Hacker News Reader

Comment by rgrmrts | Hacker News Reader

I’m curious why you’re using 3 separate methods. Do you miss things with just one? AFAIK all 3 use similar block lists and are configurable.

I’m building a pi-hole type solution for myself and essentially want all the filtering and blocking to happen at my firewall and not on my client (phone, laptop, tablet).

View on HN

I think pi-hole (Adguard home) is useful dns level ad blocker which can be used on network/router level. But it is limited, UBO provides you more flexibility to block cosmetics and certain ads that cannot be done via dns. There will be overlap of course but it is worth it. I agree that adguard here seems redundant and UBO itself recommend against using another ad blocker to avoid interference and websites adblock discovery.

However you might end up using

1. pi-hole on router

2. Adguard as device level DNS

3. UBO on Firefox (android only)

It is possible but not recommended and wasteful. 1/2 and 3 is enough.

AdGuard is for things I take off the home network, for example when I'm at work. It's true I could use AdGuard for both scenarios but I do like the additional visibility and configurability Pi-Hole provides.

Try AdGuardHome. https://github.com/AdguardTeam/AdGuardHome

I basically have all my devices use it when I am on my network, and when I am off my network, my Wireguard connection (or Tailscale depending...) uses my home DNS server.

uBlock only works in web browsers. It doesn't work in phone apps, smart TVs, anything integrated into the OS, etc.

That's why I use uBlock and PiHole, which I deem is enough.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com