5 ms·

> The Firefox team is experimenting with ways to improve the built-in Enhanced Tracking Protection feature in Firefox. This is one of the libraries we're going

by evilpie 5mo ago

> The Firefox team is experimenting with ways to improve the built-in Enhanced Tracking Protection feature in Firefox. This is one of the libraries we're going to experiment with. > - We are not, and have no plans to abandon MV2 extensions. This will ensure certain types of add-ons, like ad-blockers, continue to work best in Firefox. > - Firefox supports several ad-blockers as add-ons on Desktop and Android, including uBlock Origin. > - We are not bundling Brave's ad-blocking system, we're testing one of their open source Rust components to improve how Firefox processes tracker lists. https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/1sttf82/firefox_will_start_bundling_in_braves_adblock/oi1xklx/ https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/1sttf82/firefox_wi... This is what the official Firefox account had to say when this came up on reddit.

WeatherClock 5mo ago
[flagged]
lxgr 5mo ago
> This will ensure certain types of add-ons, like ad-blockers, continue to work best in Firefox. Oof, so even people that should really know better are now equating MV3 with "no more ad blocking"? I think at this point the entire thing just needs to be renamed. (Only Chrome removed the request blocking API from their MV3 implementation; Firefox did not.)
- inquirerGeneral 5mo ago
  [dead]
- deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
- stavros 5mo ago
  Did Vivaldi? Or Brave? Will uBlock work properly with Mv3 and request blocking?
  - lxgr 5mo ago
    Of course everything based on Chromium will inherit most of Chrome's decisions, including this one. (Unless they fork their entire web extension implementation and maintain the fork forever.)
    - stavros 5mo ago
      Yeah but then "only Chrome" is misleading, when it's actually "every major browser except Firefox".
      - ahartmetz 5mo ago
        Safari isn't exactly non-major. By the way, it seems like WebKit Embedded (~resource-efficient Linux port) has regained some steam due to Igalia's work over the last two years or so.
      - lxgr 5mo ago
        A single engine/implementation deprecated the feature. I don’t think this is particularly misleading in a hacker news context.
      - topranks 5mo ago
        Every major browser except Firefox is Chrome
        pixxel 5mo ago
        [dead]
        jim33442 5mo ago
        or Safari
      - zarzavat 5mo ago
        Brave still supports UBo though. How long they can maintain that support is an open question.
- jeroenhd 5mo ago
  The people who know better should also know that tech social media was flooded with people not knowing what they were talking about mentioning manifest versions. It wouldn't be the first time tech gossip rags would take something Mozilla did out of proportion to make outrage videos about that become a hit on Reddit. When Mozilla added some weird AI thing (I think it was page summaries?) I was asked by people whose algorithm picked up this nonsense whether it'd be better for their privacy to switch back to Chrome or Edge.
  - swed420 5mo ago
    > It wouldn't be the first time tech gossip rags would take something Mozilla did out of proportion to make outrage videos about that become a hit on Reddit. Sounds like the issue here is paid social media platforms, where everybody is looking for ways to differentiate their slop from the rest. It would be weird to expect a different outcome.
- msla 5mo ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome#Manifest_V3_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome#Manifest_V3_2 > However, DeclarativeWebRequest is limited in the number of rules that may be set, and the types of expressions that may be used.[336] Additionally, the prohibition of remotely-hosted code will restrict the ability for filter lists to be updated independently of the extension itself. As the Chrome Web Store review process has an invariable length, filter lists may not be updated in a timely fashion.[337][338] Is that not true?
  - lxgr 5mo ago
    It is, but it’s not relevant. Firefox offers both APIs.
- DangitBobby 5mo ago
  We shouldn't equate it with "no more ad blocking" because it didn't ship with an attempt to make ad blockers less effective or because that's not all it shipped with?
- ragall 5mo ago
  "This will ensure certain types of add-ons, like ad-blockers, continue to work best in Firefox" clearly means that MV3 makes ad blocking worse, not entirely disabled. How can you get "no more ad blocking" out of that ?
  - lxgr 5mo ago
    Again, no. MV3 (the specification) does not do anything to ad blocking. Chrome's implementation of MV3 does. For precision, I should have said "significantly worse ad blocking", not exaggerated as "no more ad blocking".
    - ragall 5mo ago
      This is all sophistry. The spec is irrelevant, what matters is only the implementation and the fact that Chrome has a crushing dominance.
      - lxgr 5mo ago
        How does Chrome’s implementation matter in an article about Firefox?
        ragall 5mo ago
        In a market so crushingly dominated by one monopolist, everything is about what the monopolist does.
heresie-dabord 5mo ago
From TFA: > The browser now ships adblock-rust, Brave's open source Rust-based ad and tracker blocking engine. It makes sense that Mozilla would test this. The amount of Rust code in Firefox is already at 12%. https://4e6.github.io/firefox-lang-stats/ https://4e6.github.io/firefox-lang-stats/ Memory-safe code can make a huge difference in trust and software risk. Google has said that a 70% of Chrome vulnerabilities are related to memory (un)safety. This is in the browser with dominant marketshare. https://www.chromium.org/Home/chromium-security/memory-safety/ https://www.chromium.org/Home/chromium-security/memory-safet...
gib444 5mo ago
Am I so jaded that I read "we have no plans to" as "we likely will" ?

by evilpie 5mo ago

WeatherClock 5mo ago

[flagged]

lxgr 5mo ago

> This will ensure certain types of add-ons, like ad-blockers, continue to work best in Firefox. Oof, so even people that should really know better are now equating MV3 with "no more ad blocking"? I think at this point the entire thing just needs to be renamed. (Only Chrome removed the request blocking API from their MV3 implementation; Firefox did not.)

inquirerGeneral 5mo ago
[dead]
deleted 5mo ago
[deleted]
stavros 5mo ago
Did Vivaldi? Or Brave? Will uBlock work properly with Mv3 and request blocking?
- lxgr 5mo ago
  Of course everything based on Chromium will inherit most of Chrome's decisions, including this one. (Unless they fork their entire web extension implementation and maintain the fork forever.)
  - stavros 5mo ago
    Yeah but then "only Chrome" is misleading, when it's actually "every major browser except Firefox".
    - ahartmetz 5mo ago
      Safari isn't exactly non-major. By the way, it seems like WebKit Embedded (~resource-efficient Linux port) has regained some steam due to Igalia's work over the last two years or so.
    - lxgr 5mo ago
      A single engine/implementation deprecated the feature. I don’t think this is particularly misleading in a hacker news context.
    - topranks 5mo ago
      Every major browser except Firefox is Chrome
      - pixxel 5mo ago
        [dead]
      - jim33442 5mo ago
        or Safari
    - zarzavat 5mo ago
      Brave still supports UBo though. How long they can maintain that support is an open question.
jeroenhd 5mo ago
The people who know better should also know that tech social media was flooded with people not knowing what they were talking about mentioning manifest versions. It wouldn't be the first time tech gossip rags would take something Mozilla did out of proportion to make outrage videos about that become a hit on Reddit. When Mozilla added some weird AI thing (I think it was page summaries?) I was asked by people whose algorithm picked up this nonsense whether it'd be better for their privacy to switch back to Chrome or Edge.
- swed420 5mo ago
  > It wouldn't be the first time tech gossip rags would take something Mozilla did out of proportion to make outrage videos about that become a hit on Reddit. Sounds like the issue here is paid social media platforms, where everybody is looking for ways to differentiate their slop from the rest. It would be weird to expect a different outcome.
msla 5mo ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome#Manifest_V3_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome#Manifest_V3_2 > However, DeclarativeWebRequest is limited in the number of rules that may be set, and the types of expressions that may be used.[336] Additionally, the prohibition of remotely-hosted code will restrict the ability for filter lists to be updated independently of the extension itself. As the Chrome Web Store review process has an invariable length, filter lists may not be updated in a timely fashion.[337][338] Is that not true?
- lxgr 5mo ago
  It is, but it’s not relevant. Firefox offers both APIs.
DangitBobby 5mo ago
We shouldn't equate it with "no more ad blocking" because it didn't ship with an attempt to make ad blockers less effective or because that's not all it shipped with?
ragall 5mo ago
"This will ensure certain types of add-ons, like ad-blockers, continue to work best in Firefox" clearly means that MV3 makes ad blocking worse, not entirely disabled. How can you get "no more ad blocking" out of that ?
- lxgr 5mo ago
  Again, no. MV3 (the specification) does not do anything to ad blocking. Chrome's implementation of MV3 does. For precision, I should have said "significantly worse ad blocking", not exaggerated as "no more ad blocking".
  - ragall 5mo ago
    This is all sophistry. The spec is irrelevant, what matters is only the implementation and the fact that Chrome has a crushing dominance.
    - lxgr 5mo ago
      How does Chrome’s implementation matter in an article about Firefox?
      - ragall 5mo ago
        In a market so crushingly dominated by one monopolist, everything is about what the monopolist does.

heresie-dabord 5mo ago

From TFA: > The browser now ships adblock-rust, Brave's open source Rust-based ad and tracker blocking engine. It makes sense that Mozilla would test this. The amount of Rust code in Firefox is already at 12%. https://4e6.github.io/firefox-lang-stats/ https://4e6.github.io/firefox-lang-stats/ Memory-safe code can make a huge difference in trust and software risk. Google has said that a 70% of Chrome vulnerabilities are related to memory (un)safety. This is in the browser with dominant marketshare. https://www.chromium.org/Home/chromium-security/memory-safety/ https://www.chromium.org/Home/chromium-security/memory-safet...

gib444 5mo ago

Am I so jaded that I read "we have no plans to" as "we likely will" ?