• Opisek@lemmy.world
    0·
    3 months ago

    Besides what everyone else already said: Vimium-C. It lets you use Vim bindings in your browser. It’s also extremely customizable and even works with my bizzare keyboard setup.

          • Marty_TF@lemmy.zip
            0·
            3 months ago

            vim is a text editor program which is the centerpiece of a lot of people’s workflow.

            while vim itself alone is already impressively good, what makes it really stand out is the amount of Keybinds it has and how well you can use them.

            hjkl for left up down right, for example. Sounds complicated, takes some getting used to, but after a while, it comes natural. hjkl in particular are great for navigation as that is where ur right hand is on the keyboard all the time, so no need to move it right hand to the arrow keys.

            so a lot of other programs offer vim-like Keybinds to navigate or to do text stuff. This extension being one of them.

  • P4ulin_Kbana@lemmy.eco.br
    0·
    3 months ago
    My list of extensions

    • Imagus - displays bigger image when hovered over (Imagus Mod recommended);

    • Sponsor Block - Skips promotions on YT videos;

    • TOS;DR - summarizes TOS and Privacy Policies;

    • Cookie Autodelete - erases cookies when you close a tab, can make you log out regularly if you don’t put an website on a whitelist, though.

    • Dark Reader - changes the page CSS and creates a dark mode version of any page, while it isn’t always 100% perfect, it has many useful configurations, like whitelisting websites OR words on them, changing to a light mode, but less bright version of it, setting up the time that it activates, and a few more.

    • Open tabs next to current/Always Right - What the names says, 2 different extensions, but on Chrome I prefer to combine them.

    • Wayback Machine - has an option to auto archive, can bring you to oldest or newest versions of websites and links.

    • Search Image - gives you 6 or so options to search for an image online, kind of combines with Imagus.

    • uBlock Origin - the best ad blocker so far, browsers with built in adblock use it.

    • Privacy Badger - blocks hidden trackers once it sees then on 3 different websites

    • WhatFont - displays the font name in a popup, this is more a personal thing, but I enjoy it.

    • Anti fingerprinting extensions can possibly help.

    This is a long list, but these are one of the extensions that I have and I most value, there are some otherb too, but those are more aesthetic than anything.

    • ivn@jlai.lu
      0·
      3 months ago

      Decentralise and adblockplus do nothing uBlock Origin doesn’t already do. You can remove them. Also it’s uBlock Origin, not just uBlock.

  • rekabis@lemmy.ca
    0·
    3 months ago

    Despite uBlock, my first pick would be Tab Mix Plus. Firefox has yet to properly open up the API for tabs, so you still have to do some mucking around with internals, but TMP gives you multi-row tabs, specific tab-closing patterns, expanded right-click options, and a whole host of insanely useful tab features.

    I have been using TMP almost since the beginning, a good 15+ years now, and consider it to be absolutely essential to a proper Firefox setup. I would be happy to punt my TMP config file to anyone interested.

    • deranger@sh.itjust.works
      0·
      3 months ago

      Isn’t NoScript redundant if you run UBO in medium mode?

      Roughly similar to using Adblock Plus with many filter lists + NoScript with 1st-party scripts/frames automatically trusted. Unlike NoScript however, you can easily point-and-click to block/allow scripts on a per-site basis.

      • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.ee
        0·
        3 months ago

        If you go in ublock origin settings, scroll all the way down, you can toggle a setting that disables JS by default. On each site you can whitelist it by clicking ubo and enable JS.

        • sylver_dragon@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          3 months ago

          I wasn’t aware of this feature in UBO, but it doesn’t seem to be quite the same. As best I can tell (with a quick test), UBO lets me turn all scripts on or off for a site. I don’t see any sort of granular controls for selecting which domains to load scripts from (and I might just be missing it). For example, I may want to allow first party scripts to run on a site and maybe third party scripts from one or two domains. But, I don’t want scripts from other third party domains to execute. It’s very much a fine grained, least privileged style of script management. It’s a lot more work, as you often have to spend a few minutes sussing out which domains need to be whitelisted to allow a site to reach minimum functionality; but, you are not often caught offguard by a site doing strange things on your system.

          • underscores@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
            0·
            3 months ago

            If you check “I’m an advanced user” in the settings, then hit the “More” button in the dropdown a few times it’ll show the more advanced interface that lets you choose which third party domains to allow. It doesn’t work quite the same since it blocks both content and scripts per site, but I find it good enough for my usage.

            edit: You can technically block just scripts per 3rd party site, but it involves manually editing the content type for your rules in the settings. It’s not part of the main interface, so I never bother using it.

    • cRazi_man@lemm.ee
      0·
      3 months ago

      I thought HTTPS everywhere was baked into browsers now and didn’t need to be installed anymore? Is that not correct?

    • ivn@jlai.lu
      0·
      3 months ago

      I don’t understand your edit, how is more things doing the same thing better? It adds complexity, attack surface while taking resources.

      • SolidGrue@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        3 months ago

        Yeah, sorry… My head was in 1000 different places when I wrote that. Sloppy of me.

        Overall I agree with the general statement that less code is better, except perhaps in this case it is not.

        What I had been trying to say is in-browser privacy implementations are liable to be incomplete from the perspective of privacy minded users because the software publishers, say, Mozilla, are competing for market share of installed, default browsers. One way they maintain market share is by having the fastest and most accurate page renders for the widest base of use cases. To do this requires, in part, some cooperation from website developers whose vested interest in part is in driving ad serves.

        Therefore, it’s in the browser publishers’ interest to implement enough privacy and blocking features to effectively stop malware and common nuisances, but not completely cripple ad blocking since ads are a key part of web site operators’ revenue. They’re trying not to alienate that part of the web economy such that their browser suddenly starts hitting those “please turn off you ad blocker or select another browser” paywalls.

        Mozilla pretty much said this was the case a few years ago when they opted not to turn on the privacy features by default in new installs because the advertisers threatened to start hobbling websites for Mozilla browsers. I don’t know that the situation has really changed much since then.

        Anyway, my point was that the in-browser privacy features are a good start and should be enabled, but also that they amount to little more than a fig leaf over the question of effectively blocking ads. Loading the adblockjng extensions accomplishes a few things for the user. First, the extensions grant a more complete, uncompromised blocking experience for the user. Second, it grants the user finer-grained control over the whole web experience, letting the user decide what ads and cross-site data sharing occurs. Finally, the code is independent of the browser and so it doesn’t alienate the site owners from the browser publisher.

        For Mozilla, it shifts the responsibility of incomplete page loads and breakage onto the user, which in my opinion is where we want it.

        That’s why I’m advocating for doing both in this case: because the browser publishers have a vested interest to remain relevant in an economy that wants you to see the ads, and will do everything it can to make you click them. The best defense against for the user that is a multilayered approach.

        Finally, I do want to acknowledge that I’m using the terms “privacy” and “ad blocking” too loosely here since they are separate, distinctly nuanced topics. The extensions help more in the ad blocking space than the privacy space, but in what I wrote I think its fair to say that overall the extensions do improve outcomes where the two spaces intersect.

        Anyway, nice chat. Thanks for keeping me honest

        • ivn@jlai.lu
          0·
          3 months ago

          Wow, you are really confused. The argument about the functionality being already implemented by Firefox was about https everywhere. This has nothing to do with adblocking and it does break some sites (the one still not using https) but you can still access them with a click.

  • slazer2au@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    3 months ago

    Adnausem. Built on top of unlock origin it will simulate clicks on ads it hides to mess up your advertising profile. Also has an ad vault so you can see the adverts it is hiding.

    Consent-o-matic. Run by a Danish uni, it will auto deny all cookie popups by actually opting out of everything for you.

  • abrahambelch@programming.dev
    0·
    3 months ago

    Im using Firefox/a fork of it - please note that many of the below mentioned extensions either only exist for Firefox or don’t work well with Chromium browsers due to manifest V3.

    • UBlock Origin
    • I still don’t care about cookies
    • CanvasBlocker
    • Multi account containers
    • Dark Reader
    • FlagFox
    • (Bitwarden)
  • edric@lemm.eeEnglish
    0·
    3 months ago

    uBO, Facebook container, Bitwarden, Privacy Badger. People say uBO already covers Privacy Badger but I like keeping it there because of the replace widget feature.

  • sylver_dragon@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    3 months ago

    Pretty standard stuff here:

    • UBlock Origin
    • No Script - Yes, I run both UBO and NoScript, they have slightly different use cases
    • Dark Reader
    • FireFox Multi-Account Containers
    • Redirector - Great for automagically changing links
    • KeePassXC-Browser - For password manager integration
    • Rested - For monkeying with REST APIs
    • User-Agent Switcher and Manager - Why yes, I am the browser you are looking for
    • Video DownloadHelper - Because sometimes, you need stuff available offline
       
      In terms of actually recommending extensions to others. I’d recommend most of the above, excepting NoScript. If you are using UBO, then the use case for NoScript is a very narrow one where you want selective whitelisting of javascript while visiting a site. UBO’s blacklisting approach works for most cases and UBO’s whitelisting feature is lacking the granularity of NoScript.
    • boatswain@infosec.pub
      0·
      3 months ago

      Multi-account containers is one of my favorite things about Firefox. I use Temporary Containertabs too, so anything not in an explicit container is in a brand new one of its own.

      • sylver_dragon@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        3 months ago

        I use Dark Reader on my work laptop was well. We had a conference call with a vendor and I was sharing my screen while talking with their team about our usage of their product and one of them stopped me and asked about the UI looking strange. I said, “oh ya, I use Dark Reader because you don’t have a native dark mode. You do lose points for that.” They had a native dark mode a couple months later.

        I’ve come to the conclusion that UI designers hate their customers’ retinas.

    • Lightfire228@pawb.social
      0·
      3 months ago

      If you use any kind of ad blocker, switch to FireFox

      Chrome is deliberately crippling ad block extensions via manifest v3

  • strahlemann@feddit.orgDeutsch
    0·
    3 months ago
    • uBlock Origin (of course)
    • Snowflake by The Tor Project

    YouTube:

    • Unhook: Remove YouTube Recommended Videos Comments
    • SponsorBlock - Skip Sponsorships on YouTube
    • FireMonkey/ViolentMonkey/Greasemonkey with the “YouTube Age Restriction Bypass” userscript
  • metaStatic@kbin.earth
    0·
    3 months ago

    I usually don’t get to post anything in these because everyone basically uses the same plugins to unfuck the internet so heres a few that haven’t been posted yet

    Bye Rupert

    Flag Fox

    Return Youtube Dislike

  • Waveform@lemmy.world
    0·
    3 months ago

    For Firefox:

    UBlock Origin, of course.

    And that extension that turns all Reddit pages into old Reddit pages. (I hate the redesign with a passion.)

      • sleepyTonia@programming.dev
        0·
        3 months ago

        No, this one is on life support and it’s the one which injects extra controls for image links, Twitter links and whatnot. The one you are thinking of is old Reddit redirect. And yeah, couldn’t use Reddit without it

      • Waveform@lemmy.world
        0·
        3 months ago

        On Android I’m using Old Reddit Redirect. (I imagine just changing the URL is simpler, besides I’m not there enough to desire tons of features… I don’t even have a Reddit acct. currently.)

        On PC I just use old reddit boolmarks, and a bookmarklet that toggles to old Reddit :D

      • Waveform@lemmy.world
        0·
        3 months ago

        Just curious but how does disabling javascript on Reddit change the experience? Iir, diaabling it can break certain websites.

        • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.ee
          0·
          3 months ago

          It won’t allow reddit to have any tracking or analytics since no JS is able to run, it’s practically a static html site. As for your experience, it works pretty much the same without JS

          • Waveform@lemmy.world
            0·
            3 months ago

            Am I mistaken, or would it make Reddit load slightly faster and use less resources? I might just give it a go.