▲ 1708 points
back
691 comments
Firefox is also the only browser that vets uBlock's code on every update to make sure the developer hasn't inserted spyware or malware into the extension.
They don't do it for every extension, but they do so for a wide selection of popular options.
> Recommended extensions differ from other extensions that are regularly reviewed by Firefox staff in that they are curated extensions that meet the highest standards of security, functionality and user experience. After receiving Recommended status, safety standards are maintained through automated checks, monitoring, and periodic technical reviews
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/recommended-extensions-...
Complete, authoritative list of Firefox extensions officially recommended by Mozilla.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/search/?promoted=re...
Some quite informative discussion on Firefox subreddit when I discovered and posted the above list there a few months ago.
https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/1pyvx2v/complete_a...
The Recommended Extensions program description: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/recommended-extensions-...
That's pretty cool. Thanks for pointing that out. I don't see where it says 'on every update' unless you're referring to the automated checks?
I've always wished extensions had more granular permissions though (a la phones, but more so). I think automated ai security checks sound promising soon.
> Firefox is also the only browser that vets uBlock's code on every update to make sure the developer hasn't inserted spyware or malware into the extension.
They could save themselves the trouble if Firefox simply baked in its own ad-blocking, but since Google basically owns them, we all know that will never happen.
Ladybird browser is going to be awesome.
Good for them! Glad they have the resources to do so. The free Brave Origin on Linux also has good native ad-blocking in my experience.
I’m a huge fan of Mozilla and Firefox specifically, but I don’t think that the way classical adblock extensions are made is the right way. Instead, it should be done as Apple/Safari do it [1]: the browser provides an API to hook/set a block list of identifiers that should be blocked, it could be resource hostnames, html signatures, need to think how to improve the API, but this way it’s completely safe, extension has zero access to the actual page content. Apple does the same for caller id apps. Afaik, Android has this API too, but the last time I checked, all relevant extensions were just “give me your whole phone control or web page access”, so Google clearly doesn’t enforce it
Yes, it kinda gives more control to the platform, but so far, iOS extensions that use this API worked surprisingly well for me
Please, correct me if I am wrong and uBclock can already work in this restricted mode
And the last thing, if people really want to give someone a full page content access, they surely should be able to do that, so kudos to Mozilla
[1] https://developer.apple.com/documentation/safariservices/cre...
I kept Firefox on one system for testing and had some non-popular extensions installed there. I rarely opened it and when I did it would spew me with a message that one of the extensions got malicious code installed
Also for youtube download plug-ins. yt-dpl does not work for youtube anymore.
I recommend two more:
1. pass paywalls clean.
2. Social Fixer
What's funny is that extensions were supposed to be a way to let you do the things the browser didn't want you to do. Guess that was a bit too much freedom for Google to accept, so they had to make a store with a gate, and destroy the APIs so that they're useless. Then they had to make up some reasons to justify that and ram it through the pipeline despite everyone's objections, and the frog got boiled.
Now we're back to needing an actual extension system that does what extensions were supposed to do in the first place.
I often forget how browsing the web looks for most people. Can't understand why they put up with it, or do they just think that it's part and parcel of the internet to have every page look like a slot machine from hell?
Guess it was a bad idea for everyone to switch to a browser made by one of the world’s biggest advertising companies.
Wtf, simply not true:
Brave: chrome://flags/#brave-extensions-manifest-v2 > brave://settings/extensions/v2 > Enable uBlock Origin (Brave-hosted, even better).
Helium comes with uBlock Origin pre-installed.
Edge even still has it https://microsoftedge.microsoft.com/addons/detail/ublock-ori...
And I'm sure others ...I personally only use/test Brave, Brave Origin, Helium and Firefox.
There's a mystery here. People hate ads. Firefox is the only major browser (save Brave?) that properly blocks ads. Yet people don't use Firefox (indeed its popularity is in free-fall).
Why? Is it because they don't know about it? Or they won't go to the trouble of using any browser that isn't the one provided by default by the OS?
I'm not sure. I just don't get it.
You can have my ad blocker when you take it from my cold dead fingers. I will literally move to a shack in the woods rather than go back to late 90s level of bullshit advertising.
For those who use uBlock Origin Lite, have you noticed any issues/deficiencies in what ads are blocked? I haven't.
Support Firefox. F** Chrome.
Haven’t tried it but apparently there is an unofficial port of the full version of uBlock Origin to work on manifest v3, the largest challenge being that, on manifest v3, the webRequestBlocking permission is only available to enterprise sideloaded extensions: https://github.com/r58Playz/uBlock-mv3
I've been using Firefox for over 6 years now and I've never regretted it.
I'm a web developer and I have a deep love of Firefox. I've been on it since version 3 and I'll be with it to the bitter end. I love that uBlock Origin is still available and while the news of Firefox's declining market share can be quite concerning, I hope it will be around for a long time.
Does it really make a huge difference to keep supporting Manifest Version 2?
I've installed uBlock Origin Lite in my Edge browser and I don't see any ads there either.
Manifest 3 is why I finally shut down Sitetruth and Ad Limiter. Removing ads from Google Search is now possible only in Firefox.
Remember when Firefox was the first browser to have "tabbed browsing"?
Obviously UBO isn't a first party feature - but if only Firefox could generate as much traction about ad blocking as they did with tabs.
Ladybird planned to release alpha this year. Unfortunately extensions are unsupported, but maybe soon: https://github.com/LadybirdBrowser/ladybird/issues/976
I wrote this article about Firefox 0.9 back in 2004, when they first implemented pop-up blocking, and have been using it every day since.
Firefox is also the only browser that supports anything like userChrome.css for customizing tabs, toolbar, address bar, menus, spacing, etc.
I feel that the web via browser is in danger. Vast majority of people can be convinced to switch to walled garden apps just like vast majority are fine with tablets, phones aka non open locked down computers. I am a Firefox/ublock user, and prefer browser to mobile apps, however I see the writing on the wall
Thank God for the Brave browser. For those disliking their built-in adblocker, there is a Manifest v2 opt-out specifically for uBlock if you need it.
Related:
Microsoft Edge is about to lock out older ad blockers, just like Chrome did
I was shaking my head when my fellow developers, and some hackers, moved from Firefox to mostly Chrome. “It has better dev tools you see”, “it’s so much faster you see”, and a boatload of other excuses.
But what about the remonopolization of the web? I remember how much it SUCKED when internet explorer had 95% of the web thanks to Microsoft’s illegal practices. I saw the same behaviour from Google, the ad company and they haven’t event gotten a slap on the wrist. Fuck, people fucking loves Google, despite their turn to the dark side.
Well here we are, with the open web almost dead. It’s time to revive it. Start using alternatives again. Seek out and support people and organisations that are actively working to build the community web, not this corporate shit it’s morphed into.
End rant
I just started using Zen (Firefox-based Arc clone) after Arc updated to Manifest V3. It's great! Last time I installed zen it was a battery hog, but it's much better now.
No-one referenced Firefox also has Brave's adblocking implementation baked in, even if disabled for now.
Additionally, I eagerly await resource (CPU+site size) buckets to be implemented on a browser and a LocalCDN along it to shrink the web.
> But Firefox is one of the few web browsers remaining that isn’t based on Chromium, and it’s now the only major browser to still support uBlock Origin. Neither Safari nor DuckDuckGo—the two other major non-Chromium browsers out there—support uBlock Origin
Does anyone here use DuckDuckGo browser? I've honestly never heard of anyone using it, so I'm pretty surprised to see it categorized as a "major browser". I already basically think of Firefox users (which includes myself) as a pretty tiny minority, so I'm not sure how much smaller you can really get while still being "major".
I just use Brave. I haven't seen a YouTube ad in years.
Qutebrowser seems to _want_ uBlock Origin-style filtering, but development on the feature has been ongoing for a long time and seems to have somewhat stalled: https://github.com/qutebrowser/qutebrowser/pull/7629
Chromium still has MV2 support in the extension loader as of the current state of the Chromium repository at https://chromium.googlesource.com/.
This means that both Microsoft and Google have elected to disable support at build time and alternative, good, Chromium based browser like Helium (https://helium.computer) still support it. As a matter of fact Helium still uses it to fetch and run uBlock Origin out of the box for mitigation against trackers, malware and ads.
It is worth mentioning that there are other options like NextDNS and similar, which complement uBO(L) nicely.
Firefox, after 20 years, once again has an advantage over the other browsers.
Let's hope for new generations to get tired of so many ads to finally ditch chrome.
Just a reminder to everyone to support weird and new browsers. we'll never get a new crop if we don't water and nurture the alternatives.
I don't know why with LLMs we can't just add MV2/blocking web request support to Chromium in a fork.
The argument against was always that it's "too hard to keep a fork in sync". Now it's easier.
And we must protect it at all costs.
I love Firefox.
We need more browsers like Firefox - more open source, more open to standards that improve the web, that can improve our browsing experience.
It looks like Google constantly pushing "MV3 is more secure" messaging worked at the intended high level.
Ads are so invasive and prevalent now that you need an ad blocker just to use the internet.
Great, this is unique trait and helpful one - Firefox is here to stay
It is possible to write your own extension and still use it in Chrome as long as it's not bundled. It would be a huge pain to get the source for uBlock origin and implement it locally yourself, but it might be worth the pain to block ads.
Are there any Chromium-based mod/plugin loaders out there? I mean something that uses the same DLL/SO hijacking or injection tricks game hackers use to build mod loaders, to expose a hooking layer for plugins.