Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Proposes Changes To Chromium Browser That Will Break Content-Blocking Extensions, Including Various Ad Blockers

Posted by BeauHD on from the cease-and-desist dept.

"Google engineers have proposed changes to the open-source Chromium browser that will break content-blocking extensions, including various ad blockers," reports The Register. "The drafted changes will also limit the capabilities available to extension developers, ostensibly for the sake of speed and safety. Chromium forms the central core of Google Chrome, and, soon, Microsoft Edge." From the report: In a note posted Tuesday to the Chromium bug tracker, Raymond Hill, the developer behind uBlock Origin and uMatrix, said the changes contemplated by the Manifest v3 proposal will ruin his ad and content blocking extensions, and take control of content away from users. Manifest v3 refers to the specification for browser extension manifest files, which enumerate the resources and capabilities available to browser extensions. Google's stated rationale for making the proposed changes is to improve security, privacy and performance, and supposedly to enhance user control.

But one way Google would like to achieve these goals involves replacing the webRequest API with a new one, declarativeNetRequest. The webRequest API allows extensions to intercept network requests, so they can be blocked, modified, or redirected. This can cause delays in web page loading because Chrome has to wait for the extension. In the future, webRequest will only be able to read network requests, not modify them. The declarativeNetRequest allows Chrome (rather than the extension itself) to decide how to handle network requests, thereby removing a possible source of bottlenecks and a potentially useful mechanism for changing browser behavior. The report notes that Adblock Plus "should still be available" since "Google and other internet advertising networks apparently pay Adblock Plus to whitelist their online adverts."

5 of 334 comments (clear)

  1. Calling the DOJ... by Etcetera · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If the DOJ (no particular friend of Big Tech in this Administration) wanted an excuse to probe Google with the FTC for some anti-trust discovery, this would be a quick ticket.

    The world's dominant browser requiring that the world's dominant ad network always be displayed would be a wonderful reason to force a divestiture of one or the other (or, preferably, split everything up into components).

    --
    Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
  2. It's almost like... a monopoly? by locater16 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Wow, the company that makes 90% of the its profits from advertising is trying to use the open source projects it near controls, that has a near monopoly on web browsers now... to stop adblockers from existing...

    It's a coincidence surely. *Hugs Firefox*

    1. Re:It's almost like... a monopoly? by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is a moral imperative to use ad blocking. Ads incentivize the wrong kinds of content to be created: things like click-bait and fake news.

      Even if you don't think ads are immoral, you should still use ad block as a practical matter: malware can be served to you from all the major ad networks, so if you don't want to be hacked, use ad-block.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  3. Re:In the future ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Increasing browser speed by forcing you to download slow loading video ads

  4. Re:Use the source, Luke... by r1348 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Or, you know, just use Firefox.