With Chromium-based browsers adopting MV3 which is known to be less effective at blocking ads, how many users have moved to DNS filtering instead for ad-blocking? Like not even bothering adding more extensions and using uBlockDNS instead? It seems like unless you need cosmetic filtering or per-page rules UBO is optional? There’s obviously nothing preventing you from using both solutions, add it as an extension and then do your filtering at the DNS level with UBD.
It’s free, doesn’t require an email for registration and provides backup codes to access your account to add devices. Not associated with them and I don’t think the two projects are related.
Yikes, my mistake! I thought I had the right one copied in the paste buffer.
I generally use both DNS filtering and an ad blocker; they complement each other well. Although DNS level blocking is useful, it’s not as capable as ad blocker extensions because it can’t block ads, web elements, and trackers from the same domain as effectively. dns is more like a perimeter wall.
Every reputable source I have read has said to use both DNS blocking with a content blocker. And that has been my setup with zero major issues for a few years now.
I also would recommend against using some random DNS service like the one you linked to. Stick with something like NextDNS, Control D, or AdGuard DNS.
If cost is an issue, use one of the Control D free servers with a Hagezi blocklist. That “uBlockDNS” site looks sketch as hell.
What’s sketch about it? open source client with code in a Github repository and has filtering lists like Hagezi that you mentioned. Why not try reading the FAQs?
Um, literally no one? DNS can only block web requests, not scripts, page elements, etc. I don’t know if DNS blocking alone is even 10% as effective as what uBlock Lite can do.
One developer, one contributor. A vibe-coded app and site. An attempt at dirty PR by using uBlock in the name. The developer himself, as I see it, is just mass-producing all kinds of vibe-coded garbage. No thanks.
I am a bit suspicious on how this is free? And i think the fact they “stole" the ublock name is quite unfortunate. On the positive side it is good to see more NextDNS like offerings.
and I guess the overall take today is there were some API changes with MV3 imposing rule caps, and prohibiting extensions from remotely loading code or filters requiring changes to be approved by the CWS. It’s made it less effective in that blocking is still functional but not as unrestricted like MV2 was.
This is why I asked the question and brought up this discussion.
Yeah, it’s a red flag for me. It reminds me too much of phishing sites. I’m not saying it is, but when you’re clearly just stealing/using uBlock Origin’s name and logo, you’re clearly trying to make a quick buck. Even if it is trustworthy, what is stopping the guy from selling the project in the future?
Hmm, honeypot? I came across it when looking for the UBO version that wasn’t lite. After searching a bit around the repository, I did come across the developers website.