Firefox is now the last major browser that still supports uBlock Origin(www.pcworld.com)
312 pointsby DemiGuru5 hours ago30 comments
  • GeekyBear2 hours ago
    Firefox is also the only browser that vets uBlock's code on every update to make sure the developer hasn't inserted spyware or malware into the extension.

    They don't do it for every extension, but they do so for a wide selection of popular options.

    > Recommended extensions differ from other extensions that are regularly reviewed by Firefox staff in that they are curated extensions that meet the highest standards of security, functionality and user experience. After receiving Recommended status, safety standards are maintained through automated checks, monitoring, and periodic technical reviews

    https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/recommended-extensions-...

    • gurjeet6 minutes ago
      Complete, authoritative list of Firefox extensions officially recommended by Mozilla.

      https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/search/?promoted=re...

      Some quite informative discussion on Firefox subreddit when I discovered and posted the above list there a few months ago.

      https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/1pyvx2v/complete_a...

      The Recommended Extensions program description: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/recommended-extensions-...

    • big_toastan hour ago
      That's pretty cool. Thanks for pointing that out. I don't see where it says 'on every update' unless you're referring to the automated checks?

      I've always wished extensions had more granular permissions though (a la phones, but more so). I think automated ai security checks sound promising soon.

      • elashrian hour ago
        Automated checks are done for every extension on every update. But their recommend extensions they feature on the Extension store, they do other extensive checks for each update.
    • swed420an hour ago
      > Firefox is also the only browser that vets uBlock's code on every update to make sure the developer hasn't inserted spyware or malware into the extension.

      They could save themselves the trouble if Firefox simply baked in its own ad-blocking, but since Google basically owns them, we all know that will never happen.

      Ladybird browser is going to be awesome.

      • dralley21 minutes ago
        Websites already can barely be assed to care about supporting Firefox users, doing adblocking by default is a great way to get websites to start putting up banners that say "our website does not work with your browser, please switch to Chrome" en-masse.

        And Mozilla did develop anti-fingerprinting tech, but they can't enable it by default because it breaks lots of websites and when a website doesn't work they're not going to appreciate Mozilla for protecting them, they're going to be pissed that it doesn't work.

        • swed42012 minutes ago
          The level of mental gymnastics in this thread denying the extent to which companies like Google (and their puppets like Mozilla) control the internet is too damn high.

          Fortunately if projects like Ladybird gain enough momentum, websites might be forced to cater to it. Time will tell.

      • deweywsuan hour ago
        See, this is the kind of thing that makes Firefox cool. They have not only just as good of developer console tools as Chrome, they have forward thinking, truly user-oriented policies. They have had trouble in the recent past at securing funding, but something tells me their user philosophy might save them when all the others turn completely to corporate greed as their main operating mechanism (if they already haven't).
        • swed420an hour ago
          Your reply makes no sense. To the original point, if they had user-oriented policies, they'd have ad-blocking baked in by now. But they don't, and likely never will.
          • ruckcbekan hour ago
            You're absolutely right.
    • einpoklum19 minutes ago
      > Firefox is also the only browser that vets uBlock's code on every update to make sure the developer hasn't inserted spyware or malware into the extension.

      Why, are they worried it might interfere with the spyware they bake into Firefox themselves?

      https://www.howtogeek.com/557929/how-to-see-and-disable-the-...

  • avaer2 hours ago
    What's funny is that extensions were supposed to be a way to let you do the things the browser didn't want you to do. Guess that was a bit too much freedom for Google to accept, so they had to make a store with a gate, and destroy the APIs so that they're useless. Then they had to make up some reasons to justify that and ram it through the pipeline despite everyone's objections, and the frog got boiled.

    Now we're back to needing an actual extension system that does what extensions were supposed to do in the first place.

    • matheusmoreira2 hours ago
      > Then they had to make up some reasons to justify that

      Hate to be the one to defend Google here, but the reasons weren't that unreasonable. I want my browser to prevent random extensions from directly reading web page data. The declarative API idea is pretty good.

      It's just that uBlock Origin is so insanely useful, important and trusted, it should get full access to the entire browser regardless. Honestly, it should be literally built into the browser instead of being a mere extension. Only the conflicts of interest inherent in an ad company maintaining an ad blocker prevent that.

      • codedokodean hour ago
        Yes, but if you write your own extension maybe you want to read and modify the data. For example, patch fingerprinting script so that it gets the wrong result.

        Furthermore, malicious extension can read the data from the DOM, from forms (for example, password or credit card fields), and in some cases, from JS variables. They can insert fake information into the page. So preventing extensions from reading network data still leaves a lot of options for a malicious extension.

      • michaelt26 minutes ago
        > I want my browser to prevent random extensions from directly reading web page data.

        To be honest, to me it sounds like you don't want browser extensions then.

        To me, directly messing with web page data and browser behaviour is the whole point of a browser extension - what else is a browser extension for?

        • lxgr19 minutes ago
          Why should there not be a middle ground between “can do absolutely everything with all my data” and “is basically a glorified bookmark button” based on the level of trust I have for an extension?
      • bo1024an hour ago
        Of course it's tempting to reply "don't install random extensions". But a bigger point here is that browsers have grown so massively complex that it's almost impossible to build one, so we don't have an ecosystem where you can choose your browser for safety and I can choose mine for freedom. Of course, Google has had a big incentive and hand in making it this way.
      • radleyan hour ago
        > I want my browser to prevent random extensions...

        Why are you installing random extensions?

        • lxgr18 minutes ago
          Not GP, but sometimes I want my browser to do pretty random/niche things without that compromising all of my browsing data.
        • matheusmoreira44 minutes ago
          I'm not. The only extension I trust enough to install is uBlock Origin.
      • doctorpangloss19 minutes ago
        Nothing stops people from using a fork with manifest v2 support restored. In fact "VibeChrome" would probably be a successful product.
      • cmaan hour ago
        The Google Toolbar for Internet Explorer let users search Google directly from any webpage, block pop-up ads, autofill web forms, and highlight search terms. It also displayed PageRank metrics, translated foreign languages, checked spelling, and managed web bookmarks.
        • matheusmoreiraan hour ago
          Imagine the massive amount of data they must have harvested through it.
    • Gigachadan hour ago
      Browser extensions were also one of the biggest ways to distribute malware. The situation was genuinely horrific. Malware distributors would offer popular extension devs millions of dollars to buy the extension, then silently insert malware which gets auto deployed to millions of people.
      • underlipton16 minutes ago
        That sounds more like an issue with the update policies.
  • lxe3 minutes ago
    What's preventing anyone to just spend some tokens and bring it back and fork Chrome? I think ungoogled Chromium still supports it, right?
  • ivraatiemsan hour ago
    For those who use uBlock Origin Lite, have you noticed any issues/deficiencies in what ads are blocked? I haven't.
    • jimrandomh16 minutes ago
      I use Firefox with (non-lite) uBlock Origin, and occasionally fire up Chrome (with uBO Lite) for testing. The main issue that I run into is that uBO lite filters can't vary per-domain, so in order to rule out an ad-blocking-false-positive on something I'm developing, I have to turn it off for _all_ sites, not just localhost. (Actual false positives are rare, but needing to check is not so rare.)
  • system7rocksa minute ago
    And we must protect it at all costs.

    I love Firefox.

    We need more browsers like Firefox - more open source, more open to standards that improve the web, that can improve our browsing experience.

  • Animats2 hours ago
    Manifest 3 is why I finally shut down Sitetruth and Ad Limiter. Removing ads from Google Search is now possible only in Firefox.
    • raszan hour ago
      uBO still works in newest Vivaldi.
  • DavidPiper14 minutes ago
    Remember when Firefox was the first browser to have "tabbed browsing"?

    Obviously UBO isn't a first party feature - but if only Firefox could generate as much traction about ad blocking as they did with tabs.

  • 26 minutes ago
    undefined
  • mikeocool19 minutes ago
    Guess it was a bad idea for everyone to switch to a browser made by one of the world’s biggest advertising companies.
  • imagetican hour ago
    Support Firefox. F** Chrome.
  • ytoast42 minutes ago
    Are there any Chromium-based mod/plugin loaders out there? I mean something that uses the same DLL/SO hijacking or injection tricks game hackers use to build mod loaders, to expose a hooking layer for plugins.
  • Heidaradaran hour ago
    I've been using Firefox for over 6 years now and I've never regretted it.
    • sixtyjan hour ago
      20 years and counting. :)

      Thanks for every day that this browser works.

      Sometimes I had to test something in Chrome - and it’s painful experience.

      But it really depends on personal view - I have tried to convert my friends and they don’t feel it.

  • deweywsuan hour ago
    It is possible to write your own extension and still use it in Chrome as long as it's not bundled. It would be a huge pain to get the source for uBlock origin and implement it locally yourself, but it might be worth the pain to block ads.
    • rwzan hour ago
      The original uBO relies on Manifest V2, the API Chrome no longer supports. It's impossible to run full UBO (not Lite MV3 version) on current versions on Chrome.
  • eahman hour ago
    Wtf, simply not true:

    Brave: chrome://flags/#brave-extensions-manifest-v2 > brave://settings/extensions/v2 > Enable uBlock Origin (Brave-hosted, even better).

    Helium comes with uBlock Origin pre-installed.

    Edge even still has it https://microsoftedge.microsoft.com/addons/detail/ublock-ori...

    And I'm sure others ...I personally only use/test Brave, Brave Origin, Helium and Firefox.

    • LeoPantheraan hour ago
      The title says "major browser", which none of those are.
      • ticulatedspline6 minutes ago
        Technically Firefox isn't a major browser either.
      • Aldo_MX31 minutes ago
        Brave surely is a major browser with 100+M MAU, not too distant from Firefox with 150+M MAU.
        • hackernud3s22 minutes ago
          Brave blocks those ads anyway so no point in Ublock, maybe that's why it's left out. It does inject it's own ads though, and then there's all the crypto nonsense.
          • ipsum211 minutes ago
            Brave adblocking breaks some websites that uBlock Origin doesn't.
  • luggage_bazooka37 minutes ago
    Shameless plug here [1], there is a solution for all this. Single monthly subscription to help sites make money by NOT stuffing ads in your face all the time.

    [1] https://zeroad.network

  • hn_submit2 hours ago
    Does it really make a huge difference to keep supporting Manifest Version 2?

    I've installed uBlock Origin Lite in my Edge browser and I don't see any ads there either.

  • PaulDavisThe1stan hour ago
    uBO + Steven Black hosts list + firefox. Peace, for now at least.
  • 23 minutes ago
    undefined
  • stack_frameran hour ago
    I just use Brave. I haven't seen a YouTube ad in years.
    • cykrosan hour ago
      There are ads on YouTube?
      • Imustaskforhelpan hour ago
        Oh yes they are. Occassionally when I am on a device which doesn't have an ad-blocker. I witness it and I am always left feeling shocked at how many ads Youtube can have. We really don't know the plight of so so many Youtube users. I feel sympathy for them and want to hug them and install an ad-blocker for them.

        I actually used to install Revanced for all the relatives who ever complained about Youtube and some who didn't even ask! I just feel like Ad blocker is such a useful thing that I can do to people that I care about who don't know deeply about it.

        I must say that it is one of the top entries of lists of most useful/time-saving things I have done in actually saving anybody's actual time.

        I express gratitude towards the universe for Ublock Origin. Words can't comprehend how much I love it.

  • b3ing2 hours ago
    You can also run Ad Nauseum if you want to
  • an hour ago
    undefined
  • ChrisArchitect5 hours ago
    Related:

    Microsoft Edge is about to lock out older ad blockers, just like Chrome did

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49220392

    • Insanity2 hours ago
      Edge is just chromium under the hood. So not a surprise there, should be easy lift for them.
  • rasz2 hours ago
    Vivaldi 8.1 still supports it (Chromium 150) as loaded unpacked extension.

    Edit: and latest August 14, 2026 Chromium 152.0.7977.38 based Snapshot https://vivaldi.com/blog/desktop/address-field-calculator-an... has this in patch notes:

    "[Extensions] Re-enable and extend Manifest V2 extension support for the time being (VB-130324)"

    • rwzan hour ago
      I wouldn't be sure this is a long term solution. Maintaining a this into perpetuity would probably take a lot of resources that Vivaldi team might not have.
  • josefritzishere2 hours ago
    Ads are so invasive and prevalent now that you need an ad blocker just to use the internet.
    • hdgvhicv2 hours ago
      Yet 90% of people don’t use a browser capable of running ubo
    • Casteil2 hours ago
      Now? Sure seems like it's been that way for well over a decade.
  • inquirerGeneral2 hours ago
    [dead]
  • hasperdi5 hours ago
    [flagged]
    • throw-the-towel2 hours ago
      "Never" is not true, it used to be a major browser. Now, though, sadly it isn't major.
    • pelcg5 hours ago
      I believe it is. 2% of global internet traffic.
      • 1over1374 hours ago
        How is 2% major though? (I wish FF was more used!)
        • layer82 hours ago
          Firefox has 8-9% desktop market share in Europe, 16-18% in Germany. So in some important markets it’s still pretty relevant.
        • sunaookami2 hours ago
          Wasn't Opera's (the good old Presto one) marketshare also 1% back then? And it was still considered major (even though it had compatibility problems mainly caused by sites ignoring the standard)
        • ndriscoll4 hours ago
          It's more than 2% when you condition on things like "lives in US" or "lives in EU" or "is using a desktop." e.g. among German desktop users it's apparently more like 20%. Most people probably aren't targeting global traffic and should never consider it since it can be extremely misleading.
        • paddim84 hours ago
          One in every 50 people is a lot of people.
        • BeetleB2 hours ago
          Over 6% on desktop (which is where I do the bulk of my browsing...).

          More than Safari.

        • timetraveller264 hours ago
          It's in the top 5.

          It isn't more used because one browser is promoted by the biggest search engine and thus has two thirds of the market, and the other two come pre-installed with the OS.

  • timetraveller264 hours ago
    Firefox, after 20 years, once again has an advantage over the other browsers.

    Let's hope for new generations to get tired of so many ads to finally ditch chrome.

    • matheusmoreira2 hours ago
      Unfortunately, new generations seem to be completely fine with this. People in general, they're just so completely captured by the dark patterns that I get the impression they cannot even imagine a world without them.

      I install uBlock Origin on every browser I come across. Everybody notices. The internet just feels better, somehow. People can't quite explain what changed, but they know.

    • BeetleB2 hours ago
      It's funny. Over 20 years ago, I got people to switch to Firefox because of the AdBlock extension.

      In case people don't know, Firefox was the first major browser to even have extensions.

    • bananamogulan hour ago
      I wonder if new generations will just get better and better at visually blocking off ads when they read. So many layouts are so common that I read a lot of sites and have absolutely no idea what ads they're running because 30-odd years of browsing rendered HTML pages has trained my brain to block off and not process certain areas of the page.

      I'm not an advertising apologist, just pointing out that I can remember what ads were on a freemium TV station I watched two nights ago and what ads were on a radio station I listened to this afternoon but I can't remember a single web ad since...I don't know when. This might be because the TV ads have audio and visual, and with radio my alternative at the moment was looking out the window of my car, but web ads just seem very easy to mentally filter.

    • ImJamal4 hours ago
      uBlock Origin Lite works decently on Chrome so I doubt this will help migration to Firefox.
      • Andrexan hour ago
        Exactly. The difference between the two is not qualitatively different for 99% of users.
        • sys_6473815 minutes ago
          I noticed that UBO Lite doesn't cause the ad boxes to vanish like UBO does. You see this on the likes of the weather.com webpage.
    • odidiejdiwjd2 hours ago
      If only they focused on making Firefox the definitive good browser instead of a platform for their AI efforts.

      Firefox will never convince people to leave chrome on philosophy alone. I detest Chrome with a passion and refuse to touch it with a ten-foot pole, but cannot in good faith recommend Firefox to anyone in today’s world. “It kinda works” is about as far a compliment you can give it.

      • kulahan2 hours ago
        What do you think doesn’t work on Firefox? Aside from Google products purposely crippled, everything works just fine in my experience. It’s fast and stable. If there’s a bunch of AI stuff in it, I’ve not seen it. Of course I believe it exists, I just don’t ever read popups anyways. To be fair, I probably use 5% of the browser’s capability (I imagine many are like me). I browse websites and I have UBO installed.
        • BeetleB2 hours ago
          In the last few months, I've seen a huge upsurge of sites that simply won't work for me in Firefox.

          Not sure if it's the FF + Linux combination. Should probably try with a fresh profile to confirm.

          It sucks, but I'm in on FF all the way. If much of the web stops working for me, it just means I have more time on my hands!

          • Silhouette2 hours ago
            Anecdotally my own experience is consistent with this with the same platform+browser combination.

            It appears that there are now significant numbers of sites - or at least noticeable parts or features of sites - that rely on Google-specific APIs and haven't been tested on other browsers.

            However visiting those sites from Apple devices is often similarly frustrating. I'm not sure this is an anti-Firefox thing. It seems more of a not realising there are other browsers apart from Chromium-based ones thing.

            • deweywsuan hour ago
              I kinda wondered myself if this was some kind of coordinated effort to make Firefox not work. It wouldn't surprise me if it was later discovered that Google paid some Linux subsystem maintainer to slip in some nefarious code somewhere that altered the way Linux implements rendering specifications ever so slightly such that Firefox appeared broken. Just the conspiracy theorist in me.
      • cadamsdotcom2 hours ago
        "It kinda works" is factually incorrect.

        I have used Firefox exclusively every day on macOS for the past year, several hours a day, and have not one single time had to open another browser. None of the customers of my B2B saas use Firefox. Not once have I needed to test in their browsers except quick smoke testing to prove to myself that the rendering and details are identical. All my other browsing is indistinguishable from before when I used Chrome, and from on mobile where I (tragically) am forced by Apple's monopoly to use Safari.

        Do you have evidence to support your false claim?

        • jjavan hour ago
          Agreed, I can't understand where these experiences come from.

          I only ever use Firefox, at work, at home, mobile. Since forever, as long as there has been a Firefox (and Mozilla before that, Netscape prior).

          There was one time about 8-10 years ago that I encountered a site that didn't work in Firefox, was some weird proprietary training module at work.

          So yes, I did encounter one site that didn't work in Firefox in the last ~20 years. One.

      • jasonpeacock2 hours ago
        What doesn’t work? It’s my daily driver and it renders every website I visit.
      • rwzan hour ago
        I daily Zen (Firefox under the hood) and the only thing that I consistently need to open other browsers for is direct USB support (mouse/keyboard drivers in the browser). Other than that, I don't remember when was the last time something wasn't working in Firefox.
  • Madmallardan hour ago
    Do people not remember Firefox changing their terms of service last year and allowing them to sell your data to third parties? I don't get it did people forget?

    I switched over to LibreWolf and other browsers like that then and never looked back.

  • vovavili5 hours ago
    Thank God for the Brave browser. For those disliking their built-in adblocker, there is a Manifest v2 opt-out specifically for uBlock if you need it.
  • spottedmarley5 hours ago
    Anyone can build a custom extension to do anything an extension is allowed to do. I had ~7 standard extensions that I pretty much always install into chrome browser. Over the past month or so I've been using Claude code to build a single custom extension that handles all of the things I used 7 extensions for previously. One extension does everything. You can even use the existing extensions you already use as guides for Claude to make sure all of the features you want are included. One extension to rule them all!
    • ycombinatrix5 hours ago
      >Anyone can build a custom extension to do anything an extension is allowed to do

      Yes, that's why google moved to manifest v3 and extensions can't do as much.

      • Madmallardan hour ago
        Can't they just modify the browser itself with an injection into the executable

        surely there is a way around that

      • spottedmarley4 hours ago
        [flagged]