Using uBlockO with AdGuard ...

paulderdash

Beta Tester
I know this might sound like heresy on this forum but ... please be kind! :)
Prior to trying Adguard I used uBlockO (static filtering only) and uMatrix.
Now trialling Adguard but trying uBlockO with dynamic filtering in medium mode alongside: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Blocking-mode:-medium-mode. No uMatrix.
The reason:
I know it sounds like overkill, but I like that uBlockO in this mode is like using NoScript with 1st-party scripts/frames automatically whitelisted and blocking all 3rd party frames and scripts, similar to using RequestPolicy-type add-ons (which Adguard does not offer?). And unlike NoScript however, you can easily point-and-click to block/allow those scripts on a per-site basis.
I am (still) more familiar with uBlockO interface and controls than Adguard extension or Assistant. Also I like to see what's 'under the hood' in uBlockO, and I don't mind tinkering :)
I do suppose there is some doubling up in terms of default filter lists between Adguard and uBlockO, but haven't noticed a slowdown. And, any whitelisted sites need to be done in both.
Another reason is that I may not use Adguard on my secondary laptop but am still able to Firefox sync my uBlock add-on / settings.
Is this approach ill-advised? If so, I will have to choose between Adguard and uBlockO.
If it is possible to use these together, would it be preferable to then rather add the uBlock default filter lists in Adguard?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

avatar

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
If you do like them both then who we are to stop you:)

It's true that we don't offer "noscript-like" features as I don't like how NoScript works. In my opinion, simple script blocking is a wrong way, too many incorrect blocking and broken websites.

In fact you can do the same with Adguard filter rules, we just don't provide shortcuts for it.

If it is possible to use these together, would it be preferable to then rather add the uBlock default filter lists in Adguard?
I suppose that it's better to have to the same filter lists in both AG and uBlock with one exception: in AG use English filter instead of EasyList.
 

paulderdash

Beta Tester
If you do like them both then who we are to stop you:)

It's true that we don't offer "noscript-like" features as I don't like how NoScript works. In my opinion, simple script blocking is a wrong way, too many incorrect blocking and broken websites.

In fact you can do the same with Adguard filter rules, we just don't provide shortcuts for it.



I suppose that it's better to have to the same filter lists in both AG and uBlock with one exception: in AG use English filter instead of EasyList.
Thanks @avatar
Sorry to pursue this :)
I assume you saw uBlockO default filter lists which are:
- Some custom filter lists (which can be added by URL?)
- Peter Lowe’s Ad server list
- EasyPrivacy
- Malware Domain List (add via URL)
- Malware domains
Point taken about using English Filter AG iso Easylist.
Is your advice to a) add these to the AG default filter lists or b) replace the AG filter lists? Does AG de-duplicate filters like uBlockO does? I ask this because I tried adding them and AG complained I had too many filters, warning about slow-down.
If b) then probably I should stick to native AG and its philosophy, and forget about 3rd party frames / scripts blocking a la RequestPolicy, provided by uBlockO :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

avatar

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
- Some custom filter lists (which can be added by URL?)
Yep, that's possible.

- Peter Lowe’s Ad server list
- EasyPrivacy
- Malware Domain List (add via URL)
- Malware domains
Not sure about both malware domains list. I think these are redundant if you use AG browsing security module.

Is your advice to a) add these to the AG default filter lists or b) replace the AG filter lists?
I think it's better to disable some of these lists.

Does AG de-duplicate filters like uBlockO does? I ask this because I tried adding them and AG complained I had too many filters, warning about slow-down.
Of course it does.

We show an alert when you have more than 8 filter (the number is hard-coded). The only purpose of this alert is to stop users from installing all available filters. You know, there're some users who just turn on all available checkboxes. Maybe they hate unchecked checkboxes?
 
T

The Commissioner

Guest
@paulderdash Rather than using the combo of uBo and AG, I would recommend the combo of AG with uMatrix, using uBo and AGW doesn't make sense.
Plus what you're trying to achieve is best achieved through the AG-uMatrix combo.

Point to note: Recent test have shown that using uBlock/uMatrix, or for that matter any other privacy-aimed extensions, in collaboration with AG can result in conflict.
 
Top