A large bulk of work (as admitted on uBO README.md) is done in the lists like fanboy's. On top of that, uBlock Origin is still just an engine. As with everything, more capable minds share the load. Andreas Kling has Linus Groh as co-maintainer to review PRs even considering ginormous scope of SerenityOS. Linus Torvalds is able to take weeks off because GKH is more than capable to handle the work in his absence. Oh, and to add to it, it becomes incredibly easier if you find likeminded people to join in. I do not know of gorhill, but my first guess would be that he has a stable job that pays well enough and doesn't encroach on his private life and hobbies, which I believe uBO is one of. Some (Like Drew DeVault) have actual sustainable business model that are not donations (and still give away their services when it makes sense). Some open source devs rely on consulting work. Richard Stallman quit and made his first money selling Emacs tapes. Bram Moolenaar has had consistent job since forever (not sure what % of paid time is dedicated to Vim maintenance). Larse Ingebrigsten was a CTO of startup that got acquired and now maintains GNU Emacs. Not plenty, but still a lot of people have the means, and few of them choose to execute. > Plenty of people have great motives, few have the means to execute on them. Apparently - I read in another HN topic on this recently - because uMatrix actually did receive some maintenance update.) (nuTensor was forked to take on that burden, but itself now archived. I still use uMatrix (and uBO!) and remain thankful for it - I just hope it lasts, not obsoleted by browser API changes or whatever. easier to use than 'dynamic filtering' or whatever people suggest that's buried in the full-page settings and not something I'm going to be doing 'on the fly' while visiting a site. UMatrix is more advanced than uBO 'advanced mode', and just as easy to use i.e. UMatrix lets me block all third-party, allow only first-party scripts/XHR/iframes by default, and then in two clicks (including opening the extension's popover menu) allow some specific host's scripts or whatever, while still blocking its cookies/frames/XHR/media/et al. Some of that uMatrix coverage is a hell of a lot harder/more awkward in uBO.īasically every uMatrix user always also ran uBO too, for the more DOM/'content blocking' aspects (primarly 'cosmetic filtering' as it calls it iirc). All content blocking issues will have to be resolved with the Google-controlled filtering engine, and left unaddressed if the solution can't be shoehorned in the declarativeNetRequest API. That sort of proposition is not possible to entertain with MV3 since only Google get to decide how the filtering engine will evolve, if at all. We can't innovate anymore the filtering capabilities of our content blocker engines as we have been constantly doing over the years.įor a recent example, there has been discussions lately with filter list maintainers of whether uBO should support AdGuard's proposed capability of being able to support pattern-matching for `domain=` filtering option (uBO supports AdGuard lists). So what you have now is the same required permission to "read or modify host data" as with MV2, but with a network filtering engine capabilities gated by Google (an advertising company). This MV3-based AdGuard extension still requires a broad permission to "read or modify host data" on all sites: > our new declarativeNetRequest API is designed to be a privacy-preserving method for extensions to block network requests without needing access to sensitive data One of the stated goal of MV3 by Google was to avoid extensions with broad permissions:
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |