- This topic has 21 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated Feb 13-12:28 am by andfree.
-
Posts
-
andfree
At the Control Center, there’s a list of advert blocking services and I don’t know how many and which of them I should choose. I also don’t know if I should combine them with a browser adblocking add-on. Any help, please?
- This topic was modified 5 years, 4 months ago by andfree.
Anonymous
At the links below, you can view the contents of each of the lists
and can read “from the horse’s mouth” the list maintainer’s description / explanation of what a given list contains“mvps” list: http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.txt
^—–} description is here http://winhelp2002.mvps.org“someonwhocares” list: http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/hosts
^—–} description is here http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/“yoyo” list: http://pgl.yoyo.org/adservers/serverlist.php?hostformat=hosts&showintro=0&mimetype=plaintext
^—–} description is here: http://pgl.yoyo.org/adservers/“adservers hosts” list: h t t p: / / hosts-file.net/ad_servers.asp
not hyperlinked in this post b/c it is a looooooong list (if loaded into a web browser, the browser may stall/crash)
^—–} description is here: http://hosts-file.net/edit:
(checked Jan 9, 2018) activating all 4 blocklists results in a 2.6MB /etc/hosts file, containing 75,589 entries
=======================additional info, toward serving as a “Documentation” topic:
the source code for the “advert-block” utility presented within the antiX ControlCenter
(and provided via “advert-block-antix” debfile package)
can be downloaded from (or browsed online) here: https://github.com/antiX-Linux/advert-block-antixdon’t know if I should combine them with a browser adblocking add-onThere’s no one-size-fits-all definitive answer in regard to “should”.
Personally, overall, I regard “blocking via hosts file” as a futile, tail-chasing exercise.
Consider:• Malvertisers / scammers have a virtually infinite domain namespace to work with.
Blocking effectiveness relegates the blocklist maintainer to continually playing whack-a-mole ~~ trying to keep up with new and ever-changing hostnames.• The host file is loaded into, resides in, RAM. On a low-spec machine, the added overhead from a bloated hosts file (after “subscribing to” various lists which, cumulatively, span 100k+ hostfile entries)… may push your system past the tipping point, necessitating use of slooooow swapfile virtual memory. edit: specific to using only the 4 blocklists provided via adblock-antix, SamK’s post, below, indicates the overhead has never been observed to be problematic.
• The advert-block tool employs “generalized” lists ~~ lists which the well-meaning list maintainer(s) hope will be useful to you. Although I’ve seldom (never?) noticed any “false positives” within the yoyo list — across the span of a decade now — within several lists I’ve found certain “advertising” blocklist entries with which I did not agree, did not wish to block. Any user who doesn’t know where to look (in order to comment out, aka unblock), to selectively customize the hosts file… can wind up becoming a confused and unhappy camper.
Yes, I do find merit in using one (or all, of the smaller 3) of the lists available via advert-block-antiX. Just bear in mind that their coverage (only 75k worst-offender hostnames) is far from comprehensive.
• each destination blocked via hosts file is blocked across-the-board ~~ for all applications, all schemes (protocols)
=============
further reading:
malwaredomains.com (source of additional blocklists)
wilderssecurity.com (large, longstanding forum w/ subforums dedicated to discussing “privacy” and “security” issues)
ghacks.net (blogsite, articles+commentary re web browsers + addons + privacy + security)
=============regarding “browser adblocking / privacy add-ons”:
My focus is toward defending privacy. Adblocking (tracking) is an overlapping concern, along with “security/malware”.
In terms of effectiveness, add-on(s) which enable a Default Deny (then selectively whitelist) approach are meritworthy.
Conversely, add-ons which employ blacklisting (“Decentraleyes”, etc.) are merely “easy-peasy to use, feelgood” non-ideal substitutes.I use (yet do not often “recommend”) RequestPolicyContinued firefox addon.
Its comfortable use requires a bit of fiddling / tweaking / setup (as does uBlockOrigin).
I have used AdblockEdge (moreso in conjunction with “Element Hiding Helper” than for its host blocking), and would mention a caveat ~~ same as I mentioned about “bloated hosts file size” ~~ fourfold. Not only does the addon’s blocklist content consume ram (in my usage, after subscribing to multiple lists: twenty-two megabytes), by default it is configured to save-to-disk 4 copies of its datafile (current, plus prior 3 as backups). Further, “all of that” gets re-written each time you edit any of its blocklist rules. In short, it isn’t well-suited to use in a liveboot + toram scenario.Use of the aforementioned, and similar, browser add-ons still does not achieve comprehensive “protection”.
(might followup to further discuss this point in a separate topic)Many thanks for all this info. I’m afraid it was an omission of mine that I didn’t say that my main goal is improving performance for low-spec machines (0,5 to 1 gb RAM & old cpu). So, I think that this point is of big relevance with my case:
The host file is loaded into, resides in, RAM. On a low-spec machine, the added overhead from a bloated hosts file (after “subscribing to” various lists which, cumulatively, span 100k+ hostfile entries)… may push your system past the tipping point, necessitating use of slooooow swapfile virtual memory.
So, the question is how to take benefit from adblocking without creating problems like this.
As regards add-ons, defending privacy is of-course a significant focus, but the performance of the system is again the main one. So, although I don’t use liveboot, I think I have to take somehow into account this point:
Not only does the addon’s blocklist content consume ram (in my usage, after subscribing to multiple lists: twenty-two megabytes), by default it is configured to save-to-disk 4 copies of its datafile (current, plus prior 3 as backups). Further, “all of that” gets re-written each time you edit any of its blocklist rules. In short, it isn’t well-suited to use in a liveboot + toram scenario.
Moreover, I seldom use firefox lately, but I mostly use pale moon, exactly because of the low-spec machines I use.
- This reply was modified 5 years, 4 months ago by andfree.
So, the question is how to take benefit from adblocking without creating problems like this.Unless it’s a really low-spec machine, the overhead may not problematic.
Take a baseline measurement.
Launch advert-block and activate the 3 (mvps + yoyo + someonwhocares) blocklists. reboot. Take a measurement.
Launch advert-block and activate the 4th blocklist. reboot. Take a measurement.
Compare the results (and hopefully you’ll post to share them).Take a baseline measurement.
This means to use htop and write down the RAM usage?
Launch advert-block and activate the 3 (mvps + yoyo + someonwhocares) blocklists. reboot..
After rebooting, the blocklists seem to be inactivated again. I mean they appear again unclicked in the Control Center list.
SamK
…my main goal is improving performance for low-spec machines (0,5 to 1 gb RAM & old cpu). So, I think that this point is of big relevance with my case:
The host file is loaded into, resides in, RAM. On a low-spec machine, the added overhead from a bloated hosts file (after “subscribing to” various lists which, cumulatively, span 100k+ hostfile entries)… may push your system past the tipping point, necessitating use of slooooow swapfile virtual memory.
So, the question is how to take benefit from adblocking without creating problems like this.
…I don’t use liveboot, I think I have to take somehow into account this point:
…I mostly use pale moon, exactly because of the low-spec machines I use.
Over the years I have run antiX on many different old low spec systems, with RAM ranging from 0.5GB to 1GB. antiX Adblock is always used on them. The prospect of performance being reduced by the use of Adblock has never been observed. If you are concerned that using Adblock might possibly invite the use of swapspace, then zram swapspace works at the speed of your RAM rather than the speed of your hard disk.
In my real world usage, the improved performance of web browsing when using Adblock far outweighs the unrealized concern of increased swapping.
A couple of ideas…
Adblock can be switched on and off as you desire, see the UNBLOCK tick box in its GUI. This might be used to enable blocking only when you want to web browse, and leave it unloaded when it will serve no purpose.
There might be value in using more than one web browser to obtain the performance strengths of each, depending upon the task you want to perform. Think of it this way, would you expect a surgeon to perform an operation using a scalpel or a dinner knife used to eat a meal. Your choice of software and the way in which you use it can pay big dividends.
Adblock can be switched on and off as you desire, see the UNBLOCK tick box in its GUI. This might be used to enable blocking only when you want to web browse, and leave it unloaded when it will serve no purpose.
This means to unclick the UNBLOCK tick box every time I want to web browse? But it’s already unclicked by default.
There might be value in using more than one web browser to obtain the performance strengths of each, depending upon the task you want to perform.
That’s what I want to do, but I don’t know all the merits of each one. I sometimes use dillo for simple reading text usage (I also know it’s well-combined with streamlight for videos, but I haven’t tested this yet) and firefox for some kind of e-payments. Pale moon seems to me as an option that combines speed and functionality in the most cases, but I would like I could be more flexible.
This means to unclick the UNBLOCK tick box every time I want to web browse? But it’s already unclicked by default.
Actually it is the the opposite of that action that is needed. Ticking UNBLOCK reverts to an empty hosts file i.e. one which contains no references to adservers. When you tick any of the adserver blocking services their list is added to the hosts file. So in both cases the tick instigates the action.
That’s what I want to do, but I don’t know all the merits of each one.
When working with old kit there is usually not one single answer to suit all cases. It is often a case of being willing to explore lots of alternatives. Just be clear what you are looking for before you set out. Everyone’s wants, expectations, and working patterns, are different, so what suits them is different. Maintain the flexible outlook and the willingness to change where it is needed that you have already demonstrated and you are likely to find an acceptable outcome.
Adblock can be switched on and off as you desire, see the UNBLOCK tick box in its GUI. This might be used to enable blocking only when you want to web browse, and leave it unloaded when it will serve no purpose.
Ticking UNBLOCK reverts to an empty hosts file i.e. one which contains no references to adservers. When you tick any of the adserver blocking services their list is added to the hosts file. So in both cases the tick instigates the action.
So, ticking UNBLOCK disables all ones of the four blocking services I’ve already ticked? And rebooting is no needed to enable the unblock service? And what about the blocking services? Because after every rebooting, they seem to be all non-ticked.
So, ticking UNBLOCK disables all ones of the four blocking services I’ve already ticked? And rebooting is no needed to enable the unblock service? And what about the blocking services? Because after every rebooting, they seem to be all non-ticked.
The tick does not indicate the saved state of your choices. It indicates only the action that will be performed when you click the OK button. The tick is shown until you have conducted an action (or close the Adblock GUI). Once that is done the the tick will no longer be displayed and the box will be empty.
Ticking the UNBLOCK item and clicking OK removes the blocking provided by all blocking services i.e. blocking of adservers is no longer performed.
A reboot is not required to implement a change of Adblock state. If a web browser is open when making a change of state it must be closed and restarted.
The tick does not indicate the saved state of your choices.
You’re right, now I see that the saved state of my choices is indicated by the contents of the /etc/hosts file.
Take a baseline measurement.
Well, I’m not sure what exactly I had to do, but with Pale Moon opened to this conversation, htop shows 132-168MB used RAM (from a total of 500MB).
Launch advert-block and activate the 3 (mvps + yoyo + someonwhocares) blocklists. reboot. Take a measurement.
126-169MB used.
Launch advert-block and activate the 4th blocklist. reboot. Take a measurement.
127-167MB used.
Compare the results (and hopefully you’ll post to share them).
The results are similar. Does this indicate that the big hostfile doesn’t create problems to my system?
anticapitalista
Yes, the big host file is not causing problems to your system.
Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.
antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.
Many thanks to all of you for helping me.
> > > This means to unclick the UNBLOCK tick box every time I want to web browse? But it’s already unclicked by default.
Actually it is the the opposite of that action that is needed. Ticking UNBLOCK reverts to an empty hosts file i.e. one which contains no references to adservers. When you tick any of the adserver blocking services their list is added to the hosts file. So in both cases the tick instigates the action.
☣
Ouch, that UI is a bit confusing. I’ll describe it differently (avoiding use of the word “opposite”)
Each time the UI is presented and a “choice” is submitted: https://github.com/antiX-Linux/advert-block-antix/blob/master/block-advert.sh#L199
If choice is “unblock”, the backup copy of original hosts file is restored.
Otherwise, for each item which is (this run, this submission) checkmarked, download a fresh copy of its associated blocklist… and merge/sort the content from the currently-selected blocklists into a new /etc/hosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
