dcs18 Posted February 11, 2018 Author Share Posted February 11, 2018 The logic is quite simple, I displaced only your Global Rules with mine (rest of every other parameter remained exactly the same.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 2 minutes ago, dcs18 said: The logic is quite simple, I displaced only your Global Rules with mine (rest of every other parameter remained exactly the same.) My rules were for addon and not program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 11, 2018 Author Share Posted February 11, 2018 Exactly my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 1 minute ago, dcs18 said: Exactly my point. All I'm saying is show me an example where the program is blocking 'more' requests(other than the HTML-type) than the addon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 11, 2018 Author Share Posted February 11, 2018 Even if I show you an example, it would never be a perfect comparison between my program behavior vs your add-on behavior — my suggestion is, for the same set of rules why don't you make a comparison on your own system against the log entries (that should be a fair evaluation.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 Just now, dcs18 said: Even if I show you an example, it would never be a perfect comparison between my program behavior vs your add-on behavior — my suggestion is, for the same set of rules why don't you make a comparison on your own system against the log entries (that should be a fair evaluation.) I already have made such a comparison, and found that other than the PITA HTML blocking, the program and addon didn't have any difference in blocking. And that's why I asked for an example from you because I definitely don't see the 'more' part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 11, 2018 Author Share Posted February 11, 2018 42 minutes ago, dcs18 said: <snip> the (lack of) HTML granularity gives me a feeling that it's fixable (probably something that I ought be doing differently.) I just reset my database to see whether that would fix my add-on issue (it didn't) — however, now my HTML blocking delivers full granularity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 11, 2018 Author Share Posted February 11, 2018 DD-WRT is now 3.0-r34886. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snf Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 @Undertaker & @dcs18 Hello. I know you hate Chrome and Chromium and don't use it. ( And you're think decidedly i know nothing ) But do you know a rule to add in UblockOrigin or Adguard Or uMatrix For stop Chrome add itself any search engine when visiting any web page with search box. The name is OpenSearch. I want can search when i am in web page but not the search engine add itself in Chromium Chrome. ______________________ In Setting ; Manage search engines ; Other search engines Exemple go here : https://translate.google.com/?hl=en End Chrome Chromium add in : Other search engines : Google Translate translate.google.com http://translate.google.com/?source=osdd#auto|auto|%s Or here to www.filehippo.com, www.softpedia.com _______________________ This rule not work anymore : ##link[type="application/opensearchdescription+xml"] And all of here : https://superuser.com/questions/276069/google-chrome-automatically-adding-websites-to-my-list-of-search-engines If you can't or won't no Problem. Thanks anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WALLONN7 Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 9 minutes ago, snf said: For stop Chrome add itself any search engine when visiting any web page with search box. Not enough all the known inconveniences, there is also this?!... WTF @snf Hope they help you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 11, 2018 Author Share Posted February 11, 2018 56 minutes ago, snf said: Have been doing a bit of research (after reading your query,) and your issue is a legitimate one — PowerUsers like you, are requesting to be able to disable Chrome from adding custom search engines but Google is adamant about it. Came across an article which suggests using a Chrome add-on, "Don't add custom search engines" — it's just a workaround,though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 Sorry @snf but I think it's hardcoded in chrome, tried finding in the logs for 'behind the page' requests but found nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snf Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 1 hour ago, dcs18 said: suggests using a Chrome add-on, "Don't add custom search engines" Thank you : I know this ; don't work anymore to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snf Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 @Undertaker & @dcs18 I read above in topic you're talking about rules for Youtube. Do you know in the next uMatrix 1.3.3 ; implementation of an option : Quote A new button ("puzzle" piece icon) is available in the popup panel: uMatrix will offer you the ability to import community-contributed ruleset recipes which are relevant to the current page (see #30). Hopefully there will be many contributions to populate ruleset recipes ready to be used to unbreak sites. See here: https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/releases Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecarion Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 youtube.com 1st-party script allow youtube.com googlevideo.com image allow youtube.com googlevideo.com media allow youtube.com ytimg.com css allow youtube.com ytimg.com image allow ## youtube.com 1st-party xhr allow Don't enable the xhr to avoid ads. You can follow this example @snf if you don't need more (it will play any video but it's buggy in fullscreen without the xhr). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snf Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 1 hour ago, Ecarion said: ## youtube.com 1st-party xhr allow Works without ## in uMatrix Like that: youtube.com 1st-party xhr allow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 5 hours ago, snf said: Do you know in the next uMatrix 1.3.3 ; implementation of an option : Personally, I don't know. If as a user we are using uMatrix, then we should be knowing what we are getting into. The whole purpose is devoid if you use someone else's rules. Plus the fact, the personal opinion that may get into making rules and hence the site maybe broken even after those rules for some whereas for some with those very rules, it might be allowing too much. Then there is the geo-location factor - what may fix it for you, may not necessarily fix it for me. But I don't mind as long as it's an option. Would I use it? - maybe for just a one-off site. Thanx for the update. 5 hours ago, Ecarion said: Don't enable the xhr to avoid ads. You can follow this example @snf if you don't need more (it will play any video but it's buggy in fullscreen without the xhr). Just a glance and I can infer without trying that those rules won't work for me. It may be a geo thing but I need to allow xhr requests from googlevideo.com on youtube.com. Otherwise the site won't work for me. Plus, I also allow a particular script from google to have the YT searchbox give me suggestions, my personal choice. Also, it's not the xhr type requests per-say, that is giving the ads, it's requests from other domains like doubleclick, googleadservices,etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecarion Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 It's just another example if you want to watch a video on DDG. duckduckgo.com googlevideo.com media allow duckduckgo.com youtube-nocookie.com frame allow duckduckgo.com youtube-nocookie.com image allow duckduckgo.com youtube-nocookie.com script allow duckduckgo.com youtube-nocookie.com xhr allow duckduckgo.com ytimg.com css allow duckduckgo.com ytimg.com image allow duckduckgo.com ytimg.com script allow I will explain @snf Then in fact it's an very old habits (several languages (such as Python, Bash, etc) use this kind of syntax): to resume, each line which start by one (or as you wish) # is in fact a commentary. Remove the both ##, it won't be anymore a comment but one new rules (or directive). But that's right to be able to understand that you must have a little knowledge in programming. And yes it will work but you might dislike the ads. That's why I decide to write this line as one comment (to resume is a little warning). * * * block * 1st-party css allow * 1st-party image allow ## It will block everything else. ## So I don't need to add this rules : "youtube.com 1st-party xhr block" About the geo, I can't tell @Undertaker. But about the ads, no these other domains are already block (and as you can probably guess now). Then sorry but no you are wrong because I can see the ads only when I enable this rules. I had discover this several months ago. In the past, it was from youtubei.com (and no it doesn't exist anymore). So yes Youtube has made several changes over the time. Now these ads are coming from googlevideo.com but only once after I enable the xhr rules (mentionned before). And in the case, I had check today and nothing has change (the ads was visible just between 2 videos. It has started right before the second video). PS : If you need one example, I can upload the ads (ou shoud I called it video_ads ? To be more clear). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 12, 2018 Author Share Posted February 12, 2018 9 hours ago, snf said: @Undertaker & @dcs18 I read above in topic you're talking about rules for Youtube. Do you know in the next uMatrix 1.3.3 ; implementation of an option : See here: https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/releases The last version of uMatrix that I used (in 2017) was 1.0.0. Sounds like a good initiative from gorhill — worth learning from the logic other folks use, to create their rules. I'm pleased to see more of you guys using uMatrix, too — it was my fav. ad. blocker until Undertaker convinced me to switch to AdGuard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 5 hours ago, Ecarion said: PS : If you need one example, I can upload the ads (ou shoud I called it video_ads ? To be more clear). Yes pls do so. BTW this is how it is in my system with your rules. https://i.imgur.com/wk38C29.png Points to note: There is not even a single request of media-type coming from googlevideo.com and secondly, my video is not playing at all, in default size, in expanded size or in full screen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 12, 2018 Author Share Posted February 12, 2018 I've got some good news and some bad news:— Good News Managed to get my AdGuard Add-ons pages working. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 Hmmm....so what was it that was the culprit and preventing the working of the addon? I suspect that bad news is you don't want it anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 It is now SImpleDNSCrypt 0.4.7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 12, 2018 Author Share Posted February 12, 2018 43 minutes ago, Undertaker said: Hmmm....so what was it that was the culprit and preventing the working of the addon? The problem was with the installation of Firefox and AdGuard, as well. 43 minutes ago, Undertaker said: I suspect that bad news is you don't want it anymore. Matter of fact, I'm running AdGuard on the standalone add-on and testing it for all parameters except two — loading speed and level of blocking. Bad News Have lost almost all my configurations on Firefox and individual Filters & Rules on AdGuard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 46 minutes ago, dcs18 said: The problem was with the installation of Firefox and AdGuard, as well. Now if you have setup AGW then do test whether that local.adguard.com script is present or not. 46 minutes ago, dcs18 said: Matter of fact, I'm running AdGuard on the standalone add-on and testing it for all parameters except two — loading speed and level of blocking. BY standalone, you mean the standalone version of the addon or the addon independent of the program? When you are done testing the addon exclusively, try the combo also. Addon + AGW 48 minutes ago, dcs18 said: Have lost almost all my configurations on Firefox and individual Filters & Rules on AdGuard. AFAIK you, you will be having those in backup form somewhere. Otherwise, you can retrieve it from one of your customers(that'll give you a headstart atleast). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.