As far as I know, the plan for Manifest V3 only included removing blocking from the WebRequest API and extensions using WebRequest could still see whatever activity they are given permission to view.
Comment on Google to weaken ad blockers on Chrome in a push for security
Spotlight7573@lemmy.world 10 months agoAn extension having access to everything on every page you visit is a potential security issue.
Whether that’s an acceptable risk for you in order to have an extension that blocks ads is another question.
Evilcoleslaw@lemmy.world 10 months ago
AProfessional@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Correct, and the reasoning for removing blocking was performance.
TheDarkKnight@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Wouldn’t loading the ads impact performance moreso than loading them? Not really a browser nerd so no idea it just seems like blocking a piece of content from loading outright would be less demanding than loading it.
AProfessional@lemmy.world 10 months ago
How the WebRequest API works is:
- Network process downloads data
- Sent to the WebExtension (delay #1)
- Extension runs arbitrary JavaScript (Slow to very slow)
- Results eventually make it to the WebProcess where it belongs.
This is slow and will always be. Their change to remove blocking turns step 2/3 into a copy of the data, not a blocking call.
Now an ad can be slower, just by more data or bad JS. But that isn’t Googles concern because they sell those ads.
draughtcyclist@programming.dev 10 months ago
Extensions by definition are a security issue. For that matter, so is being connected to the Internet in the case of a browser.