Ublock: Adblock detection at browserleaks

[Daisenki]

On https://browserleaks.com/proxy it always detect uBlock on my Firefox, I did use Nano Defender a long time and that can hide the detection, but I want to drop the addon, that's why I ask now: Did I do something wrong or is hiding the uBlock not possible?

[mapx-]

just add
browserleaks.com##script:inject(abort-on-property-write.js, proxy_ab)

[Daisenki]

Okay, this works now for one site, how can I make a filter to make it work on every site? The uBlock should hide on every site.

[mapx-]

There is no adblocker / defender which can take care of all the sites in this world. It's all about filters or (in special cases) about bultin implementations to fix trick classes

[Daisenki]

So it's "normal" that uBlock get's detected and not a leak or wrong setting on my side?

[mapx-]

Exactly.

[uBlock-user]

It's not detecting uBO, it's rather detecting Filterlists's filters, you would get the same result with any other content blocker that relies on Filterlists. Also there's no one filter for every website, you can fix them on case by case basis.

[uBlock-user]

Blocking proxy_ab.js takes care of the filter detection.

[Daisenki]

Thank you, not sure if it does anything for privacy, but the filter lists are not detected anymore. Why does uBlock not block proxy_ab.js as default? Isn't that a leak at the addon?

[okiehsch]

So after I block proxy_ab.js what have I achieved?
I do not "leak" anything, the site assumes that I use an adblocker based on blocked network requests.
The users of https://browserleaks.com/proxy can say: "Hey, I use an adblocker that browserleaks can't detect", which is basically meaningless, because any site can use the same script, rename it and then assume that the user has an ablocker installed.

I find the whole premise of such a "test" deeply flawed.

[Daisenki]

Thanks guys!