←back to thread

Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

(0x44.xyz)
1034 points deryilz | 6 comments | 12 Jul 25 19:06 UTC | HN request time: 0.932s | source | bottom
Show context
SuperShibe ◴[12 Jul 25 20:20 UTC] No.44544826[source]▶
[flagged]
replies(6): >>44544855 #>>44545234 #>>44546507 #>>44546656 #>>44546983 #>>44547982 #
4gotunameagain ◴[12 Jul 25 20:23 UTC] No.44544855[source]▶
Well, in his defense it would have been patched immediately after the first adblocker used it, and he would have gotten nothing at all out of it.

Oh wait he got nothing at all anyway ;)

replies(2): >>44544888 #>>44545091 #
1. m4rtink ◴[12 Jul 25 20:56 UTC] No.44545091[source]▶
Would be quite different if they patched it and broke important extensions, possibly facing serieous outcry and bad publicity.
replies(3): >>44545271 #>>44545323 #>>44545582 #
2. devnullbrain ◴[12 Jul 25 21:19 UTC] No.44545271[source]▶
That's what they already did.
3. rollcat ◴[12 Jul 25 21:26 UTC] No.44545323[source]▶
Important extensions like, dunno, uBlock Origin?
replies(1): >>44545924 #
4. deryilz ◴[12 Jul 25 22:03 UTC] No.44545582[source]▶
I agree that would change things but I can't picture an open-source extension with millions of users pivoting to rely on something that's clearly a bug.
replies(1): >>44547361 #
5. eddythompson80 ◴[12 Jul 25 22:59 UTC] No.44545924[source]▶
Yeah, surely if chrome broke important extensions people will get mad and switch.
6. userbinator ◴[13 Jul 25 03:57 UTC] No.44547361[source]▶
At that point it's a feature, not a bug.

Having millions of users on your side is great ammunition.