-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 83
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Generic 3rd-party switch does not indicate 3rd-party scripts and frames are blocked #2171
Comments
Yes by design: filling in red would suggest all is being blocked when it's only 3rd-party frames and/or 3rd-party scripts. Other types of resources are not being blocked. I do agree that the block rules should be conveyed somehow, and that is gorhill/uBlock#544. I did some work on this months ago (using partially filled cells), but I was not satisfied with the results, so still an open issue. |
I’m confused. I’m referring to using the row simply labeled “3rd-party” to block or no-op all 3rd-party requests. Based on the comment I linked, it looks like that action includes blocking 3rd-party frames and scripts, but the UI does not reflect it. Shouldn’t the rows labeled “3rd-party scripts” and “3rd-party frames” have the same translucent red fill indicating inheritance that the bottom rows do? |
Ok I see what you mean, I misunderstood. |
Maybe it goes without saying, but thank you for your work! |
Prerequisites
Description
According to gorhill/uBlock#484 (comment), using the dynamic filtering matrix to block generic 3rd-party requests includes 3rd-party scripts and frames on the backend, but the UI does not reflect this by having the scripts and frames rows inherit the red or gray fills.
Steps to Reproduce
uBlock Origin version
1.43.0
Browser name and version
Firefox 102.0
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: