example make ads for it on www.google.com, don’t bundle Chrome with Android and such things.
    
    I believe there will always be an alternative to Chrome available as the Open Source community will find a way together.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
NutWrench@lemmy.ml ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Google has been telegraphing this for months. Either switch browsers now or enjoy your ads.

source
- JackbyDev@programming.dev ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  They’ve literally said ad blockers are a threat to their revenue www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/…/goog10-kq42018.htm
  
  source
  - princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    It’s not exactly super helpful to just link to an 86 page SEC filing. Maybe you could provide a quote?
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
DeForrest_McCoy@beehaw.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
With this from chrome, and Reddit going paywalls do you think we’ll see another spike in Lemmy traffic…i think it’s a safe bet.

source
- Sabata11792@ani.social ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  They have already been coming in over the last week since the announcement.
  
  source
kyub@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Well, they’re only doing what they announced already like 1-2 years ago. So we knew it was coming. This is also accompanied by Google making YouTube more restrictive when viewed with adblockers. Google is (somewhat late, to be honest) showing its teeth against users who block ads. I always expected it to happen but it took them quite some time. Probably they wanted to play the good guys for long enough until most users are dependent on their services, and now their proprietary trap is very effective.

On the desktop, you should switch to a good Firefox fork right now. Firefox can also be used but needs configuring before it’s good. The forks LibreWolf or Mullvad Browser are already very good out of the box. There’s the potential issue of the forks not being updated fast enough, but so far these two have been fast. Mullvad shares a lot of configuration with the Tor Browser, so using it may break some sites. LibreWolf might be “better” for the average user because of that.

On mobile, Firefox-based browsers aren’t recommended, because on Android, the sandboxing mechanism of Firefox is inferior to that of the Chromium-based browsers. And on iOS, all browsers (have to) run on Apple’s proprietary Webkit engine anyway, but well this is Apple we’re talking about so of course it’s all locked-down and restricted. It’s one of the reasons I don’t even like talking about Apple that much, just be aware that as an iOS user, your choice doesn’t mean as much when it comes to browsers, and your browser might not behave like you think it does on other platforms.

So on mobile, I’d suggest things like Brave, Cromite or Mull. Or Vanadium (GrapheneOS). If the browser doesn’t have built-in adblocking capability which sidesteps the MV3 restrictions, make sure to use an ad-blocking DNS server, so your browser doesn’t have to do it. But you still need it. Adblocking not only helps you retain your sanity when browsing the web in 2024, but it also proactively secures you against known and unknown security threats coming from ads. So adblocking is a security plus, a privacy plus, and a sanity plus. It’s absolutely mandatory. As long as the ad industry is as terrible as it is, you should continue using adblocks. All the time. On every device and on every browser.

The ad industry is itself to blame for this. There could in theory be such a thing like acceptable ads, but that would require ads to be static images/text, not fed by personal data, and not dynamically generated by random scripts which could compromise your security, and not overly annoying. Since that is probably never going to happen, you should never give up using adblockers. Since they basically fight you by reducing your security and privacy, you have a right to defend yourself.

source
- algorithmae@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  There are no issues with the main Firefox branches for desktop and mobile, for the average user, not sure why you’re so against them.
  
  source
  - kyub@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Reasons are the data transmissions happening by default and Mozilla’s questionable inclusion of add-on things like Pocket. See for example: kuketz-blog.de/mozilla-firefox-datensendeverhalte… vs. kuketz-blog.de/mullvad-browser-datensendeverhalte… kuketz-blog.de/librewolf-datensendeverhalten-desk… (You might need to translate the site to English) If you compare that, you can see why it’s easy to recommend the forks over the original.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
coffeetest@beehaw.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Use DNS filtering. I use NextDNS which has a free tier that meets my needs. You can add popular filter lists and your browser will never even see those ads, trackers etc. Or you can use Vivaldi and Firefox of course. But DNS cuts it off before it even gets to your machine.

source
- adarza@lemmy.ca ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  dns blocking methods do not, and literally cannot, block them all.
  
  source
- princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  
  a free tier
  
  Alternatively, you can just host this stuff yourself and never pay. A Pihole is just DNS-filtering. There’s a million guides to do this on the internet already. You can also do it more directly with some routers, I run DNS filtering on an ASUS router with the merlin third-party firmware. It’s possibly the simplest thing you can host yourself. Like others have pointed out though, it isn’t a replacement for uBO. They both complement each other and I would recommend both to people who are able. The one major advantage it has is being able to block some ads in mobile apps. But it cannot block as many in a browser.
  
  source
- B0rax@feddit.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  DNS filtering only gets you so far. An adblocker is still a very good addition
  
  source
Antient@beehaw.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
[deleted]
source
- Fish@midwest.social ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  I wouldn’t recommend Brave for 3 main reasons:
  
  Chromium-based
  
  Funded by venture capitalists
  
  Supported by crypto and ads
  
  Unfortunately, Firefox and its forks are really the only alternative to Chrome.
  
  source
  - sleepybisexual@beehaw.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Also the whole brave CEO being a homophobic prick. Also that adblock will probably break under v3
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
- technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  I’m pro-crypto enough that I tried Brave but anti-crypto enough that I had to stop.
  
  The popup ads were melting my brain and the payment wasn’t worth it.
  
  source
orcrist@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
The garbage is taking itself out

source
psycocan@lemmy.ml ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Ungoogled Chromium

source
- Dhs92@programming.dev ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Or, hear me out, Firefox
  
  source
  - Kolanaki@yiffit.net ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Firefox: “I’m listening.”
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
  - psycocan@lemmy.ml ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    I left the firefox camp about a couple of weeks ago. First, it has huge memory consumption on linux (seems more like leaks) and my RAM is 16 Gigs. The recent decisions and the light shed on mozilla priorities actually made me realize that Mozilla is on the same train as evil corporates like Google. Ungooglrd chromium seems the better choice to me atm
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
i use firefox (and you should too) but they’re blocking ubo, which as not updated to mv2 - ubo lite still works.

source
- ivn@jlai.lu ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Yes but that’s not the same. Because of Chrome limitation it can’t update it’s blocklist directly. You have to update the whole extension to update the blocklist and that goes through Google validation in the Chrome store. It adds delay and Google could even refuse some updates. The blocklist is also shorter because not all filter rules are supported.
  
  source
  - VaalaVasaVarde@sopuli.xyz ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Sounds like ubo lite could end up blocking everything else than Google, unless of course the ad companies pay Google to force ubo lite to remove them from the list.
    
    source
ftothe3@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Yes! Vivaldi!

source
- ulkesh@beehaw.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Built on Chromium. No thanks.
  
  source
FlashMobOfOne@beehaw.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Yet another reason to use Brave, which has better native ad block than any of the other browsers.

source
- blackris@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Meh, Brave is still Chroium. Even if they continue to support manifest v2, even today the are selling „good“ ads to the users. That and the Crypto bullshit they tried a while ago makes them untrustworthy in my eyes.
  
  Firefox is the only real alternative.
  
  source
  - FlashMobOfOne@beehaw.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    
    Brave is still Chroium
    
    And yet, it does a better job blocking YouTube ads than Firefox, without any add-ons.
    
    Crypto, Ads
    
    Those features are opt-in.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
- Xero@infosec.pub ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  No thanks Brendan Eich the CEO of Brave is a piece of shit.
  
  source
- moonpiedumplings@programming.dev ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Google put an API into Chrome that sends extra system info but only to*.google.com domains. In every Chromium browser.
  
  Only vivaldi caught this issue. Brave had this api enabled, most likely on accident.
  
  But the problem is, that chromium is just such big and complex software, when combined with development being driven by Google, it’s just impossible for any significant changes or auditing to be done by third parties. Google is capable of exteriting control over Brave, simply by hiding changes like above, or by making massive changes like manifest v3, which are expensive for third parties to maintain.
  
  Brave can maintain 1 big change to chromium, but for how long? What about 2, 3, etc.
  
  source
tate@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Will this change be implemented in Chromium too? Or will it / should it finally become independent of Chrome?

source
- abrahambelch@programming.dev ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  I guess so. I don’t get your second point however. Chromium is as independent from Google/Chrome as your banking app from your bank account.
  
  source
  - tate@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    I thought the situation was a little like Android. Google develops an open source version (along with as many independent developers who wish to contribute), then sticks on a bunch of proprietary BS and sells that version to phone companies. If chromium is to chrome like vanilla android is to android with g-services, then I guess my question really becomes: is google making this change in the underlying code base, or just in the BS they put on top?
    
    Or am I confused about how the connection works between chrome and chromium?
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
- adarza@lemmy.ca ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  yes, it will.
  
  whether or not a ‘fully functional’ and fully-featured content blocker remains available for third-party browsers that use chromium as their core will depend on those third-parties and what they add, or add back, to their own releases to support those kinds of browser extensions.
  
  source
tangentism@beehaw.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Google isn’t blocking one of the biggest adblockers. It’s killing chrome!

Those who aren’t using an adblock won’t notice any difference but everyone else will just migrate to a non chromium browser

source
- communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  This will incentivize businesses to only support chrome
  
  source
  - DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    I’m fine with not supporting them then.
    
    source
CynicusRex@lemmy.ml ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
On desktop, either use: → LibreWolf (FireFox); uBlock Origin is installed by default. → Vivaldi browser (Chromium); has a native ad blocker, but obviously supports extensions, and will try supporting manifest V2 ~~as long as possible~~ until June 2025 [the wording is ambiguous so I asked on their forum]. Also, why the “not completely open source” criticism is unwarranted.

On Android: → Mull

source
Engywuck@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Who cares… Inbuilt adblockers are not affected by thus MV3.

source
zeekaran@sopuli.xyz ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Looks like I’m going to use my work laptop browser a lot less.

source