They still are the fastest and the most secure, and Manifest v3 is faster than uBlock Origin since no javascript code needs to run.
I won't be using Chrome anymore once they implement this since I like my element-hiding rules which I wrote myself, but for the common rabble, Manifest v3 will be an improvement.
I think uBlock Origin providing a manifest-v3 compatible extension would be a net negative for the community. As it will help more people accept the status-quo and accept a mediocre state of ad blocking, instead of switching to Firefox
But its the case that once Manifest v2 is sunsetted in Chromium only Firefox will actually support uBlock Origin's feature set as is, correct? IIRC the sunset is Q1 2022. Also IIRC Brave plans on continuing to support Manifest v2 and the MacOS webkit-based browser in beta, Orion, will somehow continue to support uBlock Origin as well.
I imagine you didn't take the time to understand Manifest v3 criticism.
Nobody claims they won't work at all, they'll just be crappier than they are now, which boils down to two reasons: Manifest v3 introduces limits to filter list size + pattern matching isn't as flexible.
And Firefox has stated multiple times so far that they're going to keep current content blocking APIs, meaning that once Manifest v3 rolls out, adblockers will work better than they will on Chromium-based browsers.
I don’t care about Chrome (having ditched it long ago). On the other hand, I do care about whatever Chrome implements having an adverse impact on Firefox.
Mozilla has said before that Manifest V3 is up for consideration in Firefox and that “there are no immediate plans to remove” the existing APIs (mainly webRequest). [1] If Mozilla makes the power of uBlock Origin untenable on Firefox [2], that’d be a sad day for me, and I’d probably switch to Brave (assuming it’s still able to support uBlock Origin, even though it has a built-in as blocker).
If anyone from Mozilla or the Firefox team is reading this, please lead the way on these changes in a way that improves security (one of the goals of Manifest V3) while allowing extensions to remain powerful. Letting Google dictate the terms or just following Chrome will likely make Firefox worse in the eyes of power users and those who influence others to use it.
[2]: like it did with the XUL obsolescence (for good reasons) and the removal of great extensions like Tab Mix Plus and Session Manager (without providing a way forward for them to work; session saving extensions on Firefox are still not as good as the mozdev Session Manager was).
Yeah, didn't gorhill already say that uBlock Origin will never be ported to Manifest v3 due to how much he'd have to cripple it?
That means that very soon all Chrome (and Edge) users will no longer have uBlock Origin, and Firefox will be the only way to run it officially.
This could be a pretty decent value prop for Firefox (bigger than the random features Mozilla has been pushing recently IMO)... Although I'm sure the majority of less technical Chrome users will just switch to whatever gimped, Chrome-sanctioned declarativeNetRequest ad-blocking extensions spring up to fill the void.
This is dumb. Manifest v3 is better than v2. For security, privacy, efficiency, reliability, etc. uBlock origin will work just fine, and be a hell of a lot more efficient using v3.
You're being disingenuous. With Manifest v3, it is not possible any more to block requests dynamically which has huge implications for the efficacy of ad blocking (example: forget blocking youtube ads). Additionally, you're limited in how many static rules you can have.
Therefore, it's not just about changing the mechanism, the end result is clearly a lot worse. One can say, they crippled ad-blocking which this change. Hopefully, once the millions of people using ublock origin start noticing what's happening, they will move away from Chrome. I already did, ublock origin is worth more to me than any feature Google puts in Chrome.
I wonder how the post manifest v3 world will look like and how much it'll affect uBlock Origin on Chromium based browsers. Even now, several features, such as CNAME uncloaking, happen only on Firefox.
The truth is Manifest V3 is a step in the right direction in that regard. It forces extensions to declare what they want done so the browser can do it directly without exposing user data. This is the right choice for 99% of extensions out there.
It's just that uBlock Origin is so important and trusted that it should be an exception. There should be no limits on uBlock Origin at all. It's so important that it should just be turned into an actual built-in browser feature, and the only reason it isn't is the massive conflicts of interests involved since all major browsers are backed by adtech profits.
Yes, I totally agree that Manifest V3 solves some real problems — in the case of many webextensions, I would welcome the ability to manually control which domains the extension can run in.
However, the move to Manifest V3 also involves curtailing the power of extensions, including those that I trust as much or more than the browser itself. I want uBlock origin to be able to intercept and filter requests according to the logic that gorhill deems most sensible rather than however Chromium wants it to be done, since I trust gorhill far more than Google (and possibly slightly more than even Mozilla). I don't think that any of the tiny extensions that I've written to scratch my own itch require any of the capabilities removed in Manifest V3, but if they did, I'd also want them to keep having them.
reply