First Chrome browser with Manifest V3 for extensions expected in late July
The first public version of the upcoming Manifest V3 for Chrome extensions is expected to be released in late July or beginning of August.
Google published an early draft of the new manifest for extensions in early 2019. The manifest defines what Chrome extensions can do and some of the changes in the draft caught the attention of extension developers.
Developers like Raymond Hill, best known for the Chrome content blocker uBlock Origin, noted that the initial draft could very well end ad-blocking extensions for the web browser. Other extensions, e.g. Tampermonkey, will also be affected by the changes.
One of Google's arguments for a particular API change was that content blockers could slow down the Chrome browser but a benchmark refuted the claim for the most part. Google has not published any benchmarks or data that confirmed the company's claim in this regard.
The company stated as well that the new API would improve privacy and security of Chrome users.
Google made some concessions, e.g. by raising the artificial limit of the controversial API to better accommodate ad-blocking extensions but remained on course.
Chromium Developer advocate Simeon Vincent confirmed on the Chromium Extensions forum that Google would launch the first preview of the new Manifest to the Canary channel in late July or beginning of August.
Manifest V3 is not yet ready for experimentation and feedback. The extensions team is currently working towards releasing a Developer Preview in the Canary channel at the end of July or beginning of August. We'll be sharing additional details when that lands.
Chrome Canary is the cutting edge development version of Google Chrome. While not mentioned in the post, it is likely that the new Manifest will be turned off by default and needs to be enabled using an experimental flag before it becomes available.
Most content blockers won't work properly when the change lands in Chrome Canary. The draft and some of its limits are not final, and developers are still trying to figure out if it is even possible to publish updates that use the new API without sacrificing functionality.
It will take at least six months before the change lands in Chrome Stable at the earliest; this would mean that Manifest V3 could launch as early as the beginning of 2020.
Most companies that produce Chromium-based web browsers have stated that they would not implement the API in this form or that their built-in content blocking capabilities would not be affected by the change.
Google made some adjustments to some of the parameters of the new API that is part of Manifest V3 but the overall change seems to be set in stone.
Closing Words
It seems unlikely that Google will modify Manifest V3Â for Chrome extensions significantly at this point. The company may make changes here and there but seems hellbent on releasing the Manifest with the new API.
Now You: What is your take on the whole situation? (via The Register)
Martin,
Google Chrome 76 has arrived. So, has it been applied now?
I have switched to Vivaldi.
Have switched to Firefox also.
This is really scary. I switched over to Firefox after reading this. I imported all my settings and grabbed similar extensions. So far its much faster than Chrome. Firefox navigation icons and tab are ugly so I made it look similar to Chrome using muckSponge’s MaterialFox script.
Thanks for the hint of the style. Really looks awesome.
Already moved to Firefox again. Took me an hour (Extensions, Userscripts and -styles, tweaking & final polishings undet the hood), but worth it. Was a good run with Chrome, and Firefox got also faster than Chrome.
one of the goolag execs admitted on camera they are using AI and algorithmic manipulation to meddle in the 2020 election
https://gohmert.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=399712
https://www.projectveritas.com/2019/06/24/insider-blows-whistle-exec-reveals-google-plan-to-prevent-trump-situation-in-2020-on-hidden-cam/
The average Joe won’t change to another browser, ad blockers will become crippled, Google will block the competition (abusive…) ads. In the end: profit!
I’d almost respect Google more if they just came out and said yeah, we’re an ad company and we’re doing this for money. Instead of giving us this BS that it will speed up browsing and make us safer. It will literally make people less safe. Putting major limit on apps like ghostery and ublock which do very good jobs at actually protecting people’s privacy.
@Bob
Google does a good job patronizing most people with their nonsense, so they don’t worry about criticism we generate. They will restrict adblocking and there’s nothing we can do about it except vote with our feet and move elsewhere.
Most people will just continue to use Chrome + Adblock Plus and won’t notice much difference. If you want to keep using something like uBlock Origin though you’ll have to move to a browser that’ll keep supporting it.
Agreed. Extensions like Adguard and ABP will adapt to the more stricter limits (Adguard on iOS is already going down the several-extensions-in-one route), while Gorhill might decide to call it a day on Chrome. The regular user (those who have even bothered to install an adblocker) will not really notice.
Ads’ll be the death of the internet, if Google carry on, in this way. I know a lot of the net is funded by ads, but it’s getting loopy. I tried Chrome, just for a giggle. I removed it after about fifteen minutes, as it’s so damned slow, with it loading all ads and shit. If Vivaldi is affected, I’ll just stick with Opera v12. I’ve only ever found two sites that it borks and I don’t batch any nasties, either. As I can block bits and pieces, on the fly, it blocks everything that I want blocked, without any hassles.
Ads keep visiting sites free. If ads die then ghacks and all sites will ask for subscription to read them. Most people can’t afford it. Why do you think other people should work for free? How Martin is going to going to pay the servers of ghacks? I understand that you don’t care, but why should he work on ghacks for free? Don’t you get paid from your job?
@Anonymous
I’m under no obligation to allow my browser to be infected with malware and have that site’s tracking cookies follow me all over the web. Nor do have the time, patience and unlimited bandwidth to watch java sucking animation and pop-ups appear all over my screen.
Find another way to generate revenue. Otherwise, go out of business.
Then don’t visit that site
@Anonymous – Then don’t have a public website. Go behind a paywall.
Otherwise go out of business. I won’t shed any tears.
It’s like you coming to someone’s house whose owner wants you take your shoes off, but you refuse and keep entering the house. So selfish.
@Anonymous – so sue me
Paywall or else…
“It’s like you coming to someone’s house whose owner wants you take your shoes off, but you refuse and keep entering the house. So selfish.”
Next time you enter a store, remove your shoes and your pants, fill the form about your sex activity during the last month, smile to the face recognition cam, and don’t complain, you selfish person.
@Anonymous:
Ads are not the only way a website can monetize. It’s just the easiest. Also, there are plenty of very good websites that don’t monetize in any form right now anyway. That’s only two of many reasons why saying that ads are required for the health of the web is fallacious.
Microsoft seems willing and able to eventually make a Chromium based Edge the choice of the majority of users. Looks to me like they have 8 months maximum to initiate that growth pattern.
Well Google had a good run with Chrome becoming so popular. I guess we’ll see a rapid decline over the next few months/years when it hits the sable channel, and they stick with this model. Good for the web as other browsers like Firefox will gain ground, and web standards will be better for it as developer won’t focus on Chrome only (or mostly for Chrome).
Firefox has yet to officially announce whether it support Manifest V3 or not. But some they are thinking about it. Because Firefox abandoned its own extension engine and copied Web Extension model from Chrome, they will have to follow Google’s footstep.
@John, that’s not firm proof. That’s pure worst case speculation.
Firefox won’t gain ground anymore. Brave will. It comes with adblocking by default, and is similar to Chrome in many ways, to the point where you can take your Chrome add-ons with you.
Good one. Brave = Chromium = You’re wrong.
@MickyFoley
Brave’s adblocker is an integral part of the application which doesn’t make use of the WebRequest API, which Google intends to cripple. It’s NOT an extension. Equations are cool, but only if they actually work.
@Iron Heart
I have no desire to have my data monetized by Brendan Eich. Nor do I plan to let this happen
https://gadgets.ndtv.com/internet/news/brave-browser-allows-facebook-twitter-trackers-despite-promising-privacy-1991663
https://www.theblockcrypto.com/2018/12/24/brave-browser-is-collecting-donations-on-your-behalf-did-you-know/
https://bitcoinist.com/brave-browser-donations-not-optional/
@John
I don’t see Firefox following Google’s lead and kicking adblocking add-ons like uBlock Origin to the curbside. If you have proof otherwise this will happen then please share it here.
Will manifest v3 add to the rise of chrome only websites? After all why support less popular browsers that cost the web site money?
Its like google is implementing 1984 irl, right down to the concept of newspeak.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=re9Xp6cdkro
Video unavailable.
Probably the Project Veritas video, which is available directly on their website.
Hmmmm…. Major press outlets are running the story: “Google Chrome has become Surveillance Software.” (I actually question whether the phrase “has become” is entirely appropriate, since that has always been Google’s intent.) Steer clear of all things Google, I say.
Looks more like one article by Geoffrey A. Fowler, “The Washington Post” with no additional coverage splattered around as reprints.
After reading the article, it was somewhat obvious the writer has little usage experience: “Our latest privacy experiment found Chrome ushered more than 11,000 tracker cookies into our browser — in a single week.”
That would be about average for any user who randomly surfed about with a fresh default install of any browser.
Note: At least he [Mr. Fowler] was honest enough to admit the following: “The Washington Post website has about 40 tracker cookies, average for a news site, which the company said in a statement are used to deliver better-targeted ads and track ad performance.”
Forty cookies per site . . . .
I’ll let others do the math. It wouldn’t take much to reach 11,000 cookies in one week.
Firefox also lets websites spy on you by default. You have to actively change the about:config settings in order to make it not so.
Brave is my browser of choice now.
Firefox’s default search sends your typing in the address bar to Google in order for the search suggestion to work. But in turn, Google collects that info to profile and track you. It doesn’t matter what ad block extension you use, Firefox will send that info to Google anyway. This is a violation of privacy by Mozilla, and they have yet to make it known to its users. It’s violating the GDPR in some capacity.
Tools-Options-Search: uncheck “Provide search suggestions”, no more spygoogle data gathering! (you can monitor with wireshark and tcplogview)
If you want search suggestions you must accept the data gathering from spyware companies like goolag, that’s how it works.
There are other serious privacy/security issues with a clean FF installation… But not as much as with spyChrome.
Using Firefox or Pale Moon, I take steps to avoid being spied on by websites, and ban certain domains (Google, Facebook, etc. and their associated units) entirely. But there’s a big difference when the company behind the browser itself sets out to collect everything they can about you, across all platforms and activities, and then collate all of it into a single user profile.
this is google preparing for the web of 2025 or 2030.
In the coming years they will probably reduce the adblocking capabilities further, once it is based on the new more limited API.
Indeed, but, others if they will surivie they will fight back. I hope 2030 Firefox surives for instance.
Also the notion that many Chromium based browsers won’t implement the manifest V# is totally BS. One way ( excuse ) or and another ( excuse ) they will eventually. Also Google will make it so that if you don’t implement it, your Chromium-based browser will stay behind.
I’m nowhere near as cynical as you are. Right now, Brave, Vivaldi and Opera have said they won’t and are considering opening their own stores to host that ad-blocking API, either as a supplement to the Chrome Store, or even replacing it if the worst case scenario happens. Add-ons would still be limited in that latter case.
Even so, there’s always Firefox in the background.
The important thing to remember is that Google (at least for now) intends to retain this ‘dangerous’ API for enterprise settings, so it would probably take a hack to keep this API alive for the time being.
No it doesn’t matter really, because Google controls the Chrome store, and that’s where everything happens that is relevant for Google.