Firefox-ios: FXIOS-949 ⁃ Improve content blocking to match Safari + 3rd party content blockers

[digitalqualms]

Why/User Benefit/User Problem

Hi,

Content blocking in Firefox on iOS is not as good as Safari with 3rd party content blockers (e.g. AdGuard). I would switch my default browser if Firefox were able to perform as well in this regard.

Perhaps do one or more of the following:

1. Inherit Safari content blockers somehow (I'm guessing there are currently API restrictions against this. Maybe an iOS developer can file more specific feedback to Apple on what would be required)
2. Use more comprehensive block lists (e.g. what AdGuard and or other dedicated Safari content blockers use) by default. It looks like Edge for iOS ships with Adblock Plus but it's not as good as Safari + 3rd party either
3. Add more customization options for content blocking (perhaps a slider with how strict it is)

Safari (iOS 14.0) + AdGurard (4.0.3) + Firefox Focus (8.1.5):

Firefox (28.2)

Edge (45.8.14)

Acceptance Criteria (how do I know when I’m done?)

Ad blocking is nearly as good as Safari + 3rd party blockers

Not included

Thanks for considering this!

┆Issue is synchronized with this Jira Task

[athomasmoz]

Thanks for logging @digitalqualms . We have a Strict Enhanced Tracking Protection (under Settings > Tracking Protection) that blocks tracking content. Have you tried that and does it cover what you're looking for? I'm wondering if the request should be to add more content blocking or to make the strict option more prominent in the UI

[digitalqualms]

Good question. Strict Enhanced Tracking Protection seems to be an improvement and closer to what I hoped to see. I think I overlooked it because I didn't realize "Tracking Protection" applied to blocking visible content - I expected that menu to be just cookies, tracking pixels, etc. It's clear once you read the description of Strict Enhanced Tracking Protection that it does block content.

I'll give it a shot but I'd still like to have the powerful customization that Safari is able to provide (again, I realize Apple may have to make concessions/changes to allow for that).

[mikelambrellis]

I'm with digitalqualms. Even though I use Firefox everywhere else, I'd prefer the adblocking to be improved before I switch default browser on iOS. With respect to testing and acceptance criteria, I'd suggest canyoublockit.com. At the moment FF on iOS is worse than Safari or Edge.

[bcutter]

Copy that. Since Apple allows to change default browser with iOS 14 I finally gave Firefox a chance to prove over few weeks. The first thing which is a massive CON compared to Safari is the huge amount of ads I have to look at when surfing on the mobile broadband (I use a network based ad blocker in home WiFi).

Firefox without improved adblocking abilities is a clear NO for me. Nice browser and I use it on every device possible but on iOS not good enough. I guess it's because of some Apple limitations right?

Anyway, strongly vote for this feature request.

[dmose]

I have a different use case: I'm using https://freedom.to to help block out distractions, and on iOS it uses a content blocker in Safari to help manage this. I'm hoping to avoid having to uninstall Firefox on iOS in order to take back my attention from my devices.

[pshirshov]

Anyway, strongly vote for this feature request.

A lot of people shared the same concern and/or requested a good content blocker. Though for some reason FF team never acknowledges the issue and ignores all the arguments. The reason is unclear and this situation creates a breeding ground for wild conspiracy theories.

[DarrenSchwartz]

Agree. Mozilla should recognize the importance of this. Firefox is a great experience on every other platform, but the ecosystem effect is ruined because of the lack of ad blocking on ios. I would love to give up safari and use Firefox 100% everywhere, but like the others here, I find the browsing experience in safari to be superior because of good content blocking. Firefox on ios will not have a chance at being successful until it has ad blocking parity with safari. Sorry, but it's true.

[athomasmoz]

Thank you for the input. We have a Strict Enhanced Tracking Protection (under Settings > Tracking Protection) that blocks tracking content, meaning a lot less ads will show. We used to have this on by default, but it can result in website breakage, so we turned it off by default mid-2019 and left the option to turn it on. I'm curious if your comments about the number of ads are with strict turned on or in our standard mode. This will help me to determine if making strict ETP more prevalent could be a solution

[DarrenSchwartz]

Ok, thanks for the clarification. I had standard tracking protection (not strict). I have changed it now and will have to evaluate for some time to see if it is comparable to safari.
I think part of this confusion comes from referring to this function as tracking protection instead of ad blocking or content blocking. People think of tracking differently from the display of annoying ads (words matter). Tracking can be invisible, while ads are very visual. If the strict tracking protection really does work as well as safari at blocking visual ads, then you can probably resolve this complaint with clearer language around the feature. Maybe even a separate switch that clearly says "block ads" would help the user understand what it does. The picture below is from desktop Firefox, but illustrates the point. All it talks about is tracking and nowhere does it mention ads. I know that mobile Firefox does mention ads in the description, but calling it tracking protection is the root of the problem. People have come to know the difference between tracking and ads. They want to know that their preference to block visual ads is being explicitly understood. I'll report back my experience with strict tracking protection. As a side note, it would be fantastic if we could manage custom lists used by the blocker (like uBlock Origin).

[pshirshov]

Thank you for the input. We have a Strict Enhanced Tracking Protection (under Settings > Tracking Protection) that blocks tracking content, meaning a lot less ads will show.

Not really. Maybe on some sites Strict Mode works well, but I would say that I see about 80% of ads on the sites I visit usually. Which is a lot comparing to 0-10% with uBlock or AdGuard.

This will help me to determine if making strict ETP more prevalent could be a solution

No it couldn't be. It doesn't work.

[DarrenSchwartz]

So I went to msn news and google news with strict tracking protection on. It did indeed block all of the visual ads I came across, but most of the elements were not collapsed (hidden) like they were in safari. So it's better than nothing, but safari was a far better experience because it wasn't full of empty white space. Here are a few examples of issues on firefox that did not exist on safari:

msn news

• "add to home screen" popup on initial page load (the one that so helpfully points to the button for you).
• opening an article presents the "view in app" banner that you have to dismiss every time. I tried reddit too because that site is downright abusive with that "view in app" garbage, but in that case, neither browser blocked the popup.

google news

• firefox allowed a sticky banner at the bottom of the page where safari did not (it was empty, but again, not collapsed).
• again, interstitial ads had their content blocked, but the element was not collapsed.
• neither browser blocked all of 8 social buttons, but safari blocked half of them.

For some reason neither one is blocking autoplay video even though it is turned off in ios settings.

For the record, the ios blockers I have installed are: adblock plus, firefox focus, purify, and 1blocker legacy.