[HOME] [DOWNLOAD] [DOCS] [NEWS] [SUPPORT] [TIPS] [ISSUES] [DONATE]

Installing UBlock origin by default inside Whonix-Tor browser?

i was thinking to add an open source adblocker inside Tor browser - Whonix which will make the browsing more sufficient/secure. it is called UBlock origin.

Tails adding adblocker plus to its TBB , this is not recommended to do the same with whonix because adblocker plus allowing some non-intrusive ads (which is in way or another not a good sign to start with).

please read this page from adblocker plus main site:- https://adblockplus.org/en/about

why UBlock origin is better ? for two main reasons:-

1- their policies

2- its efficiency

Good day,

while I myself love uBlock and have been using it for over a year now, I’m not sure whether adding it to the TBB would really make sense or be feasible. First and foremost, at the moment the TBB seems to be downloaded directly from the servers of the Tor project, not from another central place, which means that if an adblocker of any kind would be to be included, without being a part of the TBB, this would have to be changed. This also means, that someone would have to maintain this browser. Personally, I’m using the JondoFox browser, by Jondonym over the TBB, as it is far easier to customise. It also comes with an adblocker, though again, it’s ABP, not uBlock or some other open solution. Adding to all of this, we need to ask ourself the question whether adding an adblocker would be necessary. Cookies get cleared after every session, NoScript actually blocks 99% of all ads, as well as tracking methods and thanks to the newly added sliders in TBB 5, choosing your level of security is easier then ever. Also, the newest versions of Firefox include a new private mode so “advanced”, pretty much any ad gets blocked, because of its tracking nature.

However, all of this is only my opinion and you may feel completely different,

Ego

TBB upstream ticket:
Add AdBlock Plus to the TBB
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/10914

Tor Browser modifications are hard and fragile development and maintenance wise. Inherited by the nature on how TBB is distributed. The absence of a proper deb package.

Also the browser fingerprint would differ from TBB and that’s no great standpoint to defend.

Good day,

the ticket appears to, at least for me, already have been closed. Not sure on the reason though. Someone recommended uBlock, but the whole ticket then got set to wontfix and in the end closed. The fingerprint argument is also a pretty good one. I’m guessing in one of the next releases (maybe TBB 6) the improvements of the new private mode in newer versions of FF will be applied for the TBB in general, thus making an adblocker redundant.

Have a nice day,

Ego

i dont have way too different views , but if that so, why would Tails developers add it to their TBB ?

plus you can for example watch videos and you dont have ads inside the page with ublock/ADP but you cant do this with noscript (except if you allow the page temporally which is not a good alternative solution).

Tor Browser modifications are hard and fragile development and maintenance wise. Inherited by the nature on how TBB is distributed. The absence of a proper deb package.

yeah i c.

Also the browser fingerprint would differ from TBB and that’s no great standpoint to defend.

why didnt Tails developers afraid of this ?

The reason for upstream rejecting the the following.

We won’t ship AdBlock plus, see: ​https://www.torproject.org/projects/torbrowser/design/#philosophy section 5 No Filters.

Quote

No filters

Site-specific or filter-based addons such as AdBlock Plus, Request Policy, Ghostery, Priv3, and Sharemenot are to be avoided. We believe that these addons do not add any real privacy to a proper implementation of the above privacy requirements, and that development efforts should be focused on general solutions that prevent tracking by all third parties, rather than a list of specific URLs or hosts.

Filter-based addons can also introduce strange breakage and cause usability nightmares, and will also fail to do their job if an adversary simply registers a new domain or creates a new URL path. Worse still, the unique filter sets that each user creates or installs will provide a wealth of fingerprinting targets.

As a general matter, we are also generally opposed to shipping an always-on Ad blocker with Tor Browser. We feel that this would damage our credibility in terms of demonstrating that we are providing privacy through a sound design alone, as well as damage the acceptance of Tor users by sites that support themselves through advertising revenue.

Users are free to install these addons if they wish, but doing so is not recommended, as it will alter the browser request fingerprint.

then after that they added to TBB inside Tails ?! thats weird …

but i think because Tails is amnesic so ADP fingerprints wont effect the users ?

https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/8665

As the “AdBlock Plus in Tails’ Tor Browser” thread on tails-dev@ showed, the only reasons we have to remove it are pretty weak currently (mostly due to remaining fingerprinting issues in Tor Browser itself), and we prefer to keep it as a political stance about what the Internet should(n’t) be.

Being amnesic doesn’t change browser fingerprint.

Good day,

the problem here wouldn’t be the “leftovers” on the disk, but rather the ever so famous canvas fingerprinting, which is a collection of tracking methods, based on “how you stick out of the crowd”. You may check it using the following link: https://panopticlick.eff.org/ This all together makes it easier for websites to track your behaviour. My guess would be that the team behind Tails thought that, since a lot of people use their OS, the “uniqueness” would fade away rather quickly, as more and more people use the TBB in combination with ABP. They themselves seem to believe that fingerprinting would be a minor issue, if that ticket is anything to go by, though personally, I’d object.

Have a nice day,

Ego

yeah in this case then we r making more progress in anonymity. i wonder if we can add this as a feature for whonix side in comparison to Tails.

The fingerprint is already added under Web fingerprint here:

[Imprint] [Privacy Policy] [Cookie Policy] [Terms of Use] [E-Sign Consent] [DMCA] [Investors] [Priority Support] [Professional Support]