I only use static DNS entries for the most offensive servers because of low overhead. I accept advertisements coming from the same server as the useful content.

There are a lot of websites that have the tracker,blocked by Privacy Bager,and with my filter lists not blocked by uBlock Origin,shown with the red arrow in the image:

In this case entering the rule is easy with the uBlock Origin Log.
So I added a total of 3 third-party rules + this rule referring to YT.

Who wants to take a test:

https://www.mediaite.com/

The tracker blocked by uBlock Origin in a Chromium-based browser:

 

22 minutes ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

So I added a total of 3 third-party rules + this rule referring to YT.

The trackers are blocked in my config NOT by relying on uBlock lists alone but by uBlock lists in addition to uMatrix blocking *ALL* third-party *crap*.

In the case of your mediaite example, no trackers are allowed on my end.  BUT if I want to actually watch the video, I have to manually enable uMatrix's block of YouTube.

Which is the way that I want it - block all CRAP until I manually intervene and decide MANUALLY to unblock.

uMatrix can be replaced by uBlock Origin, which you already use, using dynamic filtering (Hard Mode).
I'll write it for you but Raymond Hill would write it for you.

You get the same,and your Web sites would be faster on opening.
 

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Blocking-mode:-hard-mode

P.S. Note my uBlock Origin counter in red color,you have seen it 0 times in this forum.

Edited January 20, 20251 yr by Sampei.Nihira

Technically true.

But not for the way in which I use them

uBlock is for public lists only, no "my rules".

uMatrix is "my rules" only, no public lists.  uMatrix is intentionally set to BLOCK *ALL* third-party connections.  *ALL* of them.

This works 1,000,000% for me.  Not claiming it to be "for everyone".

Me using uBlock + uMatrix is no different than you using uBlock + Privacy Badger.

You have a "use" for Privacy Badger (I think you've also used Ghostery), I do not!

"To each their own."

That's why this topic hasn't gained much traction.  Everybody has what works for them.

People "hear" uBlock + uMatrix and make assumptions on "how" I couple them with each other, et cetera.

Again, "works for me, not claiming it to be 'for everyone'".

Plus, it seems to me that your latest is revealing that uBlock *does not work by itself* and REQUIRES you to use Privacy Badger in conjunction with uBlock in order to meet your needs.

The same goes here!  uBlock does not meet my needs by itself.  Using it alongside uMatrix DOES meet my needs.

I do not use Privacy Badger or even Ghostery.

I used Privacy Badger in this test only as a control extension,because PB is a reliable extension with a very good reputation.

I have already written that some anti-trackers extensions have a trackers concept that may be different from filter list maintainers.

So the test was for me to check whether the trackers block at the DNS level matched the trackers block of PB.
Equal verification I did for uBlock Origin (or AdGuard Adblocker) + internal anti-trackers feature of the browser.

Does it appear more understandable written in this way?

 

Edited January 20, 20251 yr by Sampei.Nihira

 

On 1/17/2025 at 4:57 AM, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Router config + DNS hosts file + Proxomitron Reborn + uBlock Origin + uMatrix + Stylus + Tampermonkey

 

5 minutes ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

Does it appear more understandable written in this way?

 

Yep.  As I previously stated, Router config (which includes DNS blocking!) + DNS hosts file is the first line of defense, above and beyond any extension or Proxomitron-like app.

Edited January 20, 20251 yr by NotHereToPlayGames

Has this block trackers at the router + DNS level been verified?

Use for a single test the web site I put to attention above.
Disable everything leave only the DNS.

Install PB momentarily and see which trackers it blocks.

Then do a comparison using the browser development tools.

Disable PB and see if the same trackers blocked (previously) by PB are also blocked by router + DNS.

Otherwise.......

 

P.S.
 

Or you can use The Times website.
I will insert an image without extensions.

The red arrow indicates a block at the DNS level.
The blue one (which in my case means an internal browser anti-trackers block) you will see if uBlock Origin (or PB) is present.
 

Edited January 20, 20251 yr by Sampei.Nihira

44 minutes ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

Install PB momentarily

This is your hobby/obsession, not mine.

No way in Hades will I install PB.  Nothing against PB, per se.  But I *never* install *any* extension without scouring through its source code and I have no interest in scouring PB's source code.

I cite Tampermonkey as an example.  I had it scoured and modified LONG before I ever started using it.  And look what using it "as-is" did to anybody that tried to use it in Supermium (assuming you follow those discussions as well).

PB "used to" be in the tech-news quite a bit for violating privacy in order to protect privacy.  Though I have not seen it in *recent* tech-news, so that reference is a bit dated (unsure of how dated, months or years, no clue).

As you wish.
You who are performance-conscious,give up more speed to open websites,because 3 extensions doing the work of 1 extension makes the browser slower,and more filter rules means more RAM consumed just for the rules to load in memory.

It is not my problem (and it would be a considerable problem for me).

Have a nice day.

Edited January 20, 20251 yr by Sampei.Nihira

All true.  I'm not running a 20-30yr old computer so my computer is fast enough to not be concerned with the effect of 3 extensions doing the work of 1.

That is an ENTIRELY different matter then a web browser's "naked benchmarks" (ie, no extensions) indicating a performance baseline.

I think you are now beginning to see why this thread (and others like it) never gain any traction.

What I have works for me, not you.

What you have works for you, not me.

What person C has works for person C, but not you or me.

1 hour ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

All true.  I'm not running a 20-30yr old computer so my computer is fast enough to not be concerned with the effect of 3 extensions doing the work of 1.

That is an ENTIRELY different matter then a web browser's "naked benchmarks" (ie, no extensions) indicating a performance baseline.

I think you are now beginning to see why this thread (and others like it) never gain any traction.

What I have works for me, not you.

What you have works for you, not me.

What person C has works for person C, but not you or me.

As a former university professor,on the other hand,I believe that the lack of interest is due to the fact that those who do not know how to do or do not care to do are content.

Only @nicolaasjan (I quote a user also from this forum) has replicated the test,albeit in a limited scope to change insufficient behavior of the filter lists he uses in uBlock Origin.

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/ublock-a-lean-and-fast-blocker.365273/page-347#post-3221284

But anyway it doesn't matter,I am now retired and as you rightly wrote,this is just a hobby for me.

P.S.

And on Sunday I leave for my 15 day vacation to Sharm,so I will bore forum members for a few more days.....

 

Edited January 20, 20251 yr by Sampei.Nihira

On 1/17/2025 at 8:00 AM, Klemper said:

@Sampei.Nihira A grammar mistake in the title, it must be favourite, we aren't in the States.

Oh hello, friend, welcome to the forum, why hadn't I noticed you before, how is this possible?