Might worth getting recommended instead of AdGuard in the future?
worth recommending of course, Let me know when that comes out, the page will soon be just uBlock Origin and Origin Lite heh
Added waiting tag since it’s currently in beta. Once in stable I see no reason why the existing uBlock Origin Lite recommendation shouldn’t extend to all supported browsers.
Whether the existing AdGuard recommendation should be removed is arguably the bigger question here.
2 Likes
Nice to see Safari getting a good content blocker
is this on desktop? mobile prob just has this
On mobile. Adguard is PG’s current recommendation for iOS, and HyperWeb comparitively seems to have a less established track record.
Adguard Pro has been really solid for me on iOS.
I’d prefer uBlock Origin if it were possible, but since it isn’t possible, I’m happy enough with Adguard. I wonder how uBO Lite will compare. I have only very limited experience with Lite, so I’m not fully aware of its limitations, nor how iOSes own limitations might impact it (or not).
If/when it is released, I’ll be excited to try it out.
1 Like
Hyperweb does not seem to be available for all countries
1 Like
Small but meaningful (pedantic) clarification: “uBlock” =/= “uBlock Origin” (uBO) =/= “uBlock Origin Lite” (uBOL)
The latter two come from the same developer/project, and the former is unaffiliated.
uBlock Origin Lite (uBOL) is a more feature and capability limited version of uBO that was made to work within Google’s new MV3 limitations for Chrome. What is being worked on currently is being called a “minimally working uBOL” for iOS so don’t expect the full uBO experience or featureset.
Still it’s positive news, some uBO(L) for iOS is better than no uBO for iOS 
2 Likes
TIme will tell I guess. I think uBOL is probably more capable than Firefox Focus’s content blocking on its own, but I don’t know what Gorhill (uBO/L developer) means by “minimally working” and I don’t know what iOS specific limitations might further limit uBOL beyond its existing limitations.
There is already a signed MacOS version! Safari issues to resolve for a minimally working uBOL · Issue #327 · uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home · GitHub
I’m wondering whether the AdGuard extension is more performant since it uses Safari’s content blocker API. It also doesn’t need the developer to update their extension just to update filterlists.
1 Like
Why not just use Brave ?
Not sure if this question is meant for @securitybrahh or me (Since you quoted them, but replied to my comment) but my answer would be:
Because I asked the inverse question, and couldn’t find a reason not: “Why not just use Safari?”
I did initially try Brave, and do have it installed, but I couldn’t find any comparative advantages to Brave iOS over Safrai. I thought it might have more sophisticated adblocking but its not meaningfully better, I thought it might have better blocking for PWAs but it doesn’t, that is an iOS limitation. Basically I didn’t find anything especially wrong with Brave on iOS, but I also couldn’t find any reason to prefer it to Safari + Adguard.
The answer was for @securitybrahh because I didn’t see the need for this custom browser that may not be trustworthy.
But there are still concerns about Safari data collection
1 Like
In that case I agree with you, Brave (or Safari + Adguard) makes more sense than a rather unknown browser with an adblocker.
But there are still concerns about Safari
data collectionwanting thecoarse locationpermission Surfshark Blogpost
The only reference I see to Safari in that article mentions that it asks for the coarse location permission on iOS which is just an app permission, and isn’t totally unreasonable for a browser, it doesn’t indicate “data collection” though it could be used for that purpose.
Still, I’d agree it’s a permission to be aware of, and possibly disable. And because it’s just an app permission, it’s in your control whether you want that permission enabled or not.
But realistically, if you are using an iPhone you are already choosing to trust Apple to responsibly handle location data on your device, regardless of your browser choice or whether that browser is granted access to location information. Because irrespective of the browser you choose or the permissions you give it, you must trust the OS and hardware which is in a much more privileged position wrt location data than the browser is. If Apple intended to do nefarious things with your location data, they wouldn’t need to use the browser to do so.
Why a browser would want access to location info?
I personally prefer my browser to not be location aware unless I explicitly allow it (beyond what can be inferred from IP). but I can understand why mainstream browser makers catering to mainstream users (whose search queries often look like: “weather” or “movie times” or “Cafe near me”) ask for the location permission. Even for us in the privacy space, there are valid reasons we might want to allow the browser location access to location info (e.g. if you use Google Maps in the browser or Uber’s webapp instead of the mobile app as harm reduction strategies). With that said I still feel it would be better if it was opt-in and an explicit choice (maybe it was, I don’t actually recall).
1 Like
/+ Safari is native to IOS.
1 Like
It is now notarised and available, but not yet full stable release Release uBOLite_2025.5.7.895-beta · uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home · GitHub
BTW: uBlock origin Lite is back on Firefox for real this time
1 Like
How to install this on iOS? I don’t see it on the App Store.
1 Like
It might not be available in the store yet as it’s still in beta, but it is now approved (notarised) by Apple.
Edit: I have no idea whether all Safari extensions are also available on iOS