• @vintageballs@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    Deutsch
    6416 hours ago

    Probably due to automatic extension reviews by Mozilla.

    Sad that it happened, but at least it doesn’t impact the actual uBlock, only the lite version for which I honestly see no purpose in Firefox anyways.

    • Virkkunen
      link
      fedilink
      7316 hours ago

      It was a manual review conducted by an actual person that in the end admitted they were wrong

        • @eRac
          link
          17 hours ago

          The dev stated that it mostly exists for more performance-limited applications like mobile.

      • Obinice
        link
        fedilink
        813 hours ago

        I thought that was the shit Chrome was doing to block adblockers and antimalware plugins, if Firefox is doing the same thing what browser do we use now? :-(

        I don’t care about all the browser wars stuff, I lost interest when it was Netscape Vs IE, I just want a browser that I can configure fully myself and have it be as safe and secure as one can make it, within reason.

        • @abbenm@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          17 hours ago

          I thought that was the shit Chrome was doing to block adblockers and antimalware plugins, if Firefox is doing the same thing what browser do we use now? :-(

          They’re doing a modified version of V3 that they changed to restore ad-blocking functionality.

        • @pmk@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          312 hours ago

          If we want to do something radically different, there’s always gopher and gemini browsers.

    • Aatube
      link
      fedilink
      211 hours ago

      Theoretically, the browser executes the Mv3 blocking rules, so it could be optimized and more efficient than js ever could.