Hacker News Reader

Comment by dfabulich | Hacker News Reader

The rule limits Google's proposing are more generous than the limits Apple puts on content blockers. Apple allows only 50K rules. And it turns out 50K rules is actually fine!

Declarative rules engines are better and preserve privacy better. This is Google following Apple's lead and doing the right thing.

View on HN

It does nothing for privacy because extensions will still be able to see the requests, they just won't be able to block them.

No, manifest v3 extensions will only be able to observe requests for specific hosts, with permission from each host.

This isn't mentioned in the public version of the v3 spec (perhaps I'm looking in the wrong place) or in today's blog post. Do you have a reference?

One of the other comments has a link to this tweet about it:

> Yes, but network requests won't be observable without permission on the relevant hosts. And host permissions are changing significantly in Mv3 (e.g. they can't be granted as blanket install time permissions).

https://twitter.com/justinschuh/status/1138889508512866304

there's also some stuff in the design doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nPu6Wy4LWR66EFLeYInl3Nzz...

Which explains the specific hosts part, but only makes vague mention of how extensions that users do want to run on every site will get permission to do so.

Thank you. If Google were trying to be obfuscatory they could hardly do a better job.

There's a reason apple doesn't have as much of the browser market share, and this is part of it. The lack of good ad blocking is literally the thing that drove me off of safari.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com