Or Firefox?
Comment on [deleted]
Engywuck@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Browsers with in built adblocker or system wide AdGuard.
iopq@lemmy.world 6 months ago
SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 6 months ago
Those are trash and DNS adblocking does not work on YT either. Garbage advice 0/10
Engywuck@lemm.ee 6 months ago
No, you’re wrong.
Flying_Hellfish@lemmy.world 6 months ago
porque no los dos? I use both and there are things uBlock can catch/block that AdGuard doesn’t seem to be able to. That said AdGuard makes mobile pages readable, when most these days are a complete nightmare of ads
Engywuck@lemm.ee 6 months ago
I was talking about AdGuard, not AdGuard Home.
Flying_Hellfish@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I misread system wide as network wide. My mistake.
cmhe@lemmy.world 6 months ago
DNS ad blockers are not sufficient to block all ads and often overly broad. So they have much higher rate of false positives and negatives compared to in-browser ad blockers. Differentiating between ads and useful content based on domain names will become more and more difficult. Both might use some url from the same cloud provider, and blocking those breaks a lot of stuff.
Engywuck@lemm.ee 6 months ago
AdGuard is not a DNS blocker
generic_computers@lemmy.zip 6 months ago
It’s both a browser extension and a DNS filter.
cmhe@lemmy.world 6 months ago
You where talking about “system wide AdGuard”, which is not the browser addon, but an app that uses DNS blocking, be it by either letting people set DNS servers manually, or automatically through VPN. Their VPN does not break TLS connection by inserting custom certificates and MITM proxies, so they cannot read/modifiy content.
It might be possible to use TLS breaking proxies for systemwide ad blocking, but even that wouldn’t help, because nowadays a lot of content and ads are loaded dynamically via javascript. So a browser is required to filter ads.