tech234a 4 hours ago

I’ve been using uBlock Origin Lite on iOS for several months now, but one shortcoming I see with the newer WebExtensions implementation in Safari is that WebExtensions can’t be used with the in-app Safari views, meaning extensions such as this one don’t work with in-app Safari views. There was an older Safari content blocker API that did work with the in-app Safari views, but it seems like apps are being updated to stop using it. As a workaround, I’ve been trying to set my apps to open the Safari app for links where possible, but I would have preferred to use the in-app Safari views.

  • djxfade 9 minutes ago

    As a side note, I personally HATE apps that opens links in an in-app web view (apps like Instagram, Facebook, etc). I really wish Apple could have a system wide preference where it could force in-app web views to open in the browser.

latexr 37 minutes ago

I had been wishing for uBlock Origin for Safari for years, but now that it’s here (I’ve been using it since the betas), I’m disappointed. It’s really ugly to look at (even the icon in the toolbar looks out of place), configuration is awkward and resets itself unless you give it full permissions for every website from the get go, and it doesn’t seem to be more effective than other popular blockers. Additionally, pretty much every other blocker includes several extensions to overcome the well-known 150K rule limit, but uBlock Origin only includes one, meaning it can’t be blocking as much.

  • aucisson_masque 13 minutes ago

    And it doesn't work anymore when you swipe back. The phone shows the previous page but without any adblocking.

    I too hoped for a ublock origin with filters lists, kind of what we have on Firefox or even the lite version for chrome but it's not nearly as good.

    And we can't say it's apple fault because other adblockers like Adguard does allow customs lists and custom rules.

Random09 4 minutes ago

Why not use a phone that allows you to use the full version ublock? Ios is everything that is wrong with software today in one package.

  • alarak 3 minutes ago

    Care to elaborate what is so wrong with it?

trenchpilgrim 4 hours ago

We already have Wipr 2 (https://kaylees.site/wipr2.html) on the App store which is a pretty dang great ad blocker and well worth the price.

  • nottorp 3 hours ago

    Is it better than Wipr 1? Because I paid for that one and it's kinda ... unsatisfactory.

    Edit: at least compared to full uBlock Origin on desktop Firefox. No idea how good or bad are the other mobile solutions.

    Most of the time i solve my mobile ad blocking needs by ... not browsing on mobile.

    • latexr an hour ago

      Yes. I used to use Wipr 1 and also found it underwhelming, eventually settling on 1Blocker. Eventually I decided to give Wipr 2 a shot and it’s much improved.

      It also now allows blocking even outside of Safari. Though that requires iOS/macOS 26, which I have no intention of installing any time soon, so can’t speak for how effective that is.

      https://kaylees.site/wipr-filtr.html

  • rckt an hour ago

    I've been using Wipr for a long time. Both on iOS and macOS and it works perfectly. I don't see any ads. When I happen to use or see other people's devices I'm amazed by the amount of ads on the screen.

  • Synaesthesia an hour ago

    Adguard works well and is free. I did pay for Wipr 1 but now switched to Adguard.

  • tapete2 3 hours ago

    Imagine paying for not having to view ads.

    • nxpnsv 3 hours ago

      Yeah, the ad situation really is so horrible it is worth paying to get out of it. Also supporting an inde dev to provide a useful app with the equivalent of a nice cup of coffee doesn't feel all that bad.

    • teekert an hour ago

      I think this is sarcastic?

      I mean I pay on several websites to not see ads, so it (paying to remove ads) seems like the normalest thing. And it should be the normalest thing.

      The only weird thing here is that we pay a party that is not the one serving the ads, so the primary misses income from ads and potentially paying customers.

      But I suspect that is what you meant with your remark.

      Moreover, paying on every website is just insane overkill and very expense compared to the value you get from occasional visits (the sites I subscribe to I visit multiple times a day and they provide business value).

      Something like Alby [0] could solve this though. But Crypto currency has become a dirty word around here ;) (Alby does allow fractions of cents to be transferred, like a stream, on website visits, it (among others) also powers per-second paying for Podcasts streams, splitting revenue between multiple podcast hosts, the podcast app and the central index if set up that way. It's hard to set up though, something fiat-currency, based with 0 overhead would be nice...).

      [0] https://getalby.com/

    • mrklol an hour ago

      I mean… putting the app onto the store costs a yearly fee + development costs. I don’t think the dev should pay that out of their own pocket.

    • troupo 3 hours ago

      Imagine you're entitled to free work by others

      • pasteldream 2 hours ago

        Imagine asking the browser on my hardware to do things I don’t want it to do, and acting shocked when I tell it not to.

        • threatofrain 2 hours ago

          Imagine there's a business that can't really enforce whether you walk out without providing compensation. You realize you have the home court advantage on enforcement and guess what, you don't want to pay. It's your browser/wallet and that's your prerogative. But what does that mean about how tempting their goods are? Do we have prerogative to these goods?

          Should we live in a world where we only permit business models that require customers pay directly or don't enter at all?

          • pasteldream 2 hours ago

            You know, I do not actually know that a website had ads before clicking on a link to it; I would be happy to only visit websites without ads.

            It’s scummy to shove ads in my face without at least warning me and giving me a chance to leave, I think.

            • threatofrain 2 hours ago

              Fair point. There should be a header to reveal whether the payload has ads. Then you can refuse right there.

joak 2 hours ago

The normal uBlock origin extension can be installed on Orion browser for iOS

Orion is webkit and can be set as default browser.

  • SoKamil an hour ago

    Unfortunately uBlock Origin on Orion is a bit flaky. Also, the phone heats up a bit, but that might be due to Orion itself.

    • islon an hour ago

      Yeah, I have the same problem. Had to stop using Orion because it always heated up the phone too much. A shame. Hopefully they fix it.

ornornor 3 hours ago

In all these years I haven’t found a better solution than DNS blocking with NextDNS on iOS. The only place I get ads is YT (but for that I have an Albanian VPN)

  • 8fingerlouie 2 hours ago

    If you're in Europe, there's the newly launched DNS4EU project which is free for personal use, and also includes adblocking at the DNS level like NextDNS.

    I use it in conjunction with Adguard and secure DNS, but they also publish configuration profiles for iOS.

    https://www.joindns4.eu/

    https://www.joindns4.eu/dns-guidelines

    • nottorp an hour ago

      Humm they only mention wifi. Can't do it on [3-4-5]G?

    • Havoc 2 hours ago

      Thanks for pointing this out

  • wasting_time an hour ago

    Why not just pay for a subscription instead of VPN?

    • ornornor 39 minutes ago

      Because I don’t want to give google any money. And mullvad has many other uses besides blocking YT ads.

  • moontear 2 hours ago

    How does the Albanian VPN help? No ad revenue in Albania?

    • ornornor 2 hours ago

      For some reason there are no YT ads in Albania. It’s refreshing.

    • jim180 2 hours ago

      The CPM difference in US vs. rest of the world is huge. If Albania has cpm near zero, it's not worth to show ads there.

  • v7engine 2 hours ago

    Safari ads are not blocked when using NextDNS. Is it just me?

    • latexr an hour ago

      Safari does not respect the operating system’s DNS settings, it uses its own. I have seen several reports online that you can disable this behaviour by turning off iCloud Private Relay or disabling Advanced Tracking and Fingerprint Protection, but was never able to do so with various combinations.

      • drcongo 31 minutes ago

        iCloud Private Relay is the only thing that stops Safari using your NextDNS config, turn that off and you're golden. I've been using NextDNS since it launched, I love it.

        • latexr 16 minutes ago

          > iCloud Private Relay is the only thing that stops Safari using your NextDNS config

          Maybe that’s true for the NextDNS configuration—I don’t know, I haven’t tested, so I’ll take your word for it—but not true for DNS settings in general.

          > turn that off and you're golden.

          Unless you want iCloud Private Relay, in which case you’re not.

    • ornornor 2 hours ago

      It’s is.

      • latexr an hour ago

        It’s not, and a basic “Safari DNS” web search shows you it’s not.

JSR_FDED 2 hours ago

I'm wondering which ad blocker you've had success with...specifically I'm wondering:

- Does this also block ads on Youtube (in the browser)?

- Can this block Youtube Shorts (they're way too addictive for me)?

ge96 3 hours ago

I use lite on firefox android it's great

It's funny my Motorolla phone keeps installing random games on it like ugh...

  • ffsm8 3 hours ago

    Why use lite on Firefox/android, considering the normal one is available too?

    • ge96 2 hours ago

      Oh yeah my bad I mis-rememebered, I use lite on chrome pc and the regular mobile firefox

      • aucisson_masque 10 minutes ago

        So you are using Firefox on Android which is frankly janky but not on computer where it actually shines ?

  • f4uCL9dNSnQm 36 minutes ago

    Which model is that? I have a single "Moto" app on mine that is un-removable and that is all bloat I can find.

totostache 2 hours ago

Would it work with Firefox iOS?

cherioo 3 hours ago

One annoying thing I have is, when I want to disable Adblock on some website (suspecting Adblock impair functionality, or where Adblock is not needed), I need to grant the extension full access before I can disable it.

Is there some trick I am missing?