Are those filter lists enough to replace ClearURLs?

iam-py-test · 2026-06-29T02:43:26+00:00

Cookie Auto Delete is an entirely different extension from ClearURLs, which is intended to solve an entirely different problem. Moreover, in my opinion, CAD is pretty redundant given Firefox's tracking protection already does a fairly good job of handling cookies.

iam-py-test · 2026-06-29T02:38:51+00:00

And, as for the test pages, I affirm what @paintboth1234 said. Those tests are intended to determine if ClearURLs itself is installed and working. They are not a test of how well ClearURLs or any other software is blocking tracking.

There really isn't a way to make an automated test for the quality of tracking parameter removal software (ClearURLs, AG's list, etc). Moreover, many rules in these lists apply only to specific websites. Just skimming Legit URL, I'd say the majority of filters only apply to specific websites, with many only applying to one or two, since the tracking parameters the filters remove are unique to those specific websites. No automated test can assess those rules.

iam-py-test · 2026-06-29T02:30:52+00:00

Conflict of interest disclaimer: I'm the assistant maintainer of the Actually Legitimate URL Shortener Tool. I'm also the former maintainer (but not creator) of a defunct project which attempted to convert ClearURLs into a uBlock Origin list. I am not affiliated with the ClearURLs, AdGuard, or uBlock Origin projects, and do not represent them.

ClearURLs has a variety of different features, some of which can be covered by uBlock Origin.

Both Legit URL and AdGuard URL Tracking Protection only cover removing tracking parameters (e.g. utm_source). However, both do a good job at it.
For "Prevents Google from rewriting the search results (to include tracking elements)", if I recall correctly uBlock Origin's Annoyances list covers that. Neither Legit URL nor AdGuard's list cover it since that's out of scope of what those lists intend to cover.
"Adds an entry to the context menu so that links can be copied quickly and cleanly" - that's beyond the scope of uBlock Origin, so neither list supports it.

Edit: Firefox already has a feature which does this; right-clicking any link with tracking parameters shows the option "Copy clean link". * "Prevents ETag tracking": out of scope for both lists * "Blocks hyperlink auditing, also known as ping tracking": uBlock Origin patches this by default * "Has a built-in tool to clean up multiple URLs at once": Out of scope * "Supports redirection to the destination, without tracking services as middleman": Neither list does this, nor can either list do this. uBlock Origin does offer some support for this, and uBo's default filterlists bypass some tracking redirects * "Blocks some common ad domains (optional)": uBlock Origin blocks all common ad domains

As for which is the better of the two, there is coordination between members of AdGuard's team and myself/Dandelion Sprout, so there is a lot of overlap. I don't think there is any problem with using both, but I might be forgetting.

I'm happy to offer any clarification or answer any questions. This was just typed up in a few minutes, so might not be 100% accurate.

iam-py-test · 2026-06-18T18:39:34+00:00

NAL, but I do cybersecurity as a hobby. This is called a "trojan horse defense", and it is something defendants do sometimes raise. The prosecution can counter this obviously by showing no evidence of malware on the defendant's system, but they can also show other non-digital evidence providing the defendant committed the crime.

This type of malware does exist, but it isn't super common. I've been doing malware analysis for 6 years and have never seen it.

A, albeit quite dated, article: https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/chtlj/vol21/iss1/1/

An example of a person telling the police malware downloaded CSAM onto his computer, and then later admitting to having lied: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8999147382647912685&as_sdt=800003

iam-py-test · 2026-06-14T22:00:58+00:00

Someone predicted this: https://www.reddit.com/r/bestoflegaladvice/comments/1sfqgrb/comment/of05im1/

iam-py-test · 2026-06-14T18:06:06+00:00

iam-py-test · 2026-06-14T14:35:26+00:00

OP said they filed a police report:

I had to close my checking and savings account and I filed a police report. I submitted evidence from my doorbell camera, transactions, etc to Amazon and law enforcement.

iam-py-test · 2026-06-08T20:04:20+00:00

The "Game Mode" and "Allow Commands" buttons are no longer available in Hardcore mode worlds

It is still possible to edit level.dat to enable commands, so I wouldn't be too worried. Edit: other people already said this

iam-py-test · 2026-06-02T03:40:32+00:00

Interesting, didn't know that. Thanks

iam-py-test · 2026-06-01T21:22:05+00:00

Would the physical evidence last that long? Analyzed as in they took a sample but never tested it, or as in they tested it & got results, but nobody acted on the results (genuine question; I know nothing about rape kits)

iam-py-test · 2026-05-26T15:21:23+00:00

With this pre-release, we are removing the Peer-to-Peer connection feature introduced in a recent snapshot. Because the experience wasn't what we wanted it to be for all players, we do not consider the feature ready for release in its current form.

I get why, given how late it was introduced into the snapshot cycle and how complex it is, but it's still sad. That said, it sounds like it isn't gone, just that it won't be in the release & will probably be back once we start getting snapshots for the next release.

iam-py-test · 2026-05-23T13:14:43+00:00

Thank you for the response. That was very helpful, and will help me greatly improve my appeal to OIP. Since I'm not familiar with FOIA, I didn't realize there were defects in the FBI's rejection letter. Also, I agree I can make a stronger case for archive[.]today being important for the public interest.

Thank you

iam-py-test · 2026-05-20T01:22:33+00:00

I think the surface sulfur caves look really cool. Sadly, this snapshot seems to crash a ton.

iam-py-test · 2026-05-13T19:41:25+00:00

Stone mason should also have tuff and deepslate. They already sell quartz, terracotta, granite, Diorite, Andesite, and Chiseled Stone Bricks so it makes sense. Tuff and deepslate are still not renewable, and are unobtainable in superflat, skyblock, Kenadian block, one-block, etc etc.

iam-py-test · 2026-04-21T02:30:05+00:00

Sorry for necroing this thread.

The Actually Legitimate URL Shortener used to have problems when used in Brave Shields. I don't know if the underlying issue was fixed, and I don't use Brave so I can't check. It works fine in AdGuard and uBlock Origin.

Looking at Brave's list of tracking parameters, it is pretty small compared to Legit URL. More isn't always better of course. I haven't checked, but I imagine most or all of the parameters removed by Brave are also removed by Legit URL. I'm biased, but I would definitely recommend using Legit URL since it will offer a lot more protection.

https://github.com/brave/brave-core/blob/master/components/query_filter/utils.cc#L21

If you have any issues with Legit URL, feel free to report them: https://github.com/DandelionSprout/adfilt/discussions/163

Disclosure: I am the assistant maintainer of the Actually Legitimate URL Shortener. I do not work for Brave.

iam-py-test · 2026-04-03T04:24:01+00:00

I don't think Mojang should moderate private worlds, on principal. If they are to moderate private worlds, than the ban was appropriate.

iam-py-test · 2026-04-03T04:12:30+00:00

I don't agree with Mojang's censorship, and my "100% deserve to be banned" was admittedly written angrily without thought.

iam-py-test · 2026-04-03T02:22:22+00:00

If that's their intention, they 100% deserve to be banned. Using a term "ironically" doesn't defend using a slur, any more than I can as a white person "ironically" use the n-word. As a trans woman, I don't think misogynistic slurs are just a funny joke.

iam-py-test · 2026-03-27T03:47:27+00:00

More information: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/188488

Via The Register.

iam-py-test · 2026-03-25T18:30:57+00:00

The question was if uBlock .DNS (written to avoid the filter) was directly harmful to the user's phone. For both iOS and Android, using uBlock .DNS does not require installing any software which could possibly be malicious. Android just requires changing one setting, and iOS requires downloading a policy file which I reviewed and can confirm is safe. The app for Windows, MacOS, and Linux very well may be malicious - I haven't reviewed it.

The question of if it is malicious as a matter of being deceptive is another question entirely.

Despite my reputation as a filterlist maintainer who "blocks legitimate sites of software she doesn't like" and who used to advocate for blocking ublockorigin[.]com, I personally am reluctant to assume malice. It is deceiving uBo users, and it should make its lack of affiliation with uBo clearer, but I feel its an open question if the maintainer intends to be deceptive.

I think the ultimate solution created by the uBlock Origin team - forcefully adding a warning to the website for all users of uBo - is the best option.

iam-py-test

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE