Deutsch
English
Few technologies are as controversial as ad blocking. While users love them for their ability to enjoy the web undisturbed, advertisers consider them the death of the commercial internet. Now, the makers of Chromium, the basis for Chrome, Opera, Vivaldi and soon Edge, have announced drastic changes. And if patron Google / Alphabet gets their way, there will be tough times ahead for ad blocking.
The Chromium team recently posted a manifest including future changes that put a heavy focus on security as well as improved performance and data privacy (feel free to giggle). Better security requires taking a closer look at the currently supported APIs (Application Programming Interfaces) that enable third party developers to add functionality to Chrome, usually in the form of extensions. These interfaces also handle communication between the browser and its add-ons, e.g. ad blockers..
However, exposing interfaces to third parties increases the risk for abuse. In 2018, 42% of all malicious Chrome extensions relied on a particular interface, i.e. "Web Request", to do their mischief. Web Request allows developers to intercept, delay or otherwise process all browser-based network requests, including forwarding uploaded photos, contact details or messages. So why does ad blocking require this much data access? Simply put, ad blockers filter websites based on a huge list of known annoyances and remove suspicious elements before the contents are rendered in the browser. Naturally, this processing not only raises security concerns but also leads to a slower browsing experience – which users then tend to blame on Chrome itself, not their installed extensions.
Lately, the Chrome team has been hard at work ramping up security in their browser and spreading the news. Reportedly, the size of their anti-malware team has increased by 300%; 89% of malware extensions have been removed and 1,800 new malicious extensions are being discovered and locked out of Chrome Web Store every month. Using Chrome Web Store as the sole distribution channel is another element to Chrome's new security strategy. That all sounds great – but most users are unwilling to live without their beloved ad blockers! That's because Chrome's default ad-blocking capabilities pale in comparison, barely blocking anything. It seems, Google's participation in the Coalition for Better Ads program is just token politics, as websites continue to be littered with annoying ads. Likewise, ad space on these sites is apparently still sold to shady characters who, in turn, like to link to malware-riddled and explicit content.
While the Chrome team naturally defends all decisions of their parent company, Alphabet, developers of other Chromium-based browsers keep their distance. Opera, Vivaldi and Brave have already signaled their willingness to stick to the current codebase or integrate future changes only partially. The team behind Opera takes a more relaxed stance, as they already ship their own ad blocker with their browser. Vivaldi and Brave will continue to support ad-blocking extensions. Microsoft refuses to comment altogether – not a great start for their cooperation with the Chromium team!
Obviously, the Chromium developers had not anticipated this much backlash when they announced the upcoming changes in January. Consequently, they've been driving a de-escalation strategy ever since to calm the waves between the corporation and the now distrustful third-party developers.
Of course, all parties involved are well aware Chrome would net better profits, if users didn't use ad-blocking technology to begin with. As an olive branch, Chromium will support a new interface, called "Declarative Net Request", that will enable ad-blocking and other privacy-related extensions, but on a smaller scale. The interface will only allow up to 30,000 ad-blocking rules – too few for serious ad blockers. Furthermore, future versions of Chromium will no longer allow extensions to filter network traffic before it is processed by the browser and deny access to user input. Sounds like extension developers will be having their hands full in the coming months! At least, Alphabet has displayed some degree of cooperation following their initially harsh comments. Still, if and to what extent extensions like Adblock Plus, uBlock Origin or Ghostery will continue to work in the future, is anybody's guess.
As I see it, there's only one ultimate solution, that will never be implemented! Until advertisers stop paying lip service and start rolling out user-friendly ads that don't endanger the privacy of site visitors, ad-blocking will continue to flourish. Most users understand running and maintaining a website costs money, but epilepsy-inducing ads that slow down pages to a crawl will never be tolerated! Alas, as long as Google are raking in the cash, we can expect no change of heart from either Google or advertisers.
What I would like to know: would you be willing to use Chrome without ad blockers or would you rather switch browsers?
@Bruce Lietze: All very well on a laptop or desktop/tower computer. But on a smartphone the "x" is so damn tiny that it is most times impossible to tap it as it sits right in the corner of the screen. Makes me want to do brown stuff in my pants. (not really just totally ticks me off )
I understand the needs of ads, but the majority of the ads have gotten out of hand. On some sites the ads use so many resources that it makes the internet browsers bog down or freeze. Until advertisers make user friendly ads again I will keep using Firefox and ad blockers.
I will change to a Browser that supports ad-blocking. Intrusive, over-bearing, rude Ads are not at all what I care for. I know it takes money to run the internet, however; Advertisers should be courteous and considerate of Consumers. As long as they are rude, stupid, and ignorant, I will use Ad-Blockers!
@ Harold Reeves,
"...a new disgusting virus called Google..."
Google's been at it for years. Nothing new about Google's tricks. You are right about it being disgusting.
"...constant advertising on every bit of available space on any page you are viewing."
To be fair, Google doesn't put ads on any websites except its own. The website owners insert the code to serve Google ads onto their websites themselves, or hire a web developer to do so. Website owners can always choose not to monetise their sites with ads.
You may be blocking ads with AD(B)LOCK, but does it stop the Google spies and stalkers taking your data and tracking you?
So how does firefox compare re chrome for ad blocking?
Hi Sven, there is a new disgusting virus called Google which is destroying people's enjoyment of the internet. This virus is owned by an avaricious, greedy, money mad organisation. The idea is that it will take over the world of advertising and drive sane people insane with constant advertising on every bit of available space on any page you are viewing. The thing is that this company has brilliant people working for it producing fabulous products . I used to get really upset with with adds but thanks to ADLOCK which blocks everything I am free of nuisance rubbish.
я б збожеволів якби переглядав усю рекламу.користуюсь Хромом,Вівальді та Бравіс і життя набагато легше.
Hi Sven,
"feel free to giggle"
I'd rather giggle than google! :)
I do use Chromium, but never Chrome. If Chromium ended up being ad-friendly, I wouldn't use it.
If I knew how to build a browser engine, I'd build my own browser.
Besides, there's always the HOSTS file, that Google can't get its dirty stalkers onto. I'm sure a script could be made to download and open blocking lists, and then update the hosts file.
More people need to shun Google stuff, and NEVER click an ad.
People have mentioned alternative search engines, but if the raw results are via Google search, does Google still get money? If so, it does nothing to dissuade Google from its practices.
OK adverts can be irritating, a close friend of mine is almost apoplectic about the ads he sees on his Apple laptop, he blames primarily Google for it and thus refuses to use it - I suggested he try DUCKDUCK Go instead. Personally I have trained my brain to not even see the adverts present. I do not use Ad Blockers at all personally as I now longer really notice the adverts. I always browse with sound OFF only turning it on where it is needed.
hello Firefox
The main reason I use an ad blocker - is to stop malicious pop-ups.... Many sites are selling their space to unscrupulous advertising vendors - and whenever I disable blocking, some scam or phishing "ad" comes up....
The other thing I HATE are ads that SCREAM in my face... Hint, I'm READING... I don't need my speakers blasting at 2am that I can buy viagra....
Ads on the sidelines I"m good with - but anything that is obnoxious, will NEVER get my business!
I don't mind advertising that is clearly advertised as I can just skip over it if I don't want to look at it. However I am a little tired of dishonest news reports and advertising masquerading as scientific fact. The ad blockers will never solve this problem. I think we need to be much more savvy as internet users and distrust most streams of information. Pesky pop up adds are a nuisance but not a problem to me if they are easily closed. If we. Want free information we need to be prepared to put up with adds from the people who are paying for that information.
no ad blockers no chrome simples
Ad blocking is a necessary evil, but it is up to the web search provider. The more "user friendly" the system has become, the slower the download speeds.
Is Chrome (or any other browser for that matter) capable of blocking the repeated ads that the BBC website is now using to precede just about every video on their site?
Switching to Start Page Private Browser is my answer to such draconian Internet Dictatorship.
I love my ad blocker despite some websites I visit refusing to let me view their pages (and this includes the UK Daily Telegraph on line newspaper!) unless I disable it. Like I care! There are plenty more sites that don't do this, so the answer to your question is 'I'll keep it even if I have to change browser to do so.'
Chrome I changed to after Firefox did much the same thing to me without telling me. Chrome has now gone the same way.
Hi Sven, I'm already using Opera and have found that whilst it does significantly reduce the ads, I also get a lot of sites that want me to turn ad blocking off. I take the view that those sites are really not worth persisting with if they won't let me even look!
Grant E.
NO!!!!!!!
I'll just keep using good old Firefox. I know it works extremely well because I'm always getting notices to the effect that "we notice you are using an ad blocker...................." Plus my search engine is duckduckgo.com, which doesn't track my searches.