OCSP, OCSP Stapling, CRL checks would be done by the MITM proxy.Ĭertificate Transpency lookups can be done by the MITM proxy.Ĭertificate Transparency is not required by Chrome if you do not use a publicly trusted root certificate.Įven if it was, you could safely disable it with a group policy since the MITM proxy would do it for you when facing publicly trusted root authority certificates.Įxtented Validation checks can be done using it as well even though you will not get any EV indicator in the url bar when using your own certificates. This way no more Manifest V3 & Ad blocking prevention tyranny. I fear that this is not a win-win, but rather a lose-lose game.Ĭould uBlock devs not just create a localhost MITM websocket & HTTP proxy and just use the webExtensions system to tell Chrome to use that proxy? These ads often even disturb, interrupt and thereby diminish the user-contributed content in a way, and to an extent, that’s by most of us felt to be not just irritating but insufferable.Īs long as some ad-supported media do not have the wisdom to restrict themselves to more acceptable ways of advertising (and thereby, in fact, reaching a wider audience) this kind of cat-and-mouse game between ad-pushing media and ad-blocking consumers will continue. But the injected video ads in YouTube interfere with the actual content. Most people probably would have no problem at all when Youtube restricted itself to inserting static ads at the top of their pages. The main question here is of course: why is this a problem? It’s a problem because the ads in YouTube are way too intrusive. So Chrome users might consider switching to Vivaldi for watching YouTube. I also noticed that YouTube ads were still effectively blocked in Vivaldi with uBlock 1.40. Yes I noticed this YouTube ads-not-blocked issue last week with Chrome and uBlock 1.39.2. As for Microsoft Edge, I recommend reading about recent issues circling the browser, before deciding if you should switch to it. Vivaldi and Brave have confirmed they will not implement V3 in their browser, and Mozilla will implement its own version of Manifest V2 with the ability to perform cross-origin requests, it will continue supporting V2 for a year after it has been deprecated.

Can you blame them for being concerned? Here's an interesting article by the EFF, that talks more about the technical details of Manifest V3.įortunately, there are alternatives that you may want to consider switching to. When support for V2 ends, it will effectively break the functionality of adblockers, including uBlock Origin for Chrome. Many users are worried about it, and are hoping the extension will somehow work in the browser after the dreaded change is forced upon developers. But the search giant is already messing with ad blocking. Google will stop supporting Manifest V2 extensions in 2023, to force developers to shift to Manifest V3 sans the webRequest blocking API. The issue was patched in a later version of Opera. It was generally agreed by the tech community that YouTube was changing the way ads were delivered, as a counter-active measure to prevent ad blockers from throttling ads. After reading user reports, I observed the same pattern when I tested the browser. A few months ago, Opera browser's default ad blocker had the same problem. The update is not yet live on the Chrome webstore, Opera Addons store and Microsoft Store, but is already available on Firefox's AMO. Pop-up filtering now supports a new scriptlet, window-close-if. The update for the extension also includes a couple of other improvements for the My Filters Editor's auto-complete functionality, scriplets, defusers, and the issue reporter.

With the change, uBlock Origin will reload active tabs when Chrome is launched, while ignoring the tabs that were inactive/suspended.

Ublock origin opera