Ublock: Seeing ads with uBlock Origin installed...

[sphinx9]

[fenslett]

uBlock filters are made up of filename, directory name, domain name and DOM attribute(i.e, id and class) containing the string such as 'ad' and 'adv', which means advertisements will appear unless they has such keywords. So if you found an ad uBlock doesn't block, please report or block it using element picker.

[sphinx9]

If you can't tell from the screenshot, those are adverts on Google search results. If uBlock is 'unaware' that there are adverts there and I have to report them or block them myself, then there is clearly something wrong here. I think it's far more likely that there's an unintended issue with the extension that is causing those elements to still appear ^^

[Hrxn]

Try the default filter settings.. I don't see those ads. Also, you need to provide steps to reproduce..

[sphinx9]

"Also, you need to provide steps to reproduce.."

This has been happening since I installed the extension a few days ago, so steps to reproduce are install the extension then browse the internet, I guess!

[RoxKilly]

In your 2nd screenshot, I notice that although EasyList is selected, its rules are not being applied (it shows "0 used out of 24,191"). This may be the cause of your problem (EasyList is the most expansive adblock list). Likewise, EasyPrivacy is only using 5 out of 11,149 rules and Fanboy Enhanced Tracking List is using 0 out of 891 rules even though you also have it checked. Try to hit "Purge all Caches" and then "Update Now" above the filter lists.

PS: Something else may be interfering with the filters you've checked. Have you added custom filters (beyond those available for selection) at the bottom of that 3rd-Party Filters page?

[Hrxn]

The screenshot with the filter lists does not show the default filter list settings..

[sphinx9]

Try to hit "Purge all Caches" and then "Update Now" above the filter lists

Thanks. I just did this and though the filters list now shows it is using ' 24,102 used out of 24,153' (and similar numbers for the others), that advert in particular still appears.

[fenslett]

@sphinx9 Don't get me wrong. An ad with a weird name like _/path/Z11sDgBfg.gif_ cannot be blocked until someone puts it on the list. By way of illustration, many advertisers attempt to pass through ad-blocking extensions. Could you tell me the URL?

[RoxKilly]

Did the number of rules used also go up for the other filters I mentioned in my last post? Ok, now try to hold down the SHIFT button while you do a page Reload in the browser. Same result?

[sphinx9]

@Fenslett An ad with a weird name or attribute like path/Z11sDgBfg.gif cannot be blocked until someone put it on the list.

Yeah, they're usually in containers like .ad-container or something, and even when not there seem to be ways of hiding them despite their identifiers being obfuscated as other extensions (like adblock/adblock plus/etc) are able to do it. And if it's being obfuscated by being named with random characters then adding it to a list won't do very much.

@RoxKilly Did the number of rules used also go up for the other filters I mentioned in my last post? Ok, now try to hold down the SHIFT button while you do a page Reload in the browser. Same result?

The number of rules for the others did go up. The ads seem to have disappeared after a hard refresh - thanks very much for your help. :)

Do you (or anyone else) happen to know why or how this has happened? After a week or so of using this extension, I've found it quite unreliable (which is surprising as it's quite esteemed from what I've read online) - things like the aforementioned issue, YouTube video ads playing, etc etc...

[RoxKilly]

You're welcome. I've had very few problems with uBO. It has become my favorite extension. Others who know more about how the extension stores and reads rules would be better placed than I, but my guess is that you have a non-standard setup. Maybe you have other security software (a sandbox comes to mind, or antivirus that scans files and processes in-memory) that interferes with uBO's ability to either save or retrieve its rules.

[sphinx9]

The only sandbox I know of is the one inherent in Google Chrome. I don't have anything particularly special or 'weird' going on - Win10, Avast (with web filters / anything web related disabled). Chrome extensions include FoxyProxy (currently disabled), Stylish (simply injects user-defined css (without removing any, afaik)), uBO and that's it really. Was using Disconnect but I disabled it as it's not needed with uBO, it seems.

[RoxKilly]

Yeah sounds pretty vanilla. Sorry I don't know.

[sphinx9]

No problem. Thanks for your help. :)

[fenslett]

Hmm. I've read your issues again since I felt like something seemed wrong during conversation. Sorry for misunderstanding your words from the beginning. Couldn't see the word 'most' in the first sentence. I'm a bit shameful :(

Anyway,

@sphinx9 Do you (or anyone else) happen to know why or how this has happened? After a week or so of using this extension, I've found it quite unreliable (which is surprising as it's quite esteemed from what I've read online) - things like the aforementioned issue, YouTube video ads playing, etc etc...

Browser caching goes awry infrequently such as showing out-of-date contents when the browser doesn't recognize it as a significant change. Whenever it happened, we need to clear the entire browser cache or detour cache system. (I don't recommend clearing cache because all auto-login credentials are also removed)

Here's how for your information:

On Windows,

1. Hold Ctrl and press the F5 (Works for most browsers)
2. Hold Ctrl and click _reload_ button on browser
3. Hold Shift and press the F5 / Hold Shift and click _reload_ button (as @RoxKilly said)

On Mac,

1. Hold down Shift and click _reload_ button on browser
2. Hold both Cmd and Shift, and then press R

[ghost]

You deselected "Parse and enforce cosmetic filters.". Don't be surprised if ads show up then.
In the future try this first before posting.
This can be closed.

[gorhill]

You deselected "Parse and enforce cosmetic filters."

[ghost]

Read this: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Does-uBlock-block-ads-or-just-hide-them%3F

[harshanvn]

Also, if the ambiguously labelled "parse and enforce cosmetic filters" option does that then what does the extension even do with that option disabled?

It will still enforce all the other types of filters. It will ignore cosmetic filters. Read this, to get more information - Overview of uBlock Filtering Engine

[gorhill]

@sphinx9 The question to answer: why did you un-select that option?

[ghost]

Read the resource I or the one @harshanvn linked. The option only disables cosmetic filters but all others will still be used. Your statement "disable the main functionality of the extension" is false.

[ghost]

The point is that with cosmetic filters disabled you will still get a smaller privacy exposure and pages will still load faster all while uBO will use less resources.

[gorhill]

It doesn't really make sense that there is an option to essentially disable the main functionality of the extension

The explanation of why this option exists is available right there in the UI:

This option enables the parsing and enforcing of Adblock Plus-compatible “element hiding” filters. These filters are essentially cosmetic, they serve to hide elements in a web page which are deemed to be a visual nuisance, and which can't be blocked by the net request-based filtering engine.

Enabling this feature increases uBlock₀'s memory footprint.

For less powerful devices, this may be useful.

[gorhill]

I would say that there is ground for an issue here: uBO should have counted the cosmetic filters which were discarded -- i.e. EasyList should have shown "24,000 used out of 60,000" -- this at least would have provided one extra hint about the issue. But this needs to be opened in its own dedicated issue.

[gorhill]

@sphinx9 Can you open a new issue specifically for this? Use your 2nd picture, it demonstrates well the issue.