Undertaker Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 5 minutes ago, dcs18 said: However, when I use the AdGuard AdBlocker (Beta) 2.8.5beta add-on to create a rule, neither do I receive the above notification nor is any rule created. Have you modified the contents of addon in any way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 9, 2018 Author Share Posted February 9, 2018 Nope, no modification/s made whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 1 minute ago, dcs18 said: Nope, no modification/s made whatsoever. And have you tried on a virgin firefox profile? What's the result? Also can you check and see if there are any user filter rules in your addon settings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 9, 2018 Author Share Posted February 9, 2018 Virgin got deflowered — naw . . . . just kidding (gotta try that.) Gotta also try re-integrating the add-on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 On second thought, not having the integrated addon is a good thing, opens up all kinds of possibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 9, 2018 Author Share Posted February 9, 2018 Since you've implemented ad. blocking rules on the add-on side, are you able to make it tamper-proof like I've done on the program side? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 1 minute ago, dcs18 said: Since you've implemented ad. blocking rules on the add-on side, are you able to make it tamper-proof like I've done on the program side? The answer would be yes. You can block in the addon what you can't in the program side. Also if you feel your addon is not blocking something, there's always the program acting as a blanket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 9, 2018 Author Share Posted February 9, 2018 1 minute ago, Undertaker said: 6 minutes ago, dcs18 said: Since you've implemented ad. blocking rules on the add-on side, are you able to make it tamper-proof like I've done on the program side? The answer would be yes. I'm referring to the deployment point-of-view — what about you? 1 minute ago, Undertaker said: You can block in the addon what you can't in the program side. Let's demonstrate with real-life examples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 2 minutes ago, dcs18 said: I'm referring to the deployment point-of-view — what about you? Sure why not, the only thing that can prevent it is the disabling or uninstalling of the addon but I already know you have that covered with not only your addons but firefox as a whole. 4 minutes ago, dcs18 said: Let's demonstrate with real-life examples. Cool. Name your site. But let's limit ourself to blocking rules because cosmetic is a personal taste. Or you wanna go the distance(cosmetic rules would be same in addon and program nonetheless). I will have adguard running in a new firefox profile with no filter list and only the user filter. I would also like if you try the same thing. Or would it be a program vs addon thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 9, 2018 Author Share Posted February 9, 2018 9 minutes ago, Undertaker said: Sure why not, the only thing that can prevent it is the disabling or uninstalling of the addon but I already know you have that covered with not only your addons but firefox as a whole. More important, is whether my Clients can change, delete or create their own rules — the rules (and filters) on my program are password-protected. 9 minutes ago, Undertaker said: Cool. Name your site. Choose any site where you find that add-on works whereas the program doesn't. 9 minutes ago, Undertaker said: I will have adguard running in a new firefox profile with no filter list and only the user filter. I would also like if you try the same thing. Sure, I'll use a new profile, too — not an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 7 minutes ago, dcs18 said: More important, is whether my Clients can change, delete or create their own rules — the rules (and filters) on my program are password-protected. I thought you had lock up mode? Do your clients have access to addon page? Do you allow them to fiddle with the settings of other addons bcoz the addon doesn't come with any such protection unless forced by the sys admin. 8 minutes ago, dcs18 said: Choose any site where you find that add-on works whereas the program doesn't. Ok, I'll break for dinner and then I will list the site(for sure) and probably my result too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 9, 2018 Author Share Posted February 9, 2018 1 minute ago, Undertaker said: 11 minutes ago, dcs18 said: More important, is whether my Clients can change, delete or create their own rules — the rules (and filters) on my program are password-protected. I thought you had lock up mode? Do your clients have access to addon page? Do you allow them to fiddle with the settings of other addons bcoz the addon doesn't come with any such protection unless forced by the sys admin. Yep, my add-on page is blocked — however, clients would still be able to change, delete or create their own rules by entering the following on the address bar . . . . . wouldn't they? moz-extension://dff46c92-c83d-46bb-bf11-ace8c19ca56b/pages/options.html#userfilter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 1 hour ago, dcs18 said: Yep, my add-on page is blocked — however, clients would still be able to change, delete or create their own rules by entering the following on the address bar . . . . . wouldn't they? Yeah that's true but if you copy the whole mozilla backup maybe they won't know, still suspecting their Adguard for windows to be at work. Pls del your personalised link. Let's do nsanedown.com The addon is able to get away with:- ! Global Block Rule ://$~third-party,~stylesheet,~image,~script ://$third-party,~stylesheet,~image ! Individual Rule ||google.com^$important,domain=nsanedown.com @@||*$~third-party,xmlhttprequest,domain=nsanedown.com Personally, the above set of rules gets the site in a working condition. (I don't use the google search on nsanedown but it can be fixed if wanted). This is a rigid config but it doesn't messup the site browsing. My personal preferred set of rules:- ! Global Block Rules ://$~third-party,~stylesheet,~font,~image,~media,~script,~subdocument,~xmlhttprequest ://$third-party,~stylesheet,~font,~image ! Individual Rules ! As per site requirement. I have found that if I use these set of rules, most sites work alright(the main content works good). The second one is lenient than the first one as you see but is still good enough for a user like me. The first one although rigid and in working condition would require you to create more individual site rules. Take your pick. Both work. Now if you were to use even the lenient set of rules in AdGW, the site still has a problem. Waiting for your reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 9, 2018 Author Share Posted February 9, 2018 Nah . . . . . . . what I was looking forward to, was completely different — my interest was solely in finding out what element you're able to block with the add-on that I wouldn't be able to block with the program . . . . . . . WRT your following statement:— 2 hours ago, Undertaker said: You can block in the addon what you can't in the program side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 1 minute ago, dcs18 said: Nah . . . . . . . what I was looking forward to, was completely different — my interest was solely in finding out what element you're able to block with the add-on that I wouldn't be able to block with the program . . . . . . . WRT your following statement:— But isn't that what I showed? I showed you certain parameters that can be blocked with addon but not with program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 9, 2018 Author Share Posted February 9, 2018 Can you post a screenshot along with the corresponding rules used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 But screenshot will not show whether site works or doesn't? So, why the screenshot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 9, 2018 Author Share Posted February 9, 2018 So then, are you saying that if I used the following rules in the program, nSaneDown won't work, for me — or what? 28 minutes ago, Undertaker said: The addon is able to get away with:- ! Global Block Rule ://$~third-party,~stylesheet,~image,~script ://$third-party,~stylesheet,~image ! Individual Rule ||google.com^$important,domain=nsanedown.com @@||*$~third-party,xmlhttprequest,domain=nsanedown.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 Just now, dcs18 said: So then, are you saying that if I used the following rules in the program, nSaneDown won't work, for me — or what? It won't work properly, that's what I'm saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 9, 2018 Author Share Posted February 9, 2018 According to you then, would my implementation (in the program) block more — hence . . . . . . result in the site not working properly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 1 minute ago, dcs18 said: According to you then, would my implementation (in the program) block more — hence . . . . . . result in the site not working properly? I don't think 'more' would be the word I would use, I would say it would block 'incorrectly'.(By blocking HTML) Alternatively, think about all other modifiers and parameters that it would block Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 9, 2018 Author Share Posted February 9, 2018 Checkout the page after using only your specified rules:— Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 4 minutes ago, dcs18 said: Checkout the page after using only your specified rules:— I already said you can't tell over a screenshot whether the site works or not p.s. Browsing in-between pages has loading issue(HTML blocking) Going to nsaneforums from quick links(left side) has issues (again HTML blocking) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcs18 Posted February 9, 2018 Author Share Posted February 9, 2018 Yep, I get that. What I'm trying to point out though, is that the same set of rules should work identically in the program as they would in the add-on — please test it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undertaker Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 1 minute ago, dcs18 said: What I'm trying to point out though, is that the same set of rules should work identically in the program as they would in the add-on — please test it. They don't. That's what I 'm trying to say from the beginning. 3 hours ago, Undertaker said: On second thought, not having the integrated addon is a good thing, opens up all kinds of possibility. 2 hours ago, Undertaker said: You can block in the addon what you can't in the program side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.