Deutsch
English
Chrome is the dominant browser—but those who recently opened it often encountered an unpleasant surprise. Many popular extensions, including the widely used uBlock Origin (with over 50 million installations), no longer work. Others have received new versions with limited functionality and fewer customization options. The reason for this is the new Manifest V3 for Chrome extensions, which is currently being rolled out. What does this mean, what are Google's goals, and what alternatives do you have? Find out here!
Many add-ons (extensions) are such an integral part of our daily browsing experience that we hardly notice them—until they suddenly disappear. Ad blockers are a prime example: without them, the internet feels completely different. Only then do we realize how overloaded many websites are with ads, how much content pops up, slides into view from all sides, and how frustrating browsing suddenly becomes! To function properly, these ad blockers require extensive permissions in the browser, use complex filtering logic, and rely on a comprehensive set of rules. This system worked well for a long time—but it directly clashed with Google’s business model, which is built on mass advertising and generates billions in revenue each year.
Officially, Google claims to have users' best interests at heart. The company says it aims to improve security, privacy, and browser speed by restricting extensions’ access and ability to intervene. And when it comes to poorly made or questionable extensions, that’s not entirely wrong. Some add-ons slow down browsing, break website functionality, or have highly questionable privacy practices. However, it’s surprising that such tools are still available in Google's own Chrome Web Store! Instead of targeting problematic extensions specifically, Google has imposed sweeping restrictions on all extensions. Many functions are now handled by the browser itself—leaving Google in complete control.
Without boring you with the details of declarativeNetRequest vs. webRequest API, here’s a quick summary of the changes: Extensions used to be able to monitor and modify network requests (such as your browsing activity) in real time by analyzing all traffic and blocking it as needed. While this approach offered great flexibility, it also raised security and privacy concerns. Wherever something is analyzed, there’s always the potential to access sensitive data. Now, everything runs through Chrome: extensions merely provide instructions to the browser, which executes them itself. Additionally, the number of rules and filters an extension can use has been limited. So, while ad blockers still exist, they are now less powerful and can no longer operate as effectively as before.
This is what many websites look like without an ad blocker – slightly exaggerated, of course
Unsurprisingly, these changes primarily affect ad blockers and privacy tools—who would have thought? The first announcements about Manifest V3 last year were met with overwhelmingly negative feedback, prompting Google to make reluctant adjustments. Extensions are now allowed to function slightly more complexly and have gained a few more permissions, but Chrome still holds the reins. Critics argue that this allows Chrome to whitelist its business partners from ad blocking or, with a simple update, disable all third-party interventions entirely. Naturally, ad blocker developers were frustrated, but they didn’t give up. The new uBlock Origin Lite adapts to the new requirements, while other tools have already released updated versions or are in development.
Still, many users are now searching for alternatives to Chrome, which has recently lost some market share to Microsoft Edge. The developers of Firefox have already announced that they will continue to fully support ad blockers and related extensions. Opera and Brave are following suit, both offering built-in ad blockers as well. Vivaldi is still undecided but is expected to transition to Manifest V3 like Chrome by mid-2025. In the long run, it will be interesting to see how independent browsers can remain when almost all major players—except Firefox and Safari—are based on the Chromium project, with Google still being its main financial backer.
My question to you: Would you switch browsers if ad blockers were no longer available?
I have only used Chrome twice, the last time was to use developer mode to download Windows 10 ISO and then I promptly uninstalled it. I have found many of these google products to be very intrusive and bad for privacy. I remember several years ago when google mail was still fairly new, reading the privacy policy for over 2 hours on the sign up page after seeing 4 or 5 alerts to do so, which I had not seen on any other site. I was very scary as far as privacy goes, it basically gave them cart blanche to read every e-mail and control everything in your in box, it was one of the most invasive policies I had ever read at the time. Also these google programs, Chrome, Google Search, Mail and possibly YouTube end up being tied into one another and allow for mass gathering of personal data and surveillance. My friend who has used Google Mail for years is very worried about this issue, but finds it almost impossible to go to another service because it is tied in with so much of his life. I have always used Firefox because of it's ability to have add-ons and be customizable. I usually use Duck Duck Go or some other search engine to try and somewhat protect my privacy. I find it very hard sometimes to peruse the internet without ad blocking of some type. It can get absolutely crazy on some site's without blocking. One example I can remember from some years ago, was Major Geeks. It's a terrific site for free software and provides a major benefit to many people, but at the time it was almost unusable because of the amount of adds on it. The site would actually become very unstable after a period of time. You didn't know if you were actually clicking on the link to a program or were possibly being redirected to another site you did not want to got to. I understand these sites have to make money to stay open but I wish it was more of a donation system. I think the site is better now, seems less adds are on their pages. Maybe the government needs to step in and regulate this behavior as a question of monopolies and personal control. Also I find many of the ad blockers work to sometime stop virus attacks and redirection of your browser, so I have always supported their use and will continue to do so by using which ever software allows me that option. This control of your browsing has to be stopped for other reasons also. I recently seen a YouTube post about major companies wanting to use the security hardware built into modern CPU's and Motherboards from the last 5 years as personal identifiers to allow you access to their sites. I'm not talking banking or government pages either, but sites you could be visiting everyday right now. This information would tell them everything about you and basically eliminate privacy on the internet, which is very scary in my opinion. 1984 anyone?. The only way I can see to stop this behavior is to quit using the products of companies that do this, if they loose a lot of money, which is their bottom line for everything, then they may change.
I use Norton Private Browser as part of my abo of Norton 365. Ad blocker works quite good.
I don't use Chrome or Edge don't like them, and without Ad-blocker forget it, I LOVE OPERA ad blocker works great.
I don't use chrome (only if I have to) I've been using firefox since it first came out. I try and stay away from using any google products as they want too much of your info which translate into too many ads
I actually use Adguard (ad blocker) and it still seems to work with Edge and Chrome Canary. Have't check with Vivaldi, FireFox, and Opera.
I use Vivaldi as it's the only browser that works well with the billion of tabs I have open. I use Pihole which blocks a lot of ads. Keep voting for bigger monopolies though...
If a browser disabled ad blockers I would relegate its use to certain functions (like online banking, etc.) where you don't get bombarded with ads. I would not use it for general browsing. Some sites ask you to disable your ad blocker; when I've done that the site then becomes ridiculously unusable; all you're seeing is ads.
I'm not surprised that Google has taken this approach with Chrome for obvious reasons.
Chrome is the dominant browser - that right there tells you all you need to know about how smart people are.
Yes I would. I find ads very intrusive, abrusive and steal YOUR information. Essentailly they rob YOU of your band wideth, computer resources, infect your computer, and personal information. I ignore and stop them where ever I can. I currently use Brave because it offers better protection than the other browsers. I like duckduckgo but it's just a little too stripped down. I also use a VPN. I have no problem sharing my information, but I control the share, not some ad company stealing it.
"Would you switch browsers if ad blockers were no longer available?" Short and Sweet - Yes
I recently purchased WEB AD BLOCKER from Chrome. It works perfectly and this morning I have experienced zero ads! Before installing I was completely frustrated with browsing and when I saw an ad I vowed not to use the service or product.
I have also installed Ashampoo Windows 11 Ad Block and found that it no longer works with Chrome. I would use a new browser if it was as friendly as Chrome.
So I am happy now but waiting for the hammer to fall and see ads again.
Ads bother me when I am trying to gather information for different projects. A new browser would have a simple process allowing me to browse as I am able to do on Chrome. It should not have a hidden agenda using me as one of it's tools to gather information for what ever reason without asking me to participate.