Sampei.Nihira

I set up the second policy in Firefox: With the version update, what happened is what you see in the image: I set the policy in an attempt to block the pop-up forever.

Today I finished a restructuring of filter lists in uBlock Origin x Firefox + uBlock Origin x Edge. I am very satisfied because I achieved almost the same number of rules in Edge (97740) and Firefox (97702). Disabling the 2 extensions in the 2 browsers I get at the test,with only DNS filtering + blocking trackers browsers a score of 97%.

I again recommend that you ask the developer. Apparently with One Core API you can run various modern browsers: https://github.com/Skulltrail192/One-Core-API-Binaries https://github.com/Eclipse-Community/r3dfox/issues/129 Or check the release date of Superfox: https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/discussions/729

@Dave-H I think this is info that is probably best asked of the developer himself in the right thread.

@NotHereToPlayGames I am among those who consider Client Hints to be discreetly privacy friendly. The Mozilla team also has this opinion: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Client_hints It is possible to note that in the BrowserLeaks test ONLY 6 values are low entropy,i.e. sent (always) without request from the server. Obviously with r3dfox there are no such “problems”.

No. I don't care that some people on the forum try these extensions to see if they block everything. I already know the ads/trackers/Cname Trackers that you can block with uBlock Origin (which in my Edge browser will work until June 2025),uBlock Origin Lite,or AdGuard MV3 with as few filter lists as possible to avoid more likely FP. I have no interest that other people less experienced than me in this subject (Security IT) do what I do,worse than I do. Just as I had no interest if all my students who took my courses at the university,studied to pass the exams. If a forum member has an interest in doing what is written in this thread,I can help him in the best way I can (since we are at a distance) for HIS abilities. But it is the interest of others,not my interest.

No,it does not allow it. But adGuard MV3,it does. Do I have to write it again? If you want to learn how to configure in the easiest way these 2 MV3 extensions,this is the right place. I just now finished the configuration of adGuard Mv3. I added 2 custom filter lists. And 3 user rules. I haven't added dynamic filtering yet because the extension is still in beta and I want to wait for further development.

There would also be the possibility of using Fanboys' filter list at the DNS level with uBlock Origin Lite. But those who either don't know how to do it or refuse to do it because they think it is better this way are better off continuing to use what they know how to use the best way.

With AdGuard v.5.0.1 you can add the list of filters you use. Although at the moment custom rules are limited to 5000. This filter list is not necessary because there are other good alternatives in the default filter lists to choose from.

Out v.5.0.1: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/adguard-adblocker-mv3-bet/apjcbfpjihpedihablmalmbbhjpklbdf

Yes,the Rust Language offers more security to the browser. In my opinion,it is just an opinion,it overcomes the gap compared to the better sandbox of chromium-based browsers,considering that these browsers are used in old OSes. This version of the browser alerts the user if there is at least one policy installed. In the style of Chromium-based browsers. This feature has not been documented in the various reviews that have come out recently.

These are my new lists enabled by default in uBlock Origin Lite installed in Edge: I replaced the 2 privacy lists in Next DNS (Firefox + Edge) with: HaGeZi Multi PRO (+ 16501 rules...... I am doing some tests) - 154117rules OISD big - 227666 rules Therefore, the filter lists used in uBlock Origin installed in Firefox also changed. I currently have 42158 network filters + 45317 cosmetic filters.

I did an interesting (for me ) test. "The Times": Firefox + uBlock Origin - Hard Mode In the red frame of the browsers the trackers blocked in total (4 + 1). Edge + uBlock Origin Lite (filter lists are not at default) It seems to me that both extensions do their jobs well. P.S. If any forum members have any questions,want to know the mode of filtering,lists of filters used......I am available to provide this information. Or of course want to repeat the test (but the website changes) with other extensions and browsers.......

it is useless until you find a website that does not work with BS. With UBO there is the log,but almost no one in this forum knows how to read what it indicates and find a remedy. So you probably disable it for that website. Without having protection at the DNS level, which in these cases shows all its usefulness. And you will be exposed to all possible possibly malicious trackers/ads/scripts........ But on the other hand in the absence of better......you have to make do. P.S. Of course, it is assumed that forum members are able to choose the right filter lists. Without having 200000 filter rules enabled that exponentially increases the possible problems in the various websites.

New Tab Page in Edge is a privacy/functionality nightmare. I am forced to use an extension (even for my old habits). It is highly possible that even these extensions have a negative effect on the speed of opening web pages. The study done by DebugBear (the extension I use instead of the native New Tab Page feature is not listed) probably made me realize that there could be an overlapping, negative, effect on performance. So I reduced the heaviness of the native New Tab Page feature of my browser and still use the same extension.

UBO lite is not for everyone. I have experimented with UBO Lite in Firefox and in my opinion it is not suitable for Firefox. I have sent my findings (which I will not publish here) to the appropriate people. UBO Lite works best paired with DNS ads/trackers blocker and in this forum probably almost no one uses this method. So it is possible to conclude that in this forum only an infinitesimal percentage of users can use UBO Lite satisfactorily. P.S. But from my point of view always an infinitesimal percentage of forum members use UBO to the best of their ability. With dynamic filtering enabled.

You guys do as you please. I don't criticize those who look for features in chromium-based browsers that are easily obtained in firefox-based browsers. Or those who prefer to use obsolete OS and browsers. Use your favorite extensions. Have you installed 40/50/60 of them? I personally don't care about. You have your own conclusions. I have my own conclusions. Whoever prefers to live in the past and is happy.........Is not and never will be my problem.

https://www.debugbear.com/blog/chrome-extensions-website-performance

uBlock Origin Lite is certainly faster than uBlock Origin as far as reported here: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home Other users have also noted this fact: https://malwaretips.com/threads/ublock-origin-mv2-no-longer-featured-extension-in-chrome-web-store.131828/#post-1091626 It is also important to consider what has long been known,too many extensions slow down the browser.

Chrome Extension Performance Lookup: https://www.debugbear.com/chrome-extension-performance-lookup also added MV3 extensions. I will insert 2 images with Adguard Mv3 and uBlock Origin Lite: Adguard Mv3: uBlock Origin Lite: It is interesting to verify that, in the 3 test websites, uBlock Origin Lite makes the browser faster not only when the extension is compared with AdGuard MV3 but also in comparison with uBlock Origin (MV2).

When Supermium upgrades to version 126 it should have the policy enabled.

Strange. The policy will probably be implemented by July 23 (Chrome 127 release date).

Check whether the "ExtensionManifestV2Availability" policy is active.

I added 1 policy in Firefox OverridePostUpdatePage

I modified the extensions installed in Firefox. Interestingly, the same extension remains MV2 in the Mozilla Store when it is MV3 in the Chrome Store.