![]() ![]() In theory, this is a very positive change, one that will help Google combat malicious extensions. This will require that all code executed by the extension be present in the extension’s package uploaded to the webstore. While the ad blocker extensions take issue with the new WebRequest API, Biniok pointed to a passage under a section about remotely-hosted code.īeginning in Manifest V3, we will disallow extensions from using remotely-hosted code. The developers of competing ad blocker Ghostery were the next to chime in, even suggesting that they may file an anti-trust complaint against Google should Manifest V3 be implemented as described.īleeping Computer reports, the latest Chrome extension developer to publicly oppose Manifest V3 is Jan Biniok of Tampermonkey fame. Raymond Hill, lead developer of uBlock Origin, was the first to speak out about Manifest V3, explaining how one aspect of it would prevent most ad blockers from working as they do today. The developer of Tampermonkey is now joining in on the Manifest V3 conversation, detailing how it would stop the popular extension from working altogether on Chrome. The developer of uBlock Origin, Raymond Hill, has also chimed in on Twitter, suggesting the lite version of the ad blocker can't fully match the original extension.Last week, Google unveiled the first draft of a collection of changes to the Chrome extensions platform, known as Manifest V3, which received almost immediate backlash from the developers of ad blocking extensions. Nevertheless, there’s still debate on if the Manifest V3 edition of uBlock Origin will offer the same quality as the original. Called uBlock Origin Lite, the extension has so far received positive reviews. So the ad blocker won't be dead on Chrome. The developers of uBlock Origin also created a version of the software that's designed to work with Manifest V3. The MV3 blocker prototype already shows good filtering quality,” he added. “In short: we haven’t finished our work yet, but there is definitely light at the end of the tunnel. “Despite losing a small part of their functionality, ad blockers will still be able to offer nearly the same quality of filtering that they demonstrated with Manifest V2,” Meshkov said. Earlier this month, AdGuard CTO Andrey Meshkov discussed Google’s progress on V3, noting the company has been listening and incorporating feedback from third-party developers. ![]() The ongoing changes have been met with a positive response from ad-block provider AdGuard. This includes “improving content filtering support by providing more generous limits in the declarativeNetRequest API for static rulesets and dynamic rules.” But on Thursday, the company said it would resume the phaseout, except this time with several enhancements to Manifest V3. ![]() But the effort has been met with resistance from ad-block providers since Manifest V3 can also restrict access to content filtering on the Chrome browser.Ī year ago, Google decided to halt winding down Manifest V2 amid complaints from developers. “By disabling support for MV2, Google will be pushing even more ads,” tweeted Tuta, the encrypted email provider.įor years now, Google has been trying to wind down Manifest V2 in favor of Manifest V3, which is designed to offer better security for Chrome extensions. Still, the news is sparking worries for fans of uBlock Origin on Chrome. Google adds: “We will gradually roll out this change, gathering user feedback and collecting data to make sure Chrome users understand the change and what actions they can take to find alternative, up-to-date extensions.” (Credit: Google) Google didn't say when it will start disabling Manifest V2 extensions in the stable release of Chrome. ![]() For now, the phaseout will only cover Manifest V2 extensions installed on beta versions of Chrome, including the Dev and Canary builds. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |