mirror of https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock.git
168 lines
7.0 KiB
Markdown
168 lines
7.0 KiB
Markdown
# µBlock for Chromium
|
|
|
|
See [Change log](https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Change-log) for latest changes.
|
|
|
|
An efficient blocker for Chromium-based browsers. Fast and lean.
|
|
|
|
<p align="center">
|
|
Chromium on Linux 64-bit<br>
|
|
<img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gorhill/uBlock/master/doc/img/ss-chromium-2.png" />
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
<p align="center">
|
|
Opera 22 on Windows 7 32-bit<br>
|
|
<img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gorhill/uBlock/master/doc/img/ss-opera-1.png" />
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
<sup>The above screenshots were taken after visiting many [reference benchmark](https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/Comparative-benchmarks-against-widely-used-blockers:-Top-15-Most-Popular-News-Websites)
|
|
links plus a bit of random browsing. All blockers were active at the same time,
|
|
thus they had to deal with exactly the same workload. Before the screenshots were
|
|
taken, I left the browser idle for many minutes so as to let the browser's
|
|
garbage collector kicks in. Also, after a while idling, it's good to open the dev
|
|
console for each extension and force a garbage collection cycle by clicking a couple of times
|
|
the trashcan icon in the _Timeline_ tab (this caused a ~15MB drop for µBlock and Adguard in Opera)
|
|
as garbage collectors sometimes work in a very lazy way, so I did this for each extension.</sup>
|
|
|
|
**More:** [µBlock vs. ABP: efficiency compared](https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/%C2%B5Block-vs.-ABP:-efficiency-compared)
|
|
|
|
#### Dispelling a few myths flying around
|
|
|
|
- "µBlock does not support element hiding".
|
|
- Yes it does. If you don't believe it, try entering `twitter.com##body` in the
|
|
_"Your filters"_ text area and see what happens when you visit twitter.com.
|
|
- What it doesn't support [yet](https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues/4),
|
|
is the UI counterpart to "element hiding", i.e. being able to click on an element
|
|
to extract filters out of it.
|
|
- "The memory usage isn't actually ABP's fault, _EasyList_ is like 40,000+ lines of rules that all have to be parsed by ABP".
|
|
- Hum, µBlock also parse _EasyList_. And _EasyPrivacy_. And _Malware domains_ lists.
|
|
And _Peter Lowes's Ad server_ list. Out of the box. Yet uses less than half the
|
|
memory of ABP.
|
|
- And for a fun memory test, you can try yourself the
|
|
[infamous vim test](https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/Adblock-Plus-memory-consumption),
|
|
once with only ABP as the active extension, and once with only µBlock as the active extension. (Other
|
|
extensions may also add their own memory footprint.)
|
|
- "It consumes less memory because it doesn't block as well"
|
|
- Actually it blocks more efficiently. See [_benchmark_](#benchmarks) below.
|
|
- "It has all the features ABP has!"
|
|
- No it doesn't. There are things ABP can do which µBlock can't at this time. I will
|
|
consider all feature requests, but I will implement only those which do not jeopardize µBlock's
|
|
defining traits: lean, efficient and minimalist.
|
|
|
|
#### Regarding reviews in various web store
|
|
|
|
- [My answer to web store reviews where appropriate](https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/My-answer-to-web-store-reviews-where-appropriate)
|
|
|
|
#### Some articles about the origin of the source code behind µBlock
|
|
|
|
- [Net request filtering efficiency: HTTP Switchboard vs. Adblock Plus](https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/Net-request-filtering-efficiency:-HTTP-Switchboard-vs.-Adblock-Plus)
|
|
- [Adblock Plus memory consumption](https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/Adblock-Plus-memory-consumption)
|
|
|
|
## Installation
|
|
|
|
From the [Chrome store](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/µblock/cjpalhdlnbpafiamejdnhcphjbkeiagm),
|
|
or [manually](https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/tree/master/dist).
|
|
|
|
To benefit from the higher efficiency, it is of course not advised to use an
|
|
inefficient blocker at the same time. µBlock will do as well or better than the
|
|
popular blockers out there.
|
|
|
|
## Documentation
|
|
|
|
I think it is pretty obvious, except for this I suppose:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The big fat power button is to disable/enable µBlock **for the specific hostname
|
|
which can be extracted from the URL address of the current page**. (It applies to
|
|
the current web site only, it is **not** a global power button.) The state of the power
|
|
switch for a specific site will be remembered.
|
|
|
|
## Benchmarks
|
|
|
|
I ran my [reference benchmark](https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/Comparative-benchmarks-against-widely-used-blockers:-Top-15-Most-Popular-News-Websites)
|
|
to compare against other popular blockers.
|
|
|
|
Results -- figures are *3rd party* / *all*:
|
|
|
|
#### µBlock 0.1.0.4
|
|
|
|
* Domains: **66** / 67
|
|
* Hosts: 117 / 171
|
|
* Scripts: 239 / 321
|
|
* Outbound cookies: 8 / 42
|
|
* Net requests: 1,035 / 1,877
|
|
|
|
#### Adblock Plus 1.8.3
|
|
|
|
* Domains: **72** / 73
|
|
* Hosts: 124 / 177
|
|
* Scripts: 243 / 328
|
|
* Outbound cookies: 8 / 44
|
|
* Net requests: 1,041 / 1,913
|
|
|
|
#### Ghostery 5.3.0
|
|
|
|
* Domains: **83** / 84
|
|
* Hosts: 140 / 211
|
|
* Scripts: 239 / 343
|
|
* Outbound cookies: 17 / 57
|
|
* Net requests: 1,046 / 1,930
|
|
|
|
#### Adguard 1.0.2.9
|
|
|
|
* Domains: **89** / 90
|
|
* Hosts: 145 / 217
|
|
* Scripts: 262 / 349
|
|
* Outbound cookies: 18 / 68
|
|
* Net requests: 1,064 / 1,904
|
|
|
|
#### Disconnect 5.18.14
|
|
|
|
* Domains: **95** / 96
|
|
* Hosts: 163 / 239
|
|
* Scripts: 283 / 381
|
|
* Outbound cookies: 18 / 74
|
|
* Net requests: 1,087 / 1,989
|
|
|
|
#### No blocker
|
|
|
|
* Domains: **380** / 381
|
|
* Hosts: 566 / 644
|
|
* Scripts: 490 / 592
|
|
* Outbound cookies: 245 / 315
|
|
* Net requests: 1,950 / 2,871
|
|
|
|
The figures show the number of requests **allowed**, thus lower numbers are better.
|
|
The point is to show how many 3rd-party servers are hit on average after running
|
|
the reference benchmark (three repeats in the current instance).
|
|
|
|
The less hits on 3rd-party servers, the better. All blockers were configured
|
|
in such a way as to compare apples-vs-apples:
|
|
|
|
- **µBlock:** out-of-the-box settings -- no change.
|
|
- **Adblock Plus:** _"EasyPrivacy"_, _"Malware Domains"_ checked. _"Acceptable ads"_ unchecked.
|
|
- **Ghostery:** _"Advertising"_, _"Analytics"_, _"Beacons"_, _"Privacy"_ checked. _"Widgets"_ not checked. _"GhostRank"_ unchecked.
|
|
- **Adguard:** _"Spyware and tracking"_, _"Phishing and malware protection"_ checked. _"Social media"_ not checked. _"Acceptable ads"_ unchecked.
|
|
- **Disconnect:** out-of-the-box settings -- no change.
|
|
|
|
## About
|
|
|
|
µBlock is born out of [HTTP Switchboard](https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard).
|
|
All the niceties of HTTPSB have been removed, and what is left is a straightforward
|
|
blocker which support EasyList and the likes, and also support host files.
|
|
Cosmetic filters ("element hiding") are supported.
|
|
|
|
There is nothing more to it. But it does what popular blockers out there do, at a
|
|
fraction of CPU and memory usage for the same blocking power.
|
|
|
|
Free. Open source. No donations sought. For users by users.
|
|
|
|
Without the preset lists of filters, this extension is nothing. So if ever you
|
|
really do want to contribute something, think about the people working hard
|
|
to maintain the filter lists you are using, which were made available to use by
|
|
all for free.
|
|
|
|
## License
|
|
|
|
[GPLv3](https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/blob/master/LICENSE.txt).
|