Why uAdBlock currently no longer works

TotalSonic

@jezek said in Why uAdBlock currently no longer works:

@beli3ver Is there any reason, other than user has to download more data, why there has to be a server? Can't the list update, duplicate remove, etc be done at user side, whenever he chooses?

I am not Malte, but the reason there needs to be a server, and one that is maintained on top of that, is that the block lists all need to be updated on a regular basis for them to effectively work, and apparently according to Malte, that the block lists take up a gigantic 400 GB of data in total. So, if the app had to have all of the lists included within it, it would be a huge install (and potentially one that would be too large for some devices), that would need to be updated regularly to and from the Open Store. With a server holding the block lists, the user can just access the needed data for just the lists they choose , and the app within the Open Store doesn't need to be constantly updated.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

Keneda

@totalsonic
Couldn't the app use list already existing ?
Like some from uBlock Origin or so ?

TotalSonic

@keneda - yes it could, if it was a smaller list - like the original version by Marius had. Perhaps the current lists could be optimized so it didn't require as much as server space as well - I'm not sure.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

TotalSonic

@keneda - I believe there are likely a number of different ways that an Ad Blocker for UT could be coded that would not need to have its own dedicated list server (and one storing some 400GB of data at that) - my comments here are just based on what Malte states in his original post, and wanting to figure out a way this could be restored - not that this is the only way to go about things.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

jezek

@beli3ver said in Why uAdBlock currently no longer works:

Currently we have 13 lists, which in all possible combinations comes to a total file size of almost 400 GB.

@TotalSonic I understand this quote as, there are 13 lists and they are doing all possible combinations of the 13 lists, for every combination one file, so the user can easily download it.

The largest list (all 13 together) was still about 100 MB at the end.

See, this kind of supports my claim.

I predict that for all 13 lists, there will be no more than ~~150~~ 200 MB for one update, if not using the server and do the downloading & merging at user side. Or am I horribly wrong?

~~But, even if it was 400MB for updating all 13 lists, it would be more acceptable for me than not working app.~~
Edit: I missread GB & MB. Ignore this statement, please.

kazord

I don't have the working details on the server side

but from an optimisation point of view it sould be faster and lighter to have :

1 file for each commun entries in lists and merge client side.
(exemple 1.txt contains entries only in the list 1, 1-2.txt contains entries common on list 1 & 2 and so on)
from client side just dl every files that match activated lists.
2 avoid rebuild all if possible (and optimize code/io for lower spec servers)

With that I hope it's possible to cut the server price a lot (cheapest ovh server is like 3€/m)

Capsia

@kazord Hello! We had the same idea
I've implemented it with many optimizations a few days ago. The result was a script running 45 seconds on Intel i7 or 2 minutes 30 seconds on a Raspberry Pi. The script is single thread so it could be further optimized. The lists were ~17MB of total size when the script ended. Querying the data from Apache takes less than 5 seconds. So far it seems too good to be true, so I wanted to ask @beli3ver if I may take a look at the original sources. The idea is to build this for serverless infrastructure on Netlify that will require very little costs and almost no maintenance. Idk the numbers of requests to uadblock servers, but maybe that could be done also with the free plan.

Thank you for all your efforts in Uadblock

domubpkm

Last hosts file that i kept and use, built with 14 (all) uAdBlock blocking lists = 21.2 mb

Josué

I assume that you finally turned it off definitively. I didn't know that this feature had this great cost until now. It is sad to say but this feature looks not sustainable for a small community like ours to keep this working just with donations (I desire to be wrong). I don't know if it could be done in another way. Anyway, Malte, thanks for all the work you have done. I'll try to send you a small donation this week.
Regards

domubpkm

For those who are not aware, uAdBlock is currently working.

dizzy

@domubpkm Hum, I still have a lots of ads...

domubpkm

@dizzy Check the size of this file

dizzy

@domubpkm 312 bytes ...

domubpkm

@dizzy That means that uAdBlock doesn't work for you ! You take all ads ! You must update uAdBlock.
First open and deactivate uAdBlock, then choose the lists you want, then update. After that, you must be protected. And you can check again the size of hosts file, probably xx mb !

Knalli73

@domubpkm same here. 312 bytes and no blocking at all. I tried several times.

dizzy

@domubpkm That worked. Thanks for the help!.

Knalli73

@domubpkm now it works. I don't now if I did something wrong, but it is great to have a adblocker again

magdesign

@beli3ver : thank you for all the effort over the years.

@domubpkm: does this mean we could share hosts files to do adblocking?

Maybe we should check out if we somehow can manage to use tblock on ubports devices.

FakeShell

@beli3ver
Hey
I can fulfill the servers
If your only issue is the server then drop me a dm in telegram
@FakeShell

beli3ver

So, new version of uAdBlock server is online, mega performant and doesn't eat resources anymore. In addition, after a new review of the app by Brian, there will be a new version with 4 new lists and fix some bugs.