Optimizing filter lists with Adblock Plus 0.7

Everything about using Adblock Plus on Mozilla Firefox, Thunderbird and SeaMonkey
User avatar
pirlouy
Posts: 332
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 2:33 pm
Location: France

Optimizing filter lists with Adblock Plus 0.7

Post by pirlouy »

With this new AB+ 0.7, the way to catch pub has changed and now a lot of non-regexp filters do not slow down the web.
Then, filterset like rick752's easylist seems to be the good solution, because it is simple and easy to understand.

I think I've well-summarized, don't I ? (Edit: more explanation here)

Like I adapt a new personal filterset, I wanted to know what is the better way to block a domain ?
For example;
Rick uses *falkag*
I use |http://a.as-eu.falkag* , |http://a.as-us.falkag*

what is the better solution ?
ecjs
Posts: 170
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 7:39 pm

Re: Optimizing filter lists with Adblock Plus 0.7

Post by ecjs »

pirlouy wrote: Rick uses *falkag*
I use |http://a.as-eu.falkag* , |http://a.as-us.falkag*
The first one is better in my opinion as it is less redundant.
Guest

Re: Optimizing filter lists with Adblock Plus 0.7

Post by Guest »

pirlouy wrote: Rick uses *falkag*
I use |http://a.as-eu.falkag* , |http://a.as-us.falkag*

what is the better solution ?
I haven't had a false positive yet with just *falkag*.
If you find one, let me know.
User avatar
Peng
Posts: 518
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 8:14 pm
Location: Central Florida
Contact:

Post by Peng »

I would block /^http:\/\/([^./]+\.)*falkag\.net\//, because I think I've found a lot of falkag subdomains, so I don't want to go to through the effort of blocking every single one.
User avatar
pirlouy
Posts: 332
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 2:33 pm
Location: France

Post by pirlouy »

@ecjs: yes, the first is shorter, but with the AB+ 0.7, the lenght seems to be not important...
And with the second, thanks to '|' it avoid to do a search anywhere in an URL...

That's why I'm not sure.

@Rick: I never say *falkag* is a filter who causes false positive, it was just an example. :-)
ecjs
Posts: 170
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 7:39 pm

Re: Optimizing filter lists with Adblock Plus 0.7

Post by ecjs »

pirlouy wrote: Rick uses *falkag*
I use |http://a.as-eu.falkag* , |http://a.as-us.falkag*
The simpler, the better.
Wladimir Palant

Post by Wladimir Palant »

@pirlouy: I use |http://*.falkag.net/* and |http://as1.falkag.de/* - and I think that it is better to include more text in the filter.

And there is one exception to the rule "a lot of non-regexp filters do not slow down the web" - these non-regexp filters should have at least 8 characters of normal text somewhere (meaning no wildcards). Adblock Plus can use this text as a shortcut then. Filters that don't have enough text like *falkag* will be treated just like regexps. It is justified in cases like */ads/* but not here - *falkag.net* would do already.
ecjs
Posts: 170
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 7:39 pm

Post by ecjs »

Wladimir Palant wrote:@pirlouy: I use |http://*.falkag.net/* and |http://as1.falkag.de/* - and I think that it is better to include more text in the filter.

And there is one exception to the rule "a lot of non-regexp filters do not slow down the web" - these non-regexp filters should have at least 8 characters of normal text somewhere (meaning no wildcards). Adblock Plus can use this text as a shortcut then. Filters that don't have enough text like *falkag* will be treated just like regexps. It is justified in cases like */ads/* but not here - *falkag.net* would do already.
Alright.
Wladimir Palant

Post by Wladimir Palant »

@Rick: the difference is - instead of assuming that there will be no false positives, you know that there won't be any. *falkag* may match images in an artikle on Falk AG to give you one example.
Master X
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 7:19 pm

Post by Master X »

We need a blocking FAQ/commands list!
I did not knew, that "|" is possible and has a goog function. I do not really know whats possible with DIV-blocking... Perhaps there are even more features, that I am not aware of. :?
Wladimir Palant

Post by Wladimir Palant »

@Master X: Both bars and advanced element hiding are new in Adblock Plus 0.7 - there wasn't a release yet so the FAQ hasn't been updated.
User avatar
rick752
Posts: 2709
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 7:59 pm
Location: New York USA
Contact:

Post by rick752 »

I would think that:

*http://a.*falkag* (if "a.[whatever] falkag is the ad offender)

... would work the best, then. This would block JS calls where the ad is in the center of a js link.

Wouldn't using a "pipe" (|http) only block an ad that STARTS with the site because the "pipe" denotes that http has to START the line. That would normal not be that way as a 3rd party javascript link.

Am I correct?
Master X
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 7:19 pm

Post by Master X »

rick752 wrote:Wouldn't using a "pipe" (|http) only block an ad that STARTS with the site because the "pipe" denotes that http has to START the line. That would normal not be that way as a 3rd party javascript link.
I think so. but if you only would like to block a specific thing, this can be very useful.

Example: "|http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/" since this would never be a link.
User avatar
rick752
Posts: 2709
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 7:59 pm
Location: New York USA
Contact:

Post by rick752 »

Master X wrote: Example: "|http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/" since this would never be a link.
That is probably NOT true! I am not a big fan of using a "pipe" at the beginning of a line because there are many sites out there that serve ads (including Google) from there own databases.

If xyz.com calls from a database, "|http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/"
will NOT be blocked because the "call" will not come at the beginning of the IP string.

http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/ (without the pipe) should be a better filter string. Yes?
Master X
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 7:19 pm

Post by Master X »

I am not sure, since this intern calls in some cases modify the adress (special charakters like ":" and "/" are encoded). When this happens only the filter "pagead" would block. But this can become dangeraus, because false positives can occur.
Post Reply