#UBLOCK ORIGIN CHROME MAC#
(Not the Apache included with the Mac I installed another one separately.) It took me quite a lot of time to figure out, but I learned a lot of interesting things in the process.
#UBLOCK ORIGIN CHROME MANUAL#
How I know this isn’t even related to blocking anything: when I set up my local web-development server (Apache), for multiple websites that I work on, I used a somewhat unusual manual technique. (That’s in addition to having 1.1.1.1 as my preferred DNS provider at the MacOS system level.)īut I also have a custom hosts file, and I know for a fact it IS working. In Firefox Preferences, under Network Settings, I have “Enable DNS over HTTPS” checked, along with the default in the popup menu, “Use Provider / Cloudflare (Default)”. People have said this here before, but is it really true? Maybe on Windows… even there can somebody confirm this? Because on my Mac it’s _not_ true. “Hosts, yes….but not if you switch to DoH.
Now You: What is your take on the development?
#UBLOCK ORIGIN CHROME UPDATE#
While it is certainly possible that the stable extension update would be allowed by Google, it seems more likely that it will be rejected as well by the company. It is impossible to know why the extension was rejected from the Chrome Web Store unless Google would provide further information on the issue. The latest version of the extension is available for many major browsers including Mozilla Firefox and other Chromium-based web browsers. Hill recommends that users find another browser that continues to support uBlock Origin if they want to continue using the extension. Since the next uBO release will essentially be what 1.22.5rc2 is, consider that uBO is probably coming to an end of life in the Chrome Web Store - there is no good reason to believe uBO 1.22.5rc2 would no longer be rejected with only changing the version number to 1.23.0. While there is still the chance that it will go through, it is more likely that it too will be rejected by Google and that this could effectively end uBlock Origin for Google Chrome. The main issue with the rejection is that the next stable version of the extension will be more or less identical to the rejected developer version.
The developer version of the extension is used by fewer users than the stable version which means that the rejection does not affect the bulk of users of the extension yet. No point speculating one way or another, my experience with the CWS in the past is that we will never know why it was labelled "REJECTED", they never disclose the exact "why". Hill, a long-time developer, had no illusions that Google would provide actionable information about the rejection. The email provides no information on the actual violation other than that, a practice that Google has been criticized for in the past. In an email to the developer, Google stated that the extension violated one of the Chrome Store's policies that prohibits the bundling of unrelated functionality in extensions.
Developers upload new extension versions to the Chrome Web Store to replace existing versions Google runs automated scans of these tools and may also look at the uploaded extensions manually before allowing or rejecting them. Raymond Hill (gorhill), the developer of uBlock Origin revealed recently that Google rejected a new developer version of the extension. Update: uBlock Origin Dev is now available again on the Chrome Web Store. Google changed some parameters after it faced heavy user and developer criticism but did not revert the course completely. The new manifest file for Chrome extensions could end extensions like uBlock Origin for the web browser.
0 kommentar(er)
