[Support] uBlock Origin


#392

Can I enter an exception to allow the link to work on my computer? I’d prefer that. If so, some pointers would be appreciated; I’m quite new to uBlock, having decided to try it on my new computer though I was satisfied with Ad Block previously.


(Laozi83) #393

bonjour,
deux questions:
1- la version 1.12.2 qui date de 19 jours, n’est toujours pas disponible sur https://addons.mozilla.org/fr/firefox/addon/ublock-origin
la liste d’attente est-elle “longue” ?
2- sur le même site des addons mozilla, impossible de trouver uBO-Scope 0.1.5 ?
si non dispo, quelle version installer pour FireFox, ubo_scope-0.1.5-an.fx.xpi ?
merci pour votre éclairage et bien cordialement


(practik) #394

@secret_agent_girl, no one can give you pointers without knowing which site and which links you’re talking about.

If you’re willing to share that information, it would be more helpful to do so at https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/issues or https://forums.lanik.us/viewforum.php?f=64 as gorhill suggests. That way, not only can you get the exception syntax you’re asking for, it can also be incorporated into a future filter set so that other uBlock users who visit whatever website you’re talking about can benefit from it as well.


#395

Thank you. That’s useful information.


(Laozi83) #396

bonsoir,
ce message est une erreur, excuses


(Alpengreis) #397

Hello

Sorry, I am confused about the following things:

I use currently Chrome Beta too …

Am I right with:

  1. I can block inline scripts for a hole page only (all inline scripts)? I read the related wiki but I am not sure if that is still the case …

  2. As workaround for afterscriptexecute it’s possible to handle that through Websocket (via uBlock Origin and/or uBlock Extra)? Here I read much but don’t understand it really … some speak about relation to Websocket …

Greetings!


(Alpengreis) #398

After read some sites, I would say uBlock Extra is able to handle this, means it can block inline scripts through websocket technique …

Case closed.


(Djdiabolik) #399

I’m registered here only to post this feedback…

Apparently the “Adblock Protector List” mirror on Github it’s offline… please someone contact the author for be back online this fantastic list…

Thanks in advance…


(gwarser) #400

To completely block page and all resources from it which filter option should I use?

||example.com/path$document,~document will be ok?


(Raymond Hill) #401

No, won’t be ok. Some type options can’t be negated, because they are not implicitly enabled by default, consequently negating them must not affect implicitly enabled type options. I have been thinking about that case since a while to simplify filter creation. A more common case:

||example.com^
||example.com^$popup

Turns out that internally I had to support this conceptually (for the document option), and I have been considering adding a type option which would be a shortcut for the whole set of type options which are implicitly enabled when no types are specified:

||example.com^$any,popup

Or for your use case:

||example.com^$any,document,inline-script,popup

Where any would internally be the equivalent of font,image,media,object,other,script,stylesheet,subdocument,xmlhttprequest,websocket.

However any is not a good keyword, I can’t figure one that would make it clear it’s an alias for a combination of all discrete network request types.

You can go ahead and open an issue for this, as said I have been considering since a while now, it potentially simplifies filter creation.


(gwarser) #402

This is not a big problem for domain-only filter, because in this case strict-blocking is applied by default.
As soon as path is added, then $document must be applied for strict blocking, and after that, filter no longer work for other resources.


#403

Maybe someone can help me out, I thought I could “misuse” uBlock to mitigate the bad programming in my ISPs router, which uses synchronous/blocking XHR requests to request a resource that takes >10s to load (effectively this freezes the website GUI)

The XHR url looks like this:

GET http://192.168.0.1/goform/goform_get_cmd_process?isTest=false&cmd=station_list&_=1496282725092
GET http://192.168.0.1/goform/goform_get_cmd_process?isTest=false&cmd=lan_station_list_all&_=1496282725095

Both from the page http://192.168.0.1/index.html#home

But whatever I try, it just won’t block those calls, I went as far as defining

^goform^
^goform_get_cmd_process^
||192.168.0.1/goform/*

with absolutely zero effect - what am I doing wrong? The only reason I can think of, is XHR, but I also tried most variants similar to

^goform^$xmlhttprequest

PS: the following line, added by the element picker hides a small logo and works perfectly:

||192.168.0.1/img/3.png$image

PS2: Browser is Chrome in this case


#404

I think I’ve solved it - Seems either the IP address does not work with XHR blocking or its that it is an address from a private block.

In any case, creating an NS entry for 192.168.0.1 as router.local worked, and suddenly all the filters worked - when using router.local as host of course. I’m just happy that the router GUI at least works when accessed with that name.


(Gary) #405

Ray…

I’m sure you know about all the problems with uBO on Nightly the past couple of days especially the WE version. The wide menu is common to both the WE and XPI version. The WE version can’t get to the dashboard by clicking on the top of the menu. Worst of all page loading is abysmal with the WE version. The XPI version page loading is fine.

Hope you get get things sorted out quickly.


(Jay) #406

I recently ran across this today - “Block Adblock”

It uses a malicious, albeit clever, embedded javascript with while/if loops to check if adblock is running. If it detects adblock it overlays a full-coverage div with a randomly generated name to prevent it from being blocked.

Here’s the embed code from the blockadblock site:


(paintokill) #407

Anyone can help about resolve auto rename ads? I see some site’s owner/ad provider now using something they think smart:
Auto rename the ad’s div/id name random time(maybe few days or just few hours) to make what you set in rules useless, so all your setting in custom rules is broken.

Thanks! also sorry for my bad english.


(Hiếu) #408

help me anti Sbro.me http://lps.sbro.me/partners/linksvip/0601/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flinksvip.net%2Fdl%2FSkE2aE1KMWJxWWF0bU92b3RlSjhEQT09&f=(Hard%20Sub%20Vi%E1%BB%87t)%20-%20LONDON%20HAS%20FALLEN.mp4&l=http%3A%2F%2Flinksvip.net%2Fthankyou%2FaHR0cDovL2Rvd25sb2FkMDI4LmZzaGFyZS52bi9kbC9Felh3RUIxRmdXMmU3WHdOOTBwWjM1Q3B2czJHbmtrT0dPZHFqWjZVM2dNWXFvNnVwcEx2a1JDU2J1NEM3NE1haFFiZ0NMU2J3RE0zdG5INC8lMjhIYXJkJTIwU3ViJTIwVmklRTElQkIlODd0JTI5JTIwLSUyMExPTkRPTiUyMEhBUyUyMEZBTExFTi5tcDQ%3D


(TNR) #409

HI!
First of all sorry for my bad English!
but since 4 days after the last update, this Webpage (in turkish) does not work correctly anymore!
Especially the Videos dont show anymore and it says in turkish a error message with: "your Addon Doesnt work correct,please fix it or deactivate it. but if i deactivate it then comes hundret of advertising!
The Webpage Domain is this (a NEWS Webpage):

http://www.ensonhaber.com/sirnakta-pkk-mezarligi-bombalandi.html (ViDEO dont Show,it say Add-On Error)


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


http://videonuz.ensonhaber.com/izle/arda_milli_takimi_birakti (VIDEO Host SITE with same domain but, ViDEOS dont Show)

Can you please Help me? Or can you Update your ublockOrigin ? I need Help!

Please Sir, can someone help me? how can i Fix that? if deactivate uBlockOrigin then i have no problem with the Videos and i can watch all Videos . BUT (!) than , i have so much advertising on this site , if click on one Link it opens 15Links with advertising ;(

Can you please Update your uBlockOrigin for this domain and the subdomain?
DOMAIN: http://www.ensonhaber.com

SUBDOMAIN: http://videonuz.ensonhaber.com

tHANK you so much Sir! With all my Respect and best regards. Thank you!


#411

A couple of questions:
Could/should the image blocker also block media elements less than a certain size as well as to block tracking pixels?

Would there be a reason not to default to noop rules for any of these vs. leaving them at the default allow?

      • noop
    • 1p-script noop
    • image noop
    • inline-script noop

Personally, I’m trying UbO with no blocklists, dynamic filtering with these rules to see how well it goes and these questions came to mind.

no-cosmetic-filtering: * true
no-large-media: * true
no-remote-fonts: * true

      • noop
    • 1p-script noop
    • 3p block
    • 3p-frame block
    • 3p-script block
    • image noop
    • inline-script noop
      behind-the-scene * 3p noop
      behind-the-scene * 3p-frame noop

Thanks!


(James Lu) #412

Can uBlock join the Internet-wide day of action to save Net Neutrality?

Some net-neutrality organizations have created a protest with some pretty big names involved:

Perhaps uBlock could join? It appears as though they contact you back with instructions on how to participate after you indicate that you have “a large online audience”.