Feedback about AdGuard

[l0rdraiden]

I would like to give my feedback about adguard.

1. New Functionality - IP block capabilities, like peerblock (http://www.peerblock.com/) since it's open source maybe the code can be integrated in Adguard.
2. Interface - The text in the program is very little, the interface needs some work.
3. Ad Blocker - More transparency about the lists being use, easy list....
4. Ad Blocker - The posibility to add more lists from adblock https://adblockplus.org/en/subscriptions like the lists from malware domains http://www.malwaredomains.com/ or the privacy lists (easy privacy)
5. Browser Security - Integration with VirusTotal Url scanner, to automatically/manually scan websites
6. New Functionality - Add/integrate perspectives in Adguard http://perspectives-project.org/
7. New Functionality - Add/integrate Https everywhere in Adguard https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
8. New Functionality - Redirect cleaner functionality in adguard https://addons.mozilla.org/es/firefox/addon/redirect-cleaner/?src=search


Questions,
why google safe browsing doesn't come activated by default?
Is there any reason why is not blocking google analytics?, adblock in the browser is blocking it.
Is the google phishing protection included using this? https://developers.google.com/safe-browsing/?hl=es
Is there any roadmap?

Regards

 

[Boo Berry]

Right, I'll move this topic to the requests section after posting this.

> IP block capabilities
IP blocking might cause more harm than good in the form of potential false positives. Will have to see what avatar thinks about this one.

> The text in the program is very little, the interface needs some work.
At what resolution/DPI are you using? Adguard is getting a new interface with v6.

> More transparency about the lists being use, easy list...
Nearly all filters are based on EasyList already.

> The posibility to add more lists from adblock
The developers are already going to add more filters for various languages. Not sure about Malware Domains - Adguard already has Web Of Trust and Google Safe Browsing integration.

> Integration with VirusTotal Url scanner, to automatically/manually scan websites
Again, Adguard already has Web Of Trust and Google Safe Browsing integration and adding the VirusTotal URL scanner could increase load latency.

> Add/integrate perspectives in Adguard
Hmmm, not sure how to respond to this one as I personally wouldn't use such a feature.

> Add/integrate Https everywhere in Adguard
Probably doable but has the potential to break websites that don't support SSL.

> Redirect cleaner functionality in adguard
Like Perspectives, not sure how to respond to this one either as I wouldn't personally have use for it.

> why google safe browsing doesn't come activated by default?
Good question, I was wondering that myself. Avatar will have to answer this one.

> Is there any reason why is not blocking google analytics?, adblock in the browser is blocking it.
Have you tried turning on the Spyware filter?

> Is there any roadmap?
One was posted in the release notes to Adguard 5.9...

Our future plans

As always we are missing all deadlines.
One day we'll learn how to do everything in time.

So what's in progress now:

Firefox extension - we have just started development

Adguard for Android - development is in progress. We will soon get a working prototype (not ready for public yet but it is a very important step).

Adguard for Mac OS X - the same as for android version. Prototype is coming soon.

Adguard 6 for Windows - new design is ready. Working on first UI client prototype.

 

[Nameless]

1. IpBlocking has nothing to do with blocking ads imo and i dont feel its something that should be added to adguard if im honest maybe because im not a fa of peerguard etc maybe others will disagree.

2. Interface i use extended menu so i dont know what to say, there is quite abit hidden away.

3. More transparency in lists being used, im not too fussed about this if it does the job ok besides it could be their own or a combination of a few.

4. Ability to add more filters and lists is coming avatar told me this in a PM (screenshot can be provided)

5. Browser security like ip blocking this is nothing to do with adblocking and not required it would also i feel slow down your browsing experience and take alot of work i suggest using an all in one sulution like Kaspersky, Dit Defender etc as they are much better at detecting and blocking intrusions your asking for abit too much here.

6. Perspectives again this is nothing to do with adblocking and out of their realm

7. Https everywhere while i have used this in the past via a chrome extension i did notice on one or two websites i visited it was causing issues, and again its not anything to do with ablocking.

8. They are adding userscripts which "should" cover this at a later date

While i can understand you would like everything rolled into one application this is an adblocker not an all in one suite it would take more time and effort to keep all of this maintained and over complicate things. Personally i feel the app is best sticking to the thing its met to be, an ad blocker hence the name "adguard". if you feel you need the other things then stick to the things you suggested thats my advice.

 

[l0rdraiden]

Right, I'll move this topic to the requests section after posting this.

> IP block capabilities
IP blocking might cause more harm than good in the form of potential false positives. Will have to see what avatar thinks about this one.

In Peerblock there is an option to allow HTTP.
It's another layer of protection https://www.iblocklist.com/lists.php

> The text in the program is very little, the interface needs some work.
At what resolution/DPI are you using? Adguard is getting a new interface with v6.

Default settings win 8.1 1920x1080 everything looks ok but adguard text it's just small

> More transparency about the lists being use, easy list...
Nearly all filters are based on EasyList already.

> The posibility to add more lists from adblock
The developers are already going to add more filters for various languages. Not sure about Malware Domains - Adguard already has Web Of Trust and Google Safe Browsing integration.

I can' find easy privacy for example, we should be able to add any list we want as it happens with adblock. You can import a custom list but only one
[/QUOTE]
> Integration with VirusTotal Url scanner, to automatically/manually scan websites
Again, Adguard already has Web Of Trust and Google Safe Browsing integration and adding the VirusTotal URL scanner could increase load latency.

This should be optional, on demand

> Add/integrate perspectives in Adguard
Hmmm, not sure how to respond to this one as I personally wouldn't use such a feature.

> Add/integrate Https everywhere in Adguard
Probably doable but has the potential to break websites that don't support SSL.

> Redirect cleaner functionality in adguard
Like Perspectives, not sure how to respond to this one either as I wouldn't personally have use for it.

Let see what he says

> why google safe browsing doesn't come activated by default?
Good question, I was wondering that myself. Avatar will have to answer this one.

> Is there any reason why is not blocking google analytics?, adblock in the browser is blocking it.
Have you tried turning on the Spyware filter?

Yes I have it active and this is not being blocked
https://www.ghostery.com/es/gcache/?n=Google Analytics&s=http://www.google-analytics.com/ga.js&v=2&t=script


On top of this is normal the high CPU time and the high volume and constant of I/O read and writes (task manager details)? even more than chrome

 

[Boo Berry]

There's been threads about the higher resource usage and avatar has said they'll try reducing usage as much as they can.

 

[Nameless]

There's been threads about the higher resource usage and avatar has said they'll try reducing usage as much as they can.

Made a good point here, by adding more features the resource usage is going to climb and there is more chance thins will not be compatible as you said earlier.

 

[l0rdraiden]

Made a good point here, by adding more features the resource usage is going to climb and there is more chance thins will not be compatible as you said earlier.

It's absurd it has more I/O and cpu consumption than any other app in my PC, more than the AV, chrome, steam...

 

[Nameless]

I know the memory usage is high and the devs have said they are going to try and lower it, like i said though adding all them non-essential things are just over complecating things, adding more problems and going to increase the load not to mention slow down the browsing experience.

I use an adblocker because:
1. I hate ads
2. I want a fast browsing experience even on 100mb broadband

If i want anything else i install something else that is made for that purpose (Kaspersky, Malwarebytes, etc).

 

[Accel]

I know the memory usage is high and the devs have said they are going to try and lower it, like i said though adding all them non-essential things are just over complecating things, adding more problems and going to increase the load not to mention slow down the browsing experience.

I use an adblocker because:
1. I hate ads
2. I want a fast browsing experience even on 100mb broadband

If i want anything else i install something else that is made for that purpose (Kaspersky, Malwarebytes, etc).

yes this is the problem.. i think adguard developers need to make 2 installer. one just adblocking with no other essential things, like web of trust, browsing security ( this can be done in browser), parental control, extensions..

some of us need only adblocker and popup blockers, not overbloated software that doing everything like antivirus, or realm of addon should be doing.

 

[Nameless]

I dont think multiple installers is the answer as people will always ask why feature 1,2,3 can not be installed to the slim version making it bigger and pointless thats why their are options to disable the features but of cause this does not have much effect on the resource use.

In a way more features = more people impressed but at the same time more resource usage and over complected for some users as they find they dont need alot of it.

 

[Accel]

I dont think multiple installers is the answer as people will always ask why feature 1,2,3 can not be installed to the slim version making it bigger and pointless thats why their are options to disable the features but of cause this does not have much effect on the resource use.

In a way more features = more people impressed but at the same time more resource usage and over complected for some users as they find they dont need alot of it.

as adguard use online installer to download the programs, they can list all features and the users can pick features that they wanted to use. but ofcourse this means, they need to make Adguard modules modular which is a great amount of work.

 

[Nameless]

Yeh thats always the problem the amount of work its going to take to do this then how easy it is to keep it all updated and making sure they dont mess up when added/combined in different ways.

 

[Accel]

Yeh thats always the problem the amount of work its going to take to do this then how easy it is to keep it all updated and making sure they dont mess up when added/combined in different ways.

after it is all modular, i think it is easier to update, as 1 module not interfering with another..

maybe avatar can give us a light here.

 

[Nameless]

I have no idea, tbh while i admit i will not use a few of the options it does not bother me that they are there, but i dont feel some the features suggested are anything to do with adblocking and should be left separate but thats my opinion.

edit:
One thing i would like which is to do with the filter list is that it work in reverse order (newest filter at the top) along with adding a new filter being at the top rather than the bottom.

 

[avatar]

why google safe browsing doesn't come activated by default?

1. Too heavy
2. Chrome and Firefox already use it
3. Not good enough

Is there any reason why is not blocking google analytics?, adblock in the browser is blocking it.

Why? Blocked with spyware filter.

Is the google phishing protection included using this? https://developers.google.com/safe-browsing/?hl=es

Yes, Safe Browsing API v2.

Is there any roadmap?

Not in public. I'll post it in announcements later.

---------- Post added at 12:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:48 PM ----------

1. New Functionality - IP block capabilities, like peerblock (http://www.peerblock.com/) since it's open source maybe the code can be integrated in Adguard.

You can use rules like this:

||123.123.123.123:80^

2. Interface - The text in the program is very little, the interface needs some work.

Interface of Adguard 6.0 is completely new but it's too early to post the screenshots.

---------- Post added at 01:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:56 PM ----------

after it is all modular, i think it is easier to update, as 1 module not interfering with another..

maybe avatar can give us a light here.

Plugins architecture is good in theory but it's too difficult to support.
At the moment I don't see how it could help us.

The memory/CPU usage is not caused by the number of Adguard's features.
I mean if Parental Control is disabled - it does not use memory/CPU at all.
The same for the Extensions and Browsing Security.