EFF vs Google Chrome Manifest V3 that kills ad-blokers

Topic

New Reply

Google’s Manifest V3 Still Hurts Privacy, Security, and Innovation

It’s been over two years since our initial response to Google’s Manifest V3 proposal. Manifest V3 is the latest set of changes to the Chrome browser’s rules for browser extensions. Each extensions manifest version update introduces backwards-incompatible changes to ostensibly move the platform forward…

Since announcing Manifest V3 in 2018, Google has launched Manifest V3 in Chrome, started accepting Manifest V3 extensions in the Chrome Web Store..

New Manifest V2 extensions will no longer be accepted as of January 2022, and Manifest V2 will no longer function as of January 2023…

Google enables controversial extension Manifest V3 in Chrome 88 Beta

Google unveiled plans to upgrade the extension Manifest that Chromium-based browsers such as Google Chrome use to version 3 in early 2019. The initial draft was criticized heavily, especially for Google’s plan to limit the webRequest API that content blockers and other extensions use. The new API, declarativeNetRequest, had filter limits and other restrictions that would mean the end for many ad blockers for Chrome.

Companies like Brave or Vivaldi voiced their concern over the proposed changes and let users know that they would do all that is in their power to retain support for Manifest V2 in their browsers.

Mozilla, maker of Firefox, revealed that it had no “immediate plans” to remove the blocking part of the webRequest API…

3 users thanked author for this post.

Morty, windbg, Drcard:))

Reply | Quote

Replies

More evidence that Google regards the advertisers and marketing entities as their customers, not the browser users.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Toa Of Justice

Reply | Quote

Google revenue in 2021

from browser users = $0
from advertisers = $209 Billion

Browser users are only there (by the number of users) to increase sales to advertisers so Google needs to hang on to browser users. Ad blockers like uBlock are bad for their ad business, but rewriting the Chrome code to totally block UBlock would alarm browser users and decrease users and thus ad revenue. Better to punch holes in an ad blocker so the ads get thru yet give the browser users the false feeling of blocking ads. Also since Google can fine tune which filters that are used, so only Google ads get thru resulting in increased ad revenue.

Shame on you Alex5723, I don’t think Google wanted end users to know about these changes or that Google considers users of Chrome as Ad Bait.

Good for You.

Dana:))

HTH, Dana:))

Reply | Quote

eI have Chrome, it tells me it is up to date, but I cannot find anything with “Manifest V3” or even “V2” in the name, and I have really looked. So what am I missing?

Ex-Windows user (Win. 98, XP, 7); since mid-2017 using also macOS. Presently on Monterey 12.15 & sometimes running also Linux (Mint).

MacBook Pro circa mid-2015, 15" display, with 16GB 1600 GHz DDR3 RAM, 1 TB SSD, a Haswell architecture Intel CPU with 4 Cores and 8 Threads model i7-4870HQ @ 2.50GHz.
Intel Iris Pro GPU with Built-in Bus, VRAM 1.5 GB, Display 2880 x 1800 Retina, 24-Bit color.
macOS Monterey; browsers: Waterfox "Current", Vivaldi and (now and then) Chrome; security apps. Intego AV

1 user thanked author for this post.

Alex5723

Reply | Quote

Manifest V3/V2 isn’t a Chrome setting.
Manifest V3 is a framework for extensions (and others) developers now using webRequest API and replacing it with declarativeNetRequest API..

What this change mean for example :
Adblocker like uBlock Origine has now 111,862 network filters ＋ 183,087 cosmetic filters. Under Manifest V3 will limit the max number of such filters. Some say to <than 150K so uBlock Origin will block only 50% of ads.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Toa Of Justice, OscarCP

Reply | Quote

Alex: Let me see if I get this: The V2 or V3 thing is something the developers of things for Chrome use? And is Google mandating them to make this change from V2 to V3?

Ex-Windows user (Win. 98, XP, 7); since mid-2017 using also macOS. Presently on Monterey 12.15 & sometimes running also Linux (Mint).

MacBook Pro circa mid-2015, 15" display, with 16GB 1600 GHz DDR3 RAM, 1 TB SSD, a Haswell architecture Intel CPU with 4 Cores and 8 Threads model i7-4870HQ @ 2.50GHz.
Intel Iris Pro GPU with Built-in Bus, VRAM 1.5 GB, Display 2880 x 1800 Retina, 24-Bit color.
macOS Monterey; browsers: Waterfox "Current", Vivaldi and (now and then) Chrome; security apps. Intego AV

1 user thanked author for this post.

Alex5723

Reply | Quote

As it said, Google is mandating developers to make this change.

New Manifest V2 extensions will no longer be accepted as of January 2022, and Manifest V2 will no longer function as of January 2023…

1 user thanked author for this post.

OscarCP

Reply | Quote

https://www.theregister.com/2021/09/27/google_chrome_manifest_v2_extensions/

Excerpt:

“Miagkov said he wished Mozilla would stand up more for users instead of politely supporting Google’s proposals, with a few minor variations. Mozilla, Opera, and Vivaldi have all said they will try to support the blocking webRequest API that Google is replacing.”

How are the smaller (less used) browsers going to manage to do that?

I have been using Vivaldi for a while and am quite satisfied with it, although I still use Chrome for some sites that are unbending in their requirement that one uses this browser or Firefox (that I strongly dislike), my own bank among others. Would I have to finally give up and use FF for that, as I do not think a smaller browser such as Vivaldi is going to be in the bank’s list of acceptable browsers?

Things do not get better with every passing day, do they?

Ex-Windows user (Win. 98, XP, 7); since mid-2017 using also macOS. Presently on Monterey 12.15 & sometimes running also Linux (Mint).

MacBook Pro circa mid-2015, 15" display, with 16GB 1600 GHz DDR3 RAM, 1 TB SSD, a Haswell architecture Intel CPU with 4 Cores and 8 Threads model i7-4870HQ @ 2.50GHz.
Intel Iris Pro GPU with Built-in Bus, VRAM 1.5 GB, Display 2880 x 1800 Retina, 24-Bit color.
macOS Monterey; browsers: Waterfox "Current", Vivaldi and (now and then) Chrome; security apps. Intego AV

Reply | Quote

Chrome will block V2 extensions while Brave, Vivaldi, Firefox.. will continue to support it.
Developers of these extensions will have to submit new V2 versions only for “anti V3” browsers.

Microsoft’s Edge follows Chrome and will support V3

In continuation of our commitment to reduce fragmentation of the web for all developers and create better web compatibility for our customers, we plan to support the Declarative Net Request API and other changes proposed as part of Manifest V3. The decision to embrace Manifest V3 changes is based on our dedication to enhancing privacy, security & performance for the benefit of our end-users as well as to allow developers to extend & provide rich experiences in Microsoft Edge..

Now, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Mozilla Working Together to Improve Interoperatibility Across Web Browsers

Reply | Quote

Alex wrote: “Chrome will block V2 extensions while Brave, Vivaldi, Firefox.. will continue to support it.
Developers of these extensions will have to submit new V2 versions only for “anti V3” browsers.”

And that is the bad news. Or at least the less than excellent news. Are the developers of addons and extensions make special V2 versions for these smaller, independent browsers? If not, what future do these have left?

Ex-Windows user (Win. 98, XP, 7); since mid-2017 using also macOS. Presently on Monterey 12.15 & sometimes running also Linux (Mint).

MacBook Pro circa mid-2015, 15" display, with 16GB 1600 GHz DDR3 RAM, 1 TB SSD, a Haswell architecture Intel CPU with 4 Cores and 8 Threads model i7-4870HQ @ 2.50GHz.
Intel Iris Pro GPU with Built-in Bus, VRAM 1.5 GB, Display 2880 x 1800 Retina, 24-Bit color.
macOS Monterey; browsers: Waterfox "Current", Vivaldi and (now and then) Chrome; security apps. Intego AV

Reply | Quote

OscarCP wrote:

what future do these have left?

The v2 extensions will die.

Here is another casualty of Google’s changes. This time on Android.

I use Kodi on my Android/Linux streamer. No update for me.

Reply | Quote

uBO Lite (uBlock Origin Lite Manifest V3)

“A permission-less content blocker. Blocks ads, trackers, miners, and more immediately upon installation.

uBO Lite (uBOL) is a *permission-less* MV3-based content blocker.

The default ruleset corresponds to uBlock Origin’s default filterset:

– uBlock Origin’s built-in filter lists
– EasyList
– EasyPrivacy
– Peter Lowe’s Ad and tracking server list

You can add more rulesets by visiting the options page — click the _Cogs_ icon in the popup panel.”…

Reply | Quote

https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/wiki/About-Google-Chrome’s-%22This-extension-may-soon-no-longer-be-supported%22

Starting with Google Chrome 127, there will be a warning for uBlock Origin (uBO) in your chrome://extensions/

This is the result of Manifest v2 support being deprecated in favor of Manifest v3.

uBO is a Manifest v2 extension, hence the warning in your Google Chrome browser. There is no Manifest v3 version of uBO, hence the browser will suggest alternative extensions as a replacement for uBO

uBO Lite (uBOL) is a pared-down version of uBO with a best effort at converting filter lists used by uBO into a Manifest v3-compliant approach, with a focus on reliability and efficiency as has been the case with uBO since first published in June 2014…

Manifest v2 uBO will not be automatically replaced by Manifest v3 uBOL. uBOL is too different from uBO for it to silently replace uBO — you will have to explicitly make a choice as to which extension should replace uBO according to your own prerogatives…

* I will wait until v3 is mandatory.
* I don’t see myself switching to Firefox which will continue to support v2.

4 users thanked author for this post.

Deo, Morty, Cybertooth, Lars220

Reply | Quote

Just sharing some information about the Brave browser:

What Manifest V3 means for Brave Shields and the use of extensions in the Brave browser
Brave browser Blog  –  June 27, 2024

“… For as long as we’re able (and assuming the cooperation of the extension authors), Brave will continue to support some privacy-relevant MV2 extensions — specifically AdGuard, NoScript, uBlock Origin, and uMatrix. Brave Shields block ads and trackers by default, and they’re built natively in the Brave browser — no extensions required. Since Shields are patched directly onto the open-source Chromium codebase, they don’t rely on MV2 or MV3. Thanks to this independence, Google’s forced removal of MV2 will not weaken Brave Shields. – – we have a robust process for customizing (or “patching”) atop the open-source Chromium engine. This will allow us to offer limited MV2 support even after it’s fully removed from the upstream Chromium codebase.”

Amazing Truths Revealed: Link to Simply Magnificent AskWoody Knowledge Bases

4 users thanked author for this post.

GeeBeeDee, Toa Of Justice, Alex5723, Cybertooth

Reply | Quote

Lars220 wrote:

specifically AdGuard, NoScript, uBlock Origin, and uMatrix…This will allow us to offer limited MV2 support even after it’s fully removed from the upstream Chromium codebase

Providing developers will continue to update v2 extensions.

Reply | Quote