Best Adblocker: Test vs Malware
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 ก.ย. 2024
- Best Adblockers: Test vs Malware. We test UBlock Origin vs Ghostery vs 100 Malware links and compare the results to Google Safe Browsing, Default Browser Protection and Malwarebytes. Try ControlD to block spying and have full traffic controls at the DNS level: controld.com (sponsor)
Buy the best antivirus: thepcsecurityc...
Join the discussion on Discord: discord.tpsc.tech/
Get your business endpoints tested by us: tpsc.tech/
Contact us for business: thepcsecurityc...
I'd say considering Ublock is not intended as an anti virus, 78% is quite good.
78% is good enough to be another layer of security that may detect something that would have gotten through other tools. With that not even being its primary usage, having it also assist in that seems quite useful.
@@Daffmeister187 It also saves you the most important resource you have in life, time.
@@Daffmeister187 it also goes to show how much more exposed a typical web user will be if adblockers get phased out through dirty methods like manifest v3
agreed ... and personally i use LibreWolf (which i admit doesn't use that Google download protection or whatever) a Firefox fork. AND I also use either Ublock Origin in advanced mode blocking all third party stuff i DONT SPECIFICALLY allow
OR basic ublock origin and (i know it's EOL but its by the same dev) Umatrix which gives not just control over allowed domains but WHAT type of content from different domains.
Just got to the part in the video where Ghostery is mentioned ... I cant even remember why they lost my trust (partnering with an adware company?) years ago but they did and big shock .. that addon didn't do well
let's assume you're running Windows:
Ublock + Windows Security + Windows Firewall + (optionally) routinely running a Malware Detection tool like 'MSRT' or 'HitmanPro'
what else do you need lol?, of course one could mix and match the Adblocker, Antivirus, Firewall, and the Malware removal tool but i think this is the optimal "setup" template
Browsing the internet without ublock origin is a painful and soul crushing experience.
Without a blocker, it's like falling into a cesspool of crap. Sure you can swim out but it's a sh*tty experience. lol
@@BillAnt Why do you say that? Do you any recommendation of a BETTER web content-blocker other than uBlock Origin?
I think that Google is going to be ordered to continue Manifest V2 as the LEAST of the punishments for their Antitrust conviction.
@@simimik. - I'm saying that when Chrome moves to v3 manifest blocking the blockers. One solution is to keep using the last Chrome version which still supports v2 (been using 109 on Win7 for 2 years now, no issue at all lol). Or move to some non-Chromium base like Firefox, etc.
All hail to heros who making internet usable with such great extension.
Remember to donate
Google: A Trillion dollar company had to literally trash their browser to defeat Ublock Origin and Ghostery.
To be fair.. An ad blocker is for blocking ads, not malware...
I think it's impressive they just threw the functionality in there, and it actually works to block 78%.
Actually adblock was initially exist to protect you from scam and malicious ads. As scam ads are increasingly more common these days, it's becoming important to always use adblock. Even FBI are recommending us to use an adblock while surfing the internet
That right there is the point of this video. Many slag Malwarebytes Browswerguard because it doesn't block as many ads as Ublock Origin but clearly that's because being a malware company it as logic would dictate fucus'es more on security. Which is a good thing because nothing says you can't use both Malwarebytes browserguard and Ublock Origin together an get the best of both worlds! Getting both the best adblocking and the best malware blocking sounds like a win win to me.I myself do not use the adblocking part of Malwarebytes browserguard Vivaldi's built in adblocker takes care of that!
@@sihamhamda47and Google wants to get rid of that...
@@sihamhamda47 We use uBlock Origin for anti-Advertisement only (not for historical intended function).
We give the anti-malware defense in our Windows computer to Windows Defender and Edge's Smart Screen. Plus we turned in Edge the Google's Safe Browsing Protection.
"Google Safe Browsing + Edge Smart Screen + uBlock + Windows Defender" is better than MalwareBytes detection ratio.
@@sihamhamda47 and youtube is hosting scam ads while saying ad blockers are against their TOS
i mean lets not forget that you can add extra+ protection to ublock origin by adding more filter list via github/other sites/etc
The point of the video was to help us see how effective the choices we are making are. 78% is not great but that does not mean overall that Ublock is not a very useful extension. I myself use the malwarebytes browserguard specifically for the added malware protection an not for blocking ads and if i remember right Leo either uses it or did use it for some period of time. That may have been for teesting purposes for all i know.
And DNS filtering
@@billyguthrie3176The single most effective browser protection is ad block + turning off Javascript.
However, turning of Javascript will break most websites.
i have used UO/Umatrix (which i am messing with again .. even though it's no longer developed by Gorhill) or just UO in advanced mode with added lists AND third party stuff blocked unless i specifically allow it
@@billyguthrie3176 We use uBlock Origin for anti-Advertisement only.
We give the anti-malware defense in our Windows computer to Windows Defender and Edge's Smart Screen. Plus we turned in Edge the Google's Safe Browsing Protection.
"Google Safe Browsing + Edge Smart Screen + uBlock + Windows Defender" is better than MalwareBytes detection ratio.
* Any Browser has Google's Safe Browsing feature that has 96% detection capability. Plus Linux/Mac/Windows Defender antiviruses' capability.
My take is MalwareByte is not necessary o any antivirus/anti-malware product.
We use ad blockers to block ads not malware. And anyway ublock origins and adguard are only good blockers, others are crap.
Which other ad blockers have you tried? I know there are a TON of browser extensions for blocking ads.
There was a specific blocker going by the name of node something which was bought out and then they added info stealers.
It was more up-to-date than ublock when it was still working though
I think.
but most adblockers do offer some maware detection and prevention. Tests like leo just performed help us make better informed decisions an the test does not mean at all that Ublock origin is not a useful or good extension. Tests like this can help us spot where loop hools in coverage are so that we can close them.
adguard is better
are you serious about adblockers making m/w detection and prevention? in this case they should be called AV/security suits, but not just adblockers
To be fair, a 78% protection rate from an ad blocker against malware is really good. If it was a full fledged anti-malware program 78% would be really bad.
Shows you how much of Google Adsense is Malware doesn't it?
google will complain about adblocking but won't fix the fundamental flaw with scammy ads they serve.. if they just make the ads more screened I don't think adblokers will be a huge thing
So true, most people wouldn't mind of the ads if the ads on the internet are heavily regulated like ads on the TV.
Online ads system is already rigged from the start
money
let's be honest, if you use the browser default protection + ublock, considering that ublock blocked those 3 malwares that the browser allowed, and the browser blocked everything else, using those 2 together offer a really good amount of protection from malware. the most important thing that will remain however is common sense
I discovered your channel a few days ago and I really enjoy your content. Thank you very much and I hope the algorithm blesses you.
I used to work as a tech, and whenever someone managed to install adware, the last thing i did was always to install ublock so they wouldn't manage to do it again
Ghostery is not an adblocker or malware blocker... It's a privacy anti-tracking tool...
I’ve been using Ghostery for about a year and it’s been fantastic! I love the “never consent” option for automatically reject cookie requests.
It blocks ads tho
Another point here (not super relevant with uBO but with smaller adblockers) is that there have been cases of extensions, such as nano adblocker / defender (an anti anti adblock extension) getting bought up and turned into malware. That is the justification for manifest V3.
So.. "Lets screw everybody in the world because one bad actor". Perfectly reasonable response.
Hi eric
Nano adblocker was pretty good till some shady company from Cyprus bought it. It's no longer available nowdays.
Can you also test others AdBlocker for malware on your next video?
It may not be perfect, but it's all part of a holistic defensive stance. If you run this alongside a good anti-malware system, which Microsoft Defender has surprisingly become, you're in good shape. Combine that with a little bit of computer security literacy and you've defended against probably 99 to 98% of the threat out there.
I would actually like to see the test run again with all three of the systems enabled at once just to see if the Swiss cheese method works here or if we have the ridiculous amount of overlap between the blocking databases.
Yeah most would have more than one level of protection
I use an ad blocker to protect me from malvertising and from getting annoyed by ads, I didn't even know it had a (albeit not super impressive) malware protection system. It's not why I use it, but I don't object it having it in addition to the stuff built into the browser.
Ι would like you to test Adguard extension. It is quite good, although lately I noticed some malvertising slip through at a higher rate than it used to be. UBlock is also great, and both are of the same level. But they are just ad-blockers, so they are not an anti-malware solution, but rather an extra layer. But their main task is not this. Also, a pop-up/under blocker like pop-up blocker strict is a great addition. Another useful vid!
I use that extension and i agree things are slipping lately. I have noticed is not blocking hidden content that redirect to dangerous sites.
@@juanfigueroa4989 Glad to see that I am not the only one.
@@juanfigueroa4989 Glad to see that I am not the only one...
I use Malwarebytes Browser Guard along with another ad blocker (not uBlock Origin) and I've had great success with nothing being downloaded. So, that's a combination of the browser extensions blocking things and my browser just not being exposed to much to download. One cool thing about Malwarebytes Browser Guard is it keep statistics of the malware blocks over various time periods. So, you can get some sense of how much malware you were exposed to that it blocked. In some cases, I didn't even know I was exposed to malware that it silently blocked. Great video! Thanks for posting!
mandatory 'what is the other ad blocker are u using' question
@@ultimatehamsandwich734 lol ok, fair enough. I use "AdBlocker Ultimate". It's "just" an ad blocker, but it works very well and doesn't interfere too much. It's recommended in the Firefox add-on repository. I tried it years ago and stuck with it because they don't appear to be affiliated with any sites/companies, such that there aren't any "allowed" ads.
What the other extension you have?
@@maple_sticks5032 I don't see my other post, but I use 'AdBlocker Ultimate'. It's an ad blocker only and works well.
I like these side by side stat comparisons, gives a good indicator for how much each tool contributes. Happy to know my Malwarebytes browser protection is pulling its weight too!
Would you please start a channel for Mobile phone security too.
Love to see various anti virus / anti malware solutions tested on smartphones
I wonder how well does the combo Firefox default protection + Ublock Origin
Basically the same as just Firefox with Google Safe Browsing since it is likely to block the threats UBlock Origin blocks anyway.
@@pcsecuritychannel Google protection do warn about potentially harmful .exe for a lot of .exe
making it less effective
ublock origin have the benefit of blocking the malware page from using the pc as runner, and getting informations
and not have anything show up in the download list
so I would argue Google protection does not replace ublock origin job on this, and they are well working together
Google protection works more like a whitelist, and ublock like a blacklist
also most of these links you are going to see online after clicking on bad popups to make you download them, so specifically for serious malwares, ublock origin still reduce the attack surface a lot (even if you can still download them with direct links)
He said he was gonna do that, but didn’t
Wanted to ask same thing but youtube shadow banned my comment so thanks for asking.
I guess pretty well considering that's how I run it. lol
Though I still try to practice thinking before clicking also.
one thing i noticed is you use the domain IPs instead of the domain names themselves. I'm probably wrong but i thought when connecting via ip instead it almost always gets flagged as suspicious on that factor alone (from the browser).
Seeing as it's a free ad blocker, blocking 78% of malware sounds pretty good.
You can add more blocklists to uBlock Origin, like all the AdGuard lists. That will likely improve the results.
or just use adguard it's way better. blocks litteraly everything with mathematical algorithms and it's a russian company not a national spy agency from the "good" west.
Great video, I use Brave and NextDNS. Id like to see a video battle between Bitdefender Total vs Windows "ConfigureDefender" set to "High" (as oppose to "Default").
Would other browsers have the same protection as firefox? Maybe an idea for a video. Love your channel, found it out just a few days ago and i`m constantly watching like 2-3 hours a day. Keep it going beacuse You are doing an awesome job.
I used to use Ublock Origin with Chrome but since switched to Brave which has its on built-in and it seems to be just as good. Would love to see a test/comparison video on Brave to see as well. Thanks for the vid!
👍 good advice. The fact this type of stuff is not standard says something.
I'd be curious how something uBlock Orgin would compared to the Brave Browser builtin adblocker.
Interesting to see. I never thought about using it as a malware blocker. I use it as (drum roll) ad ... .blocker, because damn some of these websites are BLOATED with ads and of course there is always youtube which in my setup still works. I'm actively following the development on that.
What about running the test with Brave browser with aggressive adblocking?
could be interesting
Or Firefox on Strict setting
@@TeionM83 The reason for brave is because the ad blocking is built into the browser. All these others are using extensions which could probably be easily bypassed.
@@chris122380 I'd still like to see how it compares to these results with a little more than default settings, but not some crazy hardening that requires diving deep into about:config.
@@TeionM83bad
Have you done the same test on Brave?
Awesome Thank you for Sharing 💯✴
1:31 - look at the angle bracket left to network filters and click it, this gives you access to additional filters.
Hi Leo. Thanks for your informative videos. I wanted to tell that Firefox by default is not a private browser and sends various telemetry data to Mozilla. For gaining maximum protection and privacy users must harden Firefox using sanitized user.js profiles like arkenfox. Ublock Origin can also be configured and extra filter lists for malwares and PUPs can be added to it which can improve its detection of malicious URLs. Keeping the Google private Browsing option on is actually worse for user's privacy since it is being operated by Google at the end of the day.
Have you tried the browser Floorp? It's a Firefox fork built for privacy.
I have to say this tracks. We have few to no ads and most are dealt by UO. Everything else dealt by the firewall and Endpoint security. In one case I get a warning of 2.2k blocked threats and a quarantined device. Going there, is a tab with UO sitting at 4k blocked hits on a recently opened tab and what UO allowed for whatever reason mirrors the Endpoint blacklist. Apparently a "spam attack", they simply create thousands of domains, one might go through.
That made UO go from recommended to mandatory.
Would be fun to see another similar test, with uBlock Origin as Advanced User and/or combined with a DNS level ad blocking like Adguard or NextDNS.
A DNS based blocker can’t block malware payloads from IP addresses.
I am glad you are not using Crowdstrike !
Please test out Adguard in the future :D
Yes and with activated malware and phishing protection.
Adguard windows app works best.
to be fair with Ublock it probably wasn't 100% loaded since the browser had barely launched and spammed with a bunch of tabs thanks to how fast the script could open the tabs/addresses which likely accounted for Ublock missing checking some tabs.
kinda disappointed u didnt do a sample check of UBlock, Google Safe Browsing, and MalwareBytes extension all being on at the same time since thats one of the easiest config setups someone can do
ADBlock > Advertisement block if you don’t notice the main job of this extension is to block AD not virus and again they do great job
Thats a good testing methodology. Top 100 of malware currently in the wild
For an extension this is very good. You can't ask for more...
@The PC Security Channel could you please do a comparison between a free and open source security software like clam AV against the two best commercial ones like malewarebytes or bitdefender?
now I am curious about the results with cloudflares malware dns 1002.
Excellent video leo thank you for being gracious enough to make it. i found it very informative and look forward to your next video.
Brilliant testing thank you for sharing matey!
Please review Adguard next
But does it block ads? Here would be great!
Personally im very impressed at 78% for UBO. Layered defense is what is advised.
Unfortunately if any of us who watch this video find ourselves making excuses for why our favorite extension didn't do so well then we are missing the whole point of the video which Leo made quite well! Perhaps Leo will test more extensions that perport to block malware!
Ublock is so good as an extra layer
can you test brave ad block vs malware please?
About just ads brave browser is doing enough for me but for downloading malware apps I didnt try it and I dont use that as an anti-virus but I got brave just for ads and trackers , also the portmaster as you said in a video I really like it it stops creepy requests from windows as well , thanks!
Would have been interesting to see combination of ublock together with Firefox built in feature and if it gets 100/100 then try with 1000 urls.
include brave browser please..ty
security should be seen as a swiss cheese block, every layer adds holes but also covers other holes.
great video.i would rather use lynx or w3m than use a browser without ublockorigin
It might be interesting to see how the McAfee, Norton, and Bit defeder browser extensions stack up against each other. I'm pretty sure Bitdefender will be 99 or 100% but not so sure about the other 2.
great video, it would be interesting if you could do the same with the malwarebytes browser extension
Thank you for this insightful video.
Hey between a good AV like Bitdefender and Block Origin you're well covered 👍
Thank you for this demonstration!
Interesting, what is your windows defender configuration ? did you put the download folder in exception ? Thanks
I'd like to see these compared against a DNS Sinkhole like PiHole using the premade filters.
Would be great to do the same type of test with dns tools like nextdns
Why didn't you checked all the lists of the unblock?
For me adguard is the best Because it's support DNS that block ads directly on router level blocking no more extension no more private DNS to block ads
Using an ad-blocker with a Chromium browser is essentially an oxymoron now-a-days.
No. That would be using ghostery in a chromium browser.
Adblocking is not the same as anti-tracking.
One could have a browser that somehow was free of any tracking. But websites could still show you non-targeted ads.
Or you could have a browser with tracking but an adblocker installed that served you no ads.
Using a chromium browser one is most definitely tracked by Google, but can avoid being served ads. Using a good non-chromium browser with all the non-tracking features, but no ad blocker, you will still see ads. They just won't be based on your web activity ✌️
Five stars for this post. Veryvery good info and presentation is swift and effective. maybe too swift sometimes. take a breath.
Unblock paired with bitdefender traffic light is great
Ublock has the option to enable more filtered lists and import new ones. Not all of them are active on first install. Should all of them be enabled or is there a reason for why they shouldn't?
More filterlists -> higher chance of issues.
What about dns provider with malware blocking
Opera in built adblocker is also nice 👍..i use it with Ublock also
librewolf has a built in ad blocker and has better privacy and etc than opera.
@@Vividstar i already have firefox as well with many privacy extensions..librewolf looks nicer..i am gonna try it..thx
keep up the great work mate !
I wonder what score it would provide if both ublock and firefox protection were enabled (maybe some additional ublock filters too?).
What about Brave's Shield?
Can u do a video for best filters for ublock?
Should have included Aguard Plus
I'm looking for the highest quality security program for an individual with multiple computers, windows and linux? Please help???
You missed AdGuard AdBlocker, I'd like to see how well this one does on this test
well, this has made my mind up as to what adblocker i should use
I wonder if Pi-Hole (DNS-based ad-blocking) is worse than uBlock Origin? This will depend on filters used and enabled.
Yes, in that ublock intervenes on a higher level to stop video ads with weird delivery systems like you see with video ads on TH-cam.
No in that pihole blocks ads network wide and can be extended to game consoles or similar, as well as providing coverage for other users on your network.
I view both as essential security tools that work best in tandem.
note that a lot of these links use direct ip addresses
which does not use dns queries at all, you pihole dns filter will do literally nothing against that
@@s-x5373 There are people who will definitely forget about IP addresses! Yikes.
Thanks. Of course, I'm on my smartphone at the moment and I'm back on my computer after work, so yeah. I'll definitely watch that video again at some point.
that's why firewall is a more powerful instrument than a content blocker based on DNS resolve
Hah... I thought my reply went through once in here while I was using my smartphone. I did not know that PC Security Channel used IP addresses instead of domain names... Interesting.
I do use Pi-Hole in combination with NoScript in Firefox, although I should probably add uBlock Origin to my security arsenal as well. One thing I don't like about Cloudflare is that their service tells me to enable JavaScript so they can check my browser connection before allowing access to some websites and I despise that so much.
Anyway, perhaps I should find a way to setup some IP blocks in my nftables firewall. I already have my nftables setup for my router running in my firewall appliance. Plus, I run Linux in my desktop, not that it matters since not all OSes (even GNU/Linux distros) are safe anyway. It all boils down to common sense regardless of which browser/OS combination I use.
So adblock is like putting a chihuahua inside your car unlocked as a car theft deterrent? got it
Great job! when will we see an update on Kaspersky & HitmanPro.Alert software ban, as we need to kills these and load your RECOMMENDATIONS! Thanks and keep up the great work.That why we support you!
ublock origin isn't a malware blocker, its an ad/tracker blocker
They market it as such
Gorhill says it him self it’s a “wide spectrum content blocker” and says it’s not just an “adblocker” so it’s definitely meant for more than just ads/trackers
@@c0munity1 Also the filter lists are DIY, you decide what lists to add, sure it has built in ones but these are just the most popular.
Fight fire with fire. Google doesn't extend a professional curtesy to other spyware's. 😅
Excellent videos and content. Thanks!!
can you aslo test adguard , thay have standalone pc vertion and a free exstention
Great test 👍. Thank you
hello man, i was wondering, can you PLEASE test Project Nova and EZFN? It's a fan-made launcher for the older seasons of fortnite, and there's literally a LOT of people arguing and saying they got a virus or got hacked, but there's also ppl who say they had it on their pc for months and nothing happened. I'd really appreciate if you could do a further exploration on these two launchers (which are both made by different devs ofc, but they run the same purpose which is bringing up the OG fortnite seasons)
Brave shields would have essentially the same as ublock origin, correct?
Could you test self hosted DNS providers like NextDNS and ADGuard Home in a future video?
Firefox + ublock origin + kespersky internet security = my setup for downloading torrents
I think the second addon you tested works by just hiding the content like other famous adblockers instead of blocking scripts and links, I doubt it will block anything of a direct link to a download.
Add hagezi TIF list to ublock orgin
I would like to know which malware blocking list you're using for uBlock
uBlock Origin using the filterlist from URLhaus + its own small badware filterlist.
I was expecting to see Adblock Plus.
That was good 10 years ago
You should also try umatrix with scrip block.. or NoScript
Hi Leo. Can you test AdGuard both for extension and application of that? Thanks