Google proceeding with adblocker-crippling V3 changes unless you pay

https://9to5google.com/2019/05/29/chrome-ad-blocking-enterprise-manifest-v3/

Google are going ahead with the Chromium changes they proposed earlier in the year to cripple adblockers because they’re in the advertising business and not the ‘let’s keep the nerds happy’ business. Enterprise customers excluded.

Conversation 27 comments

  • jedwards87

    30 May, 2019 - 8:24 am

    <p>Yup. Google is an advertising company first and a tech company second.</p>

    • MikeGalos

      31 May, 2019 - 11:20 am

      <blockquote><em><a href="#431529">In reply to jedwards87:</a></em></blockquote><p>No. Google is an advertising company first and an advertising company second and third and fourth and fifth. Everything else is several places further down.</p>

  • Daekar

    30 May, 2019 - 9:26 am

    <p>Eh, there goes half their heavily-evangelizing userbase. If they cripple adblocking, I will never use Chrome as a primary browser again. </p>

  • klhyvcfxe2 vtni56y

    30 May, 2019 - 9:52 am

    <p>So I'm curious as to what the revenue breakdown is for various types of ads, if anyone has some insight. Because for me, I don't mind 'normal' ads. I'll gladly disable my ad blockers for someone's site as long as they don't do two things: move (blinking, covering parts of the content, any movement whatsoever) and play audio. You can show me 20 ads that don't do that, but if you show me one with movement or audio, I'm blocking things.</p><p><br></p><p>I still run an extension that blocks all audio unless I specifically allow it (Chrome's recent updates in this area don't work) &amp; I run multiple blockers on Chrome. I assume that the pay on the moving/audio ones is comparatively huge, but I'd love to see the numbers.</p><p><br></p>

  • Paul Thurrott

    Premium Member
    30 May, 2019 - 10:28 am

    <p>Google has listened to your feedback. And will now do what it wanted to do in the first place.</p>

    • MikeGalos

      31 May, 2019 - 12:55 pm

      <blockquote><em><a href="#431606">In reply to paul-thurrott:</a></em></blockquote><p>This seems like a story that deserves front page coverage.</p>

  • coeus89

    Premium Member
    30 May, 2019 - 10:53 am

    <p>I didn't have a reason to leave chrome before the new edge, but now i do. I religiously use ublock origin. I install it on my parents and siblings PCs. It is my understanding that this would cripple that extension. I know it is too early to tell but i hope chredge un-does this.</p>

    • AnOldAmigaUser

      Premium Member
      30 May, 2019 - 12:30 pm

      <blockquote><em><a href="#431642">In reply to coeus89:</a></em></blockquote><p>I use Hostmans to install a modified hosts file that directs most ad tracking addresses to 0.0.0.0, in addition to an ublock origin (belt and suspenders.)</p>

      • coeus89

        Premium Member
        30 May, 2019 - 1:14 pm

        <blockquote><em><a href="#431676">In reply to AnOldAmigaUser:</a></em></blockquote><p>I will definitely check out Hostmans. The thing is i don't fundamentally have a problem with advertising. I want to pay for the content i view. But advertising severely slows down a lot of pages, is often intrusive (i'm looking at you autoplay videos and overlays), and can/has been a vector for malware. so i only unblock on sites i trust.</p>

        • AnOldAmigaUser

          Premium Member
          30 May, 2019 - 2:42 pm

          <blockquote><em><a href="#431692">In reply to coeus89:</a></em></blockquote><p>Unfortunately, Hostmans does not allow unblocking, unless you find the specific entries and comment them out for a while. I do that sometimes for my wife when there is a groupon or something she actually wants to use.</p><p>If the ads were just ads, I would not have any issues. The problem is that online ads and the supporting infrastructure is that it is, as you say, a vector for malware. What bothers me the most, is that before I got aggressive about blocking, the ads were no more relevant than if they were flipping a coin.</p>

      • wright_is

        Premium Member
        31 May, 2019 - 3:22 pm

        <blockquote><em><a href="#431676">In reply to AnOldAmigaUser:</a></em></blockquote><p>I use a pi-hole. It runs as a secure DNS server for the whole network. You don't need to configure every device individually.</p><p>Of course it only works on your network, if you are out and about it will not work. </p>

        • infloop

          Premium Member
          01 June, 2019 - 12:11 am

          <blockquote><em><a href="#432214">In reply to wright_is:</a></em></blockquote><p><br></p><p>Yep, Pi-hole is great as well. I use it with Quad9 as forwarders.</p><p><br></p><p>For outside the home, I use VPN on my iPhone to connect back to the home network using IKEv2 and certificates via strongSwan/Ubuntu running on Hyper-V Server. Another option is OpenVPN, and there is a guide to setting it up on the Pi-hole docs.</p>

  • codymesh

    30 May, 2019 - 11:06 am

    <p>i'm a bit of a n00b, so can someone explain to be if this is a change to the manifest of chrome extensions in particular, or is it a change to the chromium project?</p>

  • AnOldAmigaUser

    Premium Member
    30 May, 2019 - 12:20 pm

    <p>So, how is this going to effect Chredge? From the article…</p><p class="ql-indent-1"><em style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Google is essentially saying that Chrome will still have the capability to block unwanted content, but this will be restricted to only paid, enterprise users of Chrome. This is likely to allow enterprise customers to develop in-house Chrome extensions, not for ad blocking usage.</em></p><p><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">…will Microsoft have access to the enterprise version and, therefore, be able to continue allowing ad-blockers?</span></p><p><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Since it is not in Google's financial interests to allow ad-blocking in their own browser, I cannot imagine that they are going to allow another firm; one which controls the desktop, to build the same browser with the ability to allow ad-blocking.</span></p>

    • coeus89

      Premium Member
      30 May, 2019 - 1:16 pm

      <blockquote><em><a href="#431672">In reply to AnOldAmigaUser:</a></em></blockquote><p>It is unclear to me if this is part of chrome or chromium. But the answer could affect Chredge if it is chromium. I think we just have to wait for a comment from Microsoft.</p>

  • dcdevito

    30 May, 2019 - 2:46 pm

    <p>I’ve moved onto (the new) Edge and haven’t looked back. </p>

    • anderb

      Premium Member
      30 May, 2019 - 6:26 pm

      <blockquote><em><a href="#431722">In reply to dcdevito:</a></em></blockquote><p>Edge will getting the same changes unless MS forks the code. I would love to see MS do this but I bet they don't.</p>

  • hrlngrv

    Premium Member
    30 May, 2019 - 3:21 pm

    <p>So if I continue to use Firefox I won't have to care what Google does?</p>

    • anderb

      Premium Member
      30 May, 2019 - 6:22 pm

      <blockquote><em><a href="#431728">In reply to hrlngrv:</a></em></blockquote><p>Unless Google link their continued funding of the Mozilla organization to implementing similar changes in Firefox.</p>

  • Patrick3D

    30 May, 2019 - 3:42 pm

    <p>Details from from the article:</p><p><br></p><p>"For the rest of us, Google hasn’t budged on their changes to content blockers, meaning that ad blockers will need to switch to a less effective, rules-based system. This system is how blockers like AdBlock Plus currently work.</p><p>One of the original concerns of switching to this system was the fact that Chrome currently&nbsp;<a href="https://developers.chrome.com/extensions/declarativeNetRequest#properties&quot; target="_blank" style="color: rgb(0, 116, 19);">imposes a limit</a>&nbsp;of 30,000 rules, while popular ad blocking rules lists like&nbsp;<a href="https://easylist.to/&quot; target="_blank" style="color: rgb(0, 116, 19);">EasyList</a>&nbsp;use upwards of 75,000 rules. In the response, Google claims that they’re looking to increase this number, depending on performance tests, but couldn’t commit to anything specific."</p><blockquote><em>We are planning to raise these values but we won’t have updated numbers until we can run performance tests to find a good upper bound that will work across all supported devices.</em></blockquote><p><br></p>

  • Bdsrev

    30 May, 2019 - 11:10 pm

    <p>Just switch to Firefox, Firefox is just as good these days and it's only getting better (WebRender is starting to roll out). Plus Firefox for Android lets you use uBlock Origin!</p>

  • TheJoeFin

    Premium Member
    31 May, 2019 - 1:58 pm

    <p>This change is happening to the Extension Platform in Chrome. Microsoft's new Edge already has some unique stuff around extensions (like being able to use extensions from old Edge via the Microsoft Store) I wonder if it will continue to work. Otherwise I can see these ad-blockers going a level deeper and blocking servers which serve ads on a OS level. </p><p><br></p><p>Either way this will be interesting to see how the new Edge is affected and how Google's reputation among developers shifts.</p>

    • infloop

      Premium Member
      31 May, 2019 - 11:51 pm

      <blockquote><em><a href="#432147">In reply to TheJoeFin:</a></em></blockquote><p><br></p><p>"Otherwise I can see these ad-blockers going a level deeper and blocking servers which serve ads on a OS level."</p><p><br></p><p>It sounds like you are referring to something like using the hosts file or DNS to block domains. Which works, up to a point. There are sites like YouTube that now serve ads from the same servers as the content, so that's why the browser blockers like uBlock Origin are important.</p><p><br></p><p>I am currently using Firefox with uBlock Origin and Privacy Badger, and the port of uBlock Origin for Safari. On iOS, it's not as good, but I have Firefox Focus with the Safari Content Blockers integration on.</p>

  • bpech

    Premium Member
    05 July, 2019 - 7:17 pm

    <p>Take a look a the Brave browser…it seems to have all this ad blocking capability baked in.</p>

  • Dan1986ist

    Premium Member
    06 July, 2019 - 10:24 am

    <p>Are there multiple confirmed sources concerning what 9to5google is reporting here or they just the only one so far? Or will there just be a bunch of copy and pasting without verifying the accuracy of the information first? </p>

  • Lordbaal

    06 July, 2019 - 1:40 pm

    <p>With the new Edge, this wouldn't be a problem. </p>

  • Bats

    06 July, 2019 - 3:40 pm

    <p>Perfectly fine. Sounds reasonable to me. This will also keep content providers happy as well and assure that Google and it's Chrome browser will continue to be the standard in web browsing. Being that Microsoft and it's Edge product is wholly dependent on Chrome technologies, they probably need to be worried. Chrome will continue to evolve along and take YouTube, Gmail, YouTube TV, etc…. with it, leaving Credge users kinda/sorta at the mercy of the flagship browser. </p><p><br></p><p>I am glad ANDERB got it right when he said that Google is the advertising business and NOT an advertising company, which would be a misleading statement. That's because Google is data company. You can access data for free or pay for it ( ala G Suite). Either/or…..one still will have access to the Google's world class products. </p><p><br></p><p>However, if people really want to block the five (5) advertising banners on Thurrott.com , I guess it's perfectly fine. I would say six (6), but I am not counting Thurrott.com's ad for the Premium Membership.</p>

Newsletter

Stay up to date with the latest tech news from Thurrott.com!

"*" indicates required fields

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Thurrott © 2023 BWW Media Group