Page 1 of 1
Can inline images be blocked?
Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 4:52 pm
by Willem
Now HTML 5 is on the way, there is a nasty load of privacy-slaughtering "features" coming towards us. And off course ads are part of the standard. Where previous HTML versions required images to have an address, HTML 5 has inline images to circumvent this (I think, I read it before in the HTML 5 standard but cannot find it back). Is there a way to block inline images by default?
For an example of inline images, see:
http://iescripts.org/help/embeddedimage.html
Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:02 pm
by Dr. Evil
Since there is no extra download, the image cannot be blocked. But the html tag can be hidden with
element hiding rules.
Btw, this has nothing to do with html 5 or ads. The
RFC for data uris is from 1998, and they can be quite useful for lots of things. Also, if there no extra download from an ad server, privacy actually increases.
Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 11:03 pm
by Wladimir Palant
Willem, Firefox has always been supporting data: URIs - and before it Mozilla Suite. So this has nothing to do with HTML 5 (or with privacy).
Posted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:35 pm
by ecjs
But I believe HTML 5 video and audio tags could become a problem, don't you think so ?
Posted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 9:19 pm
by Ares2
They are blockable with ABP since
http://adblockplus.org/development-buil ... ed-filters which is a dev-build of ABP 1.0.1.
Posted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 9:45 pm
by ziutek
I may be mistaken, but I think the previous code would block them as well, and the only difference is that they are now classified as 'media' instead of 'other'.
Posted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:32 pm
by Ares2
OK, it should be: "They are blockable in Firefox 3.5 since this bug has been fixed:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=451004 "
This was after ABP 1.0.1 was released, but if you would use ABP 1.0 with Firefox 3.5, I think they would show as "other", right.
Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 10:10 am
by ecjs
Thanks for the info.
