Jump to content

Ublock Origin Lite (MV3) vs AdGuard MV3 Chromium Extensions


Recommended Posts

Posted
On 7/15/2024 at 12:10 AM, Sampei.Nihira said:

I have no interest that other people less experienced than me in this subject (Security IT) do what I do,worse than I do.

I'm not familiar with your experience or any "security" work, where to look for it?

  • 3 weeks later...

Posted

Firefox natively blocks more trackers than chromium-based browsers.
This fact is most evident in the website below.

6sense.com

Edge natively blocks 0 trackers in the website.

So if you use a Chromium-based browser only an extension like uBlock Origin (and similar) can save you from trackers.

Since in this forum almost all members (I assume) use uBlock Origin in Easy Mode the difference is the filter lists used.

Compare the image with what your adblocker blocks.
If you are missing something it is good to reorganize your filter lists.

GtBSiJz.png

 

Posted

The popup on the left in the image is Firefox's native anti-trackers protection.
There are 3 trackers blocked.
Firefox also blocks a fingerprinting attempt in the website that is not shown in the image.

Posted

It is "not fair" to compare a browser with built-in fingerprint protection with a browser that does not have the built-in fingerprint protection.

I've seen FAR too many of these "built-in" so-called protections contain nothing but telemetry on top of telemetry, tracking your EVERY move in the "guise" of 'protection'.

Speaking solely for myself, I have NO USE for any brower with "built-in" ANYTHING.

"Built-in" TO ME is SYNONYMOUS with BLOATWARE.

Just give me a basic browser.  I will add the "bloat" that I want via extensions or third-party apps, I do not want it "built in".

But to each their own, of course.

Posted

:no:

My post is not a comparison between browsers.
It is a finding (which I obviously already know) for the benefit of MSFN members who use an adblocker in a Chromium-based browser.


It seems to me that so many issues are raised regarding privacy and then when there is a danger of huge privacy violations while browsing with the browser.....no one cares.

Then as you wrote....to each his own.

Posted
55 minutes ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

My post is not a comparison between browsers.

Yes it is.  It's a comparison of "how Firefox does it" to "how Chrome does it".

You cannot compare apples to oranges.  Firefox can do things that Chrome cannot do.  Chrome can do things that Firefox cannot do.

We all decide for ourselves which does what we need it to do, and which does not do what we need it to do.

If they didn't do things differently, than one of the two would cease to exist.

Posted
13 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

It is "not fair" to compare a browser with built-in fingerprint protection with a browser that does not have the built-in fingerprint protection.

Of course it's not! @Sampei.Nihira would've needed to compare to Brave with its native adblocker.

Posted (edited)

@NotHereToPlayGames

 

How does Firefox..... what?
Don't you see that uBlock Origin can block the same trackers?

At the instant I took the screen I was using Firefox.

If I disable Firefox's anti-trackers protection you would see what happens in any other chromium based browser i.e. the blocking of trackers/ads which is thanks to uBlock Origin.

If I insert a screen of Edge you would see only the ads/trackers blocked by uBLock Origin.

With Chrome it is the exact same thing as Edge.

The difference is therefore thanks to uBlock Origin.

If you want to check the behavior of your subscribed filter lists in uBlock Origin that website is the right place.

 

 

 

Edited by Sampei.Nihira
Posted (edited)

All I can tell you is that Firefox is a TELEMETRY NIGHTMARE in comparison to UNGOOGLED CHROMIUM.

My very first run of a just-downloaded Firefox on a computer that has NEVER had Firefox on it showed 340+ DNS ENTRIES UPON FIRST RUN !!!    THREE HUNDRED AND FORTY PLUS !!!

Disable everything I can find for the "start page" and I still show 153 DNS ENTRIES WHEN I LAUNCH FIREFOX !!!    ONE HUNDRED FIFTY THREE !!!    Without ever opening a single solitary tab, that's just to launch Firefox !!!

 

I can launch my Ungoogled Chrome and let it sit for HOURS upon HOURS and it will NEVER MAKE A DNS CONNECTION if no tabs are ever opened.

 

image.thumb.png.e76563a1f3ac13a5ccff1d00a1948baa.png

Edited by NotHereToPlayGames
Posted

Third Firefox launch.  212 DNS Connections without ever opening a single solitary tab.  And uBO doesn't "reveal" ANY OF THEM!

If we are truly talking about "privacy concerns", by all means, let's do so, but let's not turn a blind eye to the TONS of TELEMETRY that Firefox performs without most users ever knowing it is happening!

 

image.thumb.png.6c04fae00645149ea033b7102bcd58a2.png

Posted (edited)

if youre gonna compare "ungoogled" chromium then compare it to custom "cleaned" ff derivates (such as Librewolf and r3dfox)
and not with FF, it is known for some time that FF had bunch of telemetry BS init

Edited by vinifera
Posted

LibreWolf first launch has 167! connections!!!  11 of them is the "bundled" uBO performing updates (I'm NOT a fan of ANYTHING "bundled").

Basically the IDENTICAL DOMAINS that "regular" Firefox connected to.

image.thumb.png.65aa6ad5b7de3e4b4fb57d4f548e905a.png

Posted

Please do not go any further with this unnecessary off topic.

This thread is NOT a comparison tween browsers.

And those who are unable to eliminate telemetry and improve privacy in Firefox can turn to Librewolf or STUDY always elsewhere the entries in Arkenfox.user.js and if they also want to improve performance also BetterFox by Yokoffing.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...