Ublock Origin Lite (MV3) vs AdGuard MV3 Chromium Extensions

[Dave-H]

FWIW, I'm now using uBlock Origin Lite on Thorium and Supermium on XP, and Google Chrome 127 on Windows 10.
Like a huge number of people, I always loved uBlock Origin, but it will be disabled on Chrome soon, as we all know.

The Lite version seems to work fine, and blocks as many ads as the full version, as far as I can see.
My one regret is that it doesn't have the function to block elements in a page, so I'm now having to let through a few banners and the like which I used to block.
I think I can live with that though.
Going back to Firefox isn't really an option for me, as there is no Firefox equivalent browser for XP which will sync with Firefox on Windows 10 and my phone.
(I have to use Firefox on my phone as Android Chrome does not allow extensions, and using a browser with no blocker is an absolute no-no as far as I'm concerned!)

[Guest]

@Dave-H

Combining uBlock Origin Lite with DNS blocking allows for increased (not cosmetic) network filtering.
So you can increase filtering of phishing,malwares,privacy......

Instead,often,there are cosmetic filtering problems with cookie consent.
Try to see if this extension solves them at least partially:

https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/consent-o-matic/mdjildafknihdffpkfmmpnpoiajfjnjd

P.S.

If you are interested, Edge also allows the use of extensions in Android smartphones,with a more elaborate procedure than Firefox.

 

P.S.1

For more privacy, you can also use this already MV3 extension with uBLock Origin Lite:

https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/ping-blocker/jkpocifanmihboebfhigkjcdihgfcdnb

Although personally I would not be an admirer of the block CSP report.

Edited August 24, 2024 by Sampei.Nihira

[Dave-H]

Thank you!

[Guest]

[Guest]

If we consider privacy,AdGuard MV3 ranks above uBlock Origin Lite but below uBlock Origin.

It is possible to verify at the WebRTC leak test that AG MV3 outperforms uBlock Origin Lite, but the SDP Log display places this extension one step below uBlock Origin:

Equal consideration can be made for the Ping Spotter test:

However, if we consider cosmetic filtering,in my opinion, AG MV3 is inferior to uBlock Origin Lite.
Let me show you just 2 examples:

This lower performance also (but not only) depends on the available filter lists.
EasyList Cookie Notices,available in uBlock Origin Lite outperforms Adguard Cookie Notices.

With AdGuard MV3 I used only 71604 rules.

Edited August 29, 2024 by Sampei.Nihira

[Guest]

This latest version of Adguard MV3 has greatly improved cosmetic filtering.
I have done various tests and I must say that in some cases it is better than Ublock Origin.

https://github.com/AdguardTeam/AdguardBrowserExtension/releases/tag/v5.0.65-beta

[Guest]

For MSFN members, I have prepared a video where you can see the difference in blocking between uBlock origin (MV2) and Adguard MV3.

You can see that the blocking,in the MV3 extension, which is done directly from the browser, has a different layout:

https://sendvid.com/nn1ltnxz

[NotHereToPlayGames]

This doesn't really prove a pro or a con either way.  A "block" is a "block", the ad site does not show a DNS record for either uBO (MV2) or for Adguard (MV3), BOTH PERFORM THE BLOCK 100%.

[Guest]

The website blocking is obviously due to a blocking rule in the filter lists (not due to a Kees1958 filter list) of both extensions.
Kees1958's filter lists are very interesting because they can increase the performance of the adblocker with rules that block third-party domains.

It is also interesting to consider that effected blocking of extensions  is prioritized over DNS-level blocking if any is present.

If I did not have in both extensions a blocking rule in the filter lists,my DNS-level blocking would have intervened.

In the absence of DNS blocking as well,the rule that is displayed in the video (I use Kees1958's reduced filter list) would have acted as I wrote above.

 

Edited September 11, 2024 by Sampei.Nihira

[Guest]

UBO + UBO Lite + AdGuard Mv3 have scriptlet functionality.

Basically user-js that are, via extensions, injected into websites to improve content filtering.

I have written a scriptlet rule in AdGuard MV3 for better blocking,than available functionality,of items (SDP Log) to the Browserleak -WebRTC test.

But there is some reliability problem.

So indirectly I discovered a scriptlet bug in AGMV3.
Even the stable extension seems to suffer from Alex-302's report of a scriptlet problem.

Obviously only the developers can determine whether the 2 bugs are related or not.

 

Considering that version 78 is considered by Alexx7311 to be an RC I would like to make this extension more reliable than now.

 

Edited September 17, 2024 by Sampei.Nihira

[Saxon]

16 hours ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

I have written a scriptlet rule in AdGuard MV3 for better blocking,than available functionality,of items (SDP Log) to the Browserleak -WebRTC test.

But there is some reliability problem.

And of course, by the old tradition, you won't show it to us.

[Guest]

Edited September 17, 2024 by Sampei.Nihira

[Saxon]

11 hours ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

There's no script on the image, and the image is doctored, edited. What does it prove?

12 hours ago, Saxon said:

And of course, by the old tradition, you won't show it to us.

 

[Guest]

AdGuard adblocker is now at the stable version.
But there are still many bugs.

[Guest]

I opened this issue:

https://github.com/AdguardTeam/AdguardBrowserExtension/issues/2963

for the new version of AG AdBlocker 5.0.97 that came out yesterday.
MSFN members can also see the filter lists I have subscribed to.

The fourth list of custom filters (not visible) is:

• EasyList Italy (minified)
   

Obviously not the custom rules (which also include the WebRTC scriptlet rule).

Edited September 24, 2024 by Sampei.Nihira