I have always been a uMatrix (HTTPSB) user, so my knowledge of running uBlock dynamic filtering is a bit thin and limited, but anyways my words. There is no way I see it practical to use uBlock (Origin's) dynamic filtering and blocking stuff in it default deny and same time operating uMatrix. IMHO people should not try to mimic granular experts tweaking with tools which are not designed for that purpose (better use uMatrix for that), because it is to much hassle for half a partly effective solution. To clearify things, I do not ask for uBlock to implement those lacking features. Same applies to strict blocking (IMO), fine with uMatrix, but disturbing for uBlock users which click on a sponsored link (with uBlock 0.9.70 it seems it can be switched off by no-strict-blocking: * true, thanks ).
I also applaud that uMatrix disables those user settings to increase transparancy of rule application.
I applaud that uBlock does not interact with browser's javascript settings. no granular counter measures against pixel-tags (uBlock image blocking breaks to much functionality) no counter measures against browser-fingerprinting (uMatrix has option to spoof and change browser user agent) no counter measures against cookie-context-snooping (uMatrix has the option to delete blocked content and cookies on intervals) I thought you developed uMatrix for that (so the following list is not an attack on uBlock), uBlock simply lacks the granularity/features for effective privacy: IMO uBlock is not suited for expert privacy tweaking. Click to expand.I will explain (in the context that Gandalf added an explicit block without using Linkedin, so his block third party scripts/frames would probably deal with most unsolicited encounters with ).
0 kommentar(er)
