Mirrors
/
uBlock
mirror of https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock.git
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Implement gorhill's request for uBO naming convention

q1800 2022-02-06 09:52:58 -06:00
parent 078e842402
commit 8215bf4c6f
1 changed files with 6 additions and 6 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

12
Can-you-trust-uBlock-Origin?.md

@ -1,10 +1,10 @@
After I added the `privacy` permission to make uBlock Origin reliable when it comes to blocking network requests, a lot of people questioned uBlock Origin's trustworthiness.
After I added the `privacy` permission to make uBlock Origin (uBO) reliable when it comes to blocking network requests, a lot of people questioned uBO's trustworthiness.
First, uBlock Origin is completely developed in full public view. All the sources and all the changes to the sources are fully accessible on GitHub.
First, uBO is completely developed in full public view. All the sources and all the changes to the sources are fully accessible on GitHub.
Second, uBlock Origin does not have a dedicated server, it can't "phone home" with your browsing data, there is only GitHub, and GitHub is completely unrelated to uBlock Origin.
Second, uBO does not have a dedicated server, it can't "phone home" with your browsing data, there is only GitHub, and GitHub is completely unrelated to uBO.
Third, I have no intent to _ever_ monetize uBlock Origin. It started as a personal project, and it still is a personal project. So uBlock Origin has absolutely no interest in data mining you.
Third, I have no intent to _ever_ monetize uBO. It started as a personal project, and it still is a personal project. So uBO has absolutely no interest in data mining you.
I think it's time I give examples of how requiring _fewer_ permissions is **not** a sure sign of higher trustworthiness.
@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ Chrome store: Web Protector - Reliable Phishing Protection (the extension no lon
This extension requires the same permission as uBlock, _minus_ the `privacy` one. Some might be inclined that it can thus be more trusted than uBlock, which requires the `privacy` permission.
However, Web Protector has a home server, and it does "phone home" as opposed to uBlock (which has no home server in the first place).
However, Web Protector has a home server, and it does "phone home" as opposed to uBO (which has no home server in the first place).
For **every** web page you visit, you can see Web Protector sending behind-the-scene network requests to `webovernet.com`:
@ -28,6 +28,6 @@ This is just to demonstrate that the permissions _alone_ do not tell the whole s
- Under which license does the code fall?
- Is there a home server?
- What network requests are made by an extension behind the scene?
- uBlock Origin's logger allows you to see all [behind-the-scene network requests](https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/wiki/Behind-the-scene-network-requests), including its own (mainly to GitHub, for updating filter lists).
- uBO's logger allows you to see all [behind-the-scene network requests](https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/wiki/Behind-the-scene-network-requests), including its own (mainly to GitHub, for updating filter lists).
- How is an extension monetizing itself?
- Learning about this factor will help you best understand whether the extension's developer's interests are aligned or at odds with yours.