alt Hacker NewsRight. Advertisers didn't bother with all these tactics because normal chrome users could download a plugin without any major hurdles to thwart it. Why drive people that wouldn't otherwise use an ad blocker to do so?
That's going away now. Now mostly everyone is vulnerable with the only recourse being pretty technical stuff, not just downloading a very popular plugin.
So advertisers will now be free to get more aggressive without much downside.
Edit: I do get that this sounds like conspiracy theory. But it really matches the Google boiling frogs approach. Removing the blocking onBeforeRequest, as one of the very first things in the manifest v3 spec was not a coincidence.
Replies
onBeforeRequest was removed because it is a massive spyware and malware vector.
> I do get that this sounds like conspiracy theory.
> … was not a coincidence.
Could it be that it was coincidence? Do you have a solution for reducing extension malware without removing onBeforeRequest?
Even if Google did want to reduce effectiveness of ad blockers, doing that via removal of blocking webRequest API is a double-edged sword. It may push users to alternate browsers with more effective ad-blocking.
Besides, webRequest implementation in Chromium is a terrible collection of hacks on hacks. It is a good example how not to design or implement API. I will not be surprised if the removal of the API comes from a simple desire to remove that embarrassing code.