> Brave added an adblocker for one reason – to be able to detect ads in order to be able to replace them.įact II: Brave does not replace ads on websites, Brave’s ads are system notifications. My point still stands, what you say does not disprove it at all. > Enhanced Tracking Protection is a tracker blocker, not an ad blocker – the name should give you a clue, but yeah, let’s be disingenuousįirefox’s tracker blocking tracking blocking exists because they are too afraid to include an adblocker similar to uBlock Origin, Brave etc. Those API limitations are not applicable to native adblockers (like the one in Brave) as native adblockers are not extensions… For example, Brave does CNAME uncloaking:
> I guess the developer of uBlock Origin knows more about the subject than you:įact I: This article just cites the extension API limitations of Chromium. The Firefox version of uBlock Origin is considered the version that offers the best protection, as it supports protection against CNAME tracking, which the Chrome versions do not offer. To name a few improvements: blocking WebRTC from leaking IP addresses, removing elements permanently from webpages, blocking JavaScript by default, and addressing new tracking methods, such as CNAME tracking, Hill improved the extension over the years, adding features and improvements to it on a regular basis. The extension was created after Hill left the uBlock project that he created. The uBlock Origin extension was first published on Mozilla's extensions store in April 2015 by its creator Raymond Hill, known as gorhill online. As far as the number of reviews is concerned: uBlock Origin received more than 13200 reviews, thousands more than Adblock Plus' 8500 reviews at the time of writing. The average rating is 4.8 out of 5 on the Mozilla add-ons store, while Adblock Plus has a rating of 4.5 out of 5. UBlock Origin beats Adblock Plus in other metrics as well.
0 kommentar(er)
