Chrome's Adblock Pro is a uBlock Origin rip-off
Adblock Pro is very popular ad-blocking extension for the Google Chrome browser with over 2.7 million users and 12500 mostly positive ratings on the Google Chrome Web Store.
If you install the extension and have used uBlock Origin before, you will immediately notice that it uses more or less the same interface as the popular extension.
The core difference is the Adblock Pro logo that is added to the menu when you click on the icon in Chrome's address bar, and the logo on the settings page.
If you dig deeper, you will notice that the about page is missing, but that all other interface elements are a one to one copy of uBlock Origin.
Adblock Pro
Raymond Hill, creator of uBlock Origin, left a review for Adblock Pro on the Google Chrome web store that highlighted this, and other interesting tidbits.
I am the developer of uBlock Origin.
This is essentially the same code base as an older version (circa 1.7.4) of uBlock Origin, but with Google Analytics hook added to the manifest. Note the absence of privacy policy.
Also, aside google-analytics.com, whoever is behind this extension added another Content Security Policy directive which should really not be needed (the ability to embed Flash objects in the extension code itself). I consider this suspicious.
Also, the maintainer of Adblock Pro apparently does not want users to find out that the code was taken from the uBlock Origin project, the "About" pane has been removed from the dashboard.
Just use the real uBlock Origin: you get a more up to date version (1.10.0 as of writing), without any analytic hooks in the code base.
If you compare the source code of both extensions, you will immediately notice that they share most of the code. The main difference is that Adblock Pro seems to use an older version of uBlock Origin than the original.
What more, the about page is still in the code of Adblock Pro, but it is not linked. It highlights that the extension is indeed uBlock Origin based. So, no attribution at all by the makers of Adblock Pro.
What weights more are Raymond's other findings. First, that Google Analytics code was added to Adblock Pro. This means that some level of logging is going on, and available on Google Analytics.
Raymond noticed that code was inserted into the Adblock Pro extension to "embed Flash objects" in the code itself which he called suspicious.
Closing Words
It may not be that surprising that a rip-off of a popular extension can gain lots of popularity. More than 2.7 million users compared to Ublock Origin's 6.9 million is quite the feat considering that it does not add anything original and is based on an older version of uBlock Origin.
As Raymond noted, there is no reason to use Adblock Pro at this point in time. Considering that it uses old code, has analytics integrated and the option to run Flash content, it is fair to say that using uBlock Origin is the much safer bet.
Now You: Do you use an ad blocker?
Thanks for the tip Martin.
It is for these kinds of posts that I follow GHacks.
What’s up with the generic comment, are you a bot?
2G?
Where on the planet is that still in use? I was forced to give up using my RAZRV3 years ago because 2G was phased out by AT&T.
Everywhere 3G has been turned off and you don’t have LTE coverage, and believe me there are many developed countries where this is the case and if it weren’t for 2G you wouldn’t even be able to make a phone call.
Maybe I missed it, but I don’t believe tha term “2G” is in the article. Perhaps you are referring to “AGM G2”??
@Martin
Your website has gone insane.
When I the post button I then saw my comment posted on a different article page. When I opened this article again, it is here.
@Tachy @Martin Brinkmann
” Your website has gone insane. ”
Same here. Has happened several times.
@Tachy,
@Martin P.,
For over two weeks now,
I’ve been seeing “Comments” posted by subscribers appearing in different, unrelated articles.
https://www.ghacks.net/windows-11-update-stuck-fixed-for-good/#comment-4572991
https://www.ghacks.net/windows-11-update-stuck-fixed-for-good/#comment-4572951
For the time being,
it would be better to specify the “article name and URL” at the beginning of the post.
@tachy a lot of non-phone devices with a sim in them rely on 2G, at least here in europe.
Usually things reporting usage or errors/alarms on something remote that does not get day to day inspection in person. They are out there in vast numbers doing important work. Reliable, good range. The low datarate is no problem at all in those cases.
3G is gone or on its last legs everywhere, but this stuff still has too much use to cancel.
Anyhow, interesting that they would put that in. I can see the point if you suspect a hostile 2G environment (amateur eavesdroppers with laptop, ranging up to professional grade MITM fake towers while “strangely” not getting the stronger crypto voip 4G because it is being jammed, and back down to something as old ‘stingray’ devices fallen into the wrong hands).
But does this also mean that they have handled and rolled out a fix for that nasty 4G ‘pwn by broadcast’ problem you reported earlier this year? I had 4G disabled due to that, on the off chance that some of the local criminals would buy some cheap chinese gear, download a working exploit and probe every phone in range all over town in the hope of getting into phones of the police.
>”While most may never be attacked in stingrays, it is still recommended to disable 2G cellular connections, especially since it does not have any downsides.”
The downside would be losing connectivity. I spend a lot of time way out in the countryside where there’s often no service or almost none. My network allows 2G, and I need it sometimes. I have an option on the phone to disable 2G, I may do that when I’m in the city and I have good 5G connectivity, but not out in the country.
I would imagine that the stingray exploits, like most of the bad things in this world, are probably things you will run into in the crowded big cities.
I stopped using it in a mobile (Wi-Fi line) environment, so I’m almost ignorant of the actual situation,
But the recent reality in Japan makes me realize that “the infrastructure of the web is nothing more than a papier-mâché fiction”.
https://www.ghacks.net/2023/08/17/google-chrome-to-enable-https-first-by-default-for-all-users/#comment-4572402
It is already beyond the scope of what an individual can do.
What we should be aware of is the reality that “governments and those in power want to control the world through the Web”, and efforts to counter (resist and prevent) such ambitions are necessary.
Why do you want people to disable the privacy features? Hmmmmm?
Now You: do you plan to keep the Ads privacy features enabled?
I’d like to tell you, but apparently if you make a post critical of Google, you get censored. * [Editor: removed, just try to bring your opinion across without attacking anyone]
@Martin
You website is still psychotic. Comments attach to random stories.
@Martin please do fix the comments, it’s completely insane commenting here! :[
@Martin
The comments are seriously messed up on gHacks now. These comments are mixed with the article at the below URL.
https://www.ghacks.net/2023/08/18/android-how-to-disable-2g-cellular-connections-to-improve-security/
And comments on other articles are from as far back as 2010.
What does this article has anything to do with all the comments on this article? LOL I think this Websuite is ran by ChatGPT. every article is messed up. Some older comments from 2015 shown up in recant articles, LOL
The picture captioned “Clearing the Android Auto’s cache might resolve the issue” is from Apple Carplay ;)
How about other things that matter:
Drop survival?
Screen toughness?
Degree of water and dust protection?