Obviously uBlock and Adguard⊠especially Adguard have more features than Brave, did you think you just discover anything new?
I donât really understand what you even trying to get by posting here, I already gave you the information and what Brave doesnât support from their $removeparam feature, that should be enough to give you an idea that all rules in some lists will not work fine and they can cause issues.
Thatâs what the list is telling you, it uses stuff that will break Brave because it canât do it.
You can write your own removeparam rules, what arenât you doing it?
Brave still needs feature parity with uBlock, Adguard uses a complete different syntax, yes, uBlock ads a lot of alias for them to have compatibility with Adguard, but Brave doesnât need to, Adguard is not needed, Brave should just find feature parity with uBlock and done.
Lack of feature parity doesnât mean that you canât do anything you can with uBlock though, you just need different rules for that, the âfeature parityâ is so you can load a uBlock list and 99.9% of rules work, which is not the case today for few features. The biggest one is $popup which is not supported at all and maybe $denyallow but that is being deprecated in favor of $to.
Thatâs how adblockers work, and thatâs why brave has to support uBlock features, not because they are needed today, but because Brave uses uBlock lists by default.
Also, please⊠donât use the adblock testers of any kind, especially since it is clear you donât understand how adblockers work.
Adblocking tests donât check anything relevant for the real browsing of internet and having trackers and ads and malware and all that.
Adblockers might include cosmetic filtering which is useless for anything privacy, these tests also arenât checking for parameters or anything, which you are talking about here.
The only way to know if an adblocker is good or not, is to compare them with the same type of rule and see what they lack or not.
I made this list in April, https://github.com/brave/adblock-rust/issues/1#issuecomment-1506072935 and it is still relevant today, if you want to know exactly what is still missing. Probably uBlock added some feature that is not included in the list though, I am not sure.
Anyway, these online crappy adblock tests break because of the $redirect or $redirect-rule feature, just by using it I got a 80 of 100 in the score, and â test failed.
Thatâs how mediocre these tests are, they will never really tell you how sometimes you are force to whitelist trackers to bypass an anti-adblocker solution, or how you need to use a noopjs in one and another redirect resource.
Literally Youtube uses tons of Scriptlet Injection to avoid seeing ads, lastest Nightly allows you to add yotube.com#@#+js() if you tried that, you would understand how these terrible adblock testers will never test that kind of advanced features in advanced adblockers.
You know, like I said, the REALITY of the internet.
Brave already blocks all major trackers, but what about the annoyances, the bad ads, the malware⊠you know, anything else that is uses by millions of pages daily besides the major known trackers?
Like uBlock had to relay on using regex for many rules because those websites use different domains to deliver their scripts that give popups and crap, then, those domains that deliver those scripts will change daily or every 6 hours or every week⊠so unless you use regex, there is no way to block them without having to report and then manually add the rule.
Can these tests do that? no.
Again, check the features, stop loading filter lists that even tell you they are not compatible with Brave, and understand why they are not compatible.
You can probably write your OWN rules to workaround the issues, if you donât want to do that, well, it is your problem.
Filter lists are made to cover millions of people, your own rules are made to cover your needs, so thatâs the difference, you donât need to write rules that will block stuff based on regex, when you can write simple rules that do the same job every time you see an issue.
Also, Shields and adblocker are two different things, Shields cover more than adblocking, adblocking is adblocking, and Brave adblocker has the advantage of being native, being fast, and being able to have more features than an Extension API will, like blocking network requests in extensions.
What about cookies? forget me? fingerprinting protection?, you are turning off more than just adblocker when you turn Shields off.
I use uBlock in sites that I know Brave might have issues, if I get an issue, I check uBlock logger and fix it myself. Then turn it off if I use normal websites where I know Brave has no issues supporting all features needed.
You donât need to only use Brave adblocker, but turning brave adblocker is not smart, because of the reasons I mentioned about, but also because Brave adblocker has Brave-Unbreak lists, that not only cover incompatible rules from uBlock or whatever, but also the Anti-Brave specific scripts people have been adding for a while.
Even major websites like Adobe or CNN español, have been adding that, and Archive, and Zoro, and many websites specifically block Brave, because Brave has an API to check if you are using Brave even if you use Chrome UA, and some websites are using it because they donât want Brave and the adblocker or whatever.
for example go tohttps://www.whatismybrowser.com/, then you will see Brave and Chrome, add whatismybrowser.com##+js(brave-fix) and then it will only say Chrome.
How will you work around that only using uBlock or Adguard?, so no, using Brave Shields and then another adblocker, that will barely do anything while Brave is on, will be the smart thing if you want.
Yes, you can do anything you want, but I am giving you why Brave adblocker is the future and why it doesnât matter if you use uBlock or Adguard if you want (Adguard is slower though).
