Pros of adblock-rust

• Written in Rust, offering better performance and memory safety
• Designed for cross-platform use, including mobile devices
• Actively maintained by Brave Software, with regular updates

Cons of adblock-rust

• Less extensive feature set compared to uBlock
• Smaller community and fewer third-party filter lists
• Limited customization options for end-users

Code Comparison

uBlock (JavaScript):

api.net.onBeforeRequest.addListener(
    onBeforeRequest,
    {
        urls: ['<all_urls>'],
        types: allNetRequestTypes
    },
    ['blocking']
);

adblock-rust (Rust):

pub fn check_network_urls(&self, url: &str, source_url: &str, request_type: &str) -> bool {
    self.engine.check_network_urls(url, source_url, request_type)
}

The code snippets show different approaches to handling network requests. uBlock uses JavaScript and browser APIs, while adblock-rust implements a Rust function for URL checking. The Rust implementation is likely more efficient but may be less flexible for browser-specific features.

Pros of AdguardBrowserExtension

• More comprehensive filtering options, including HTTPS filtering and custom rules
• Offers additional privacy features like tracking protection and social media blocking
• Supports a wider range of browsers, including Safari and Edge

Cons of AdguardBrowserExtension

• Larger codebase and potentially higher resource usage
• Less frequent updates compared to uBlock
• Some advanced features require a paid subscription

Code Comparison

uBlock (content-script.js):

const µb = µBlock;
const onBeforeScriptExecute = {
    actor: 'content',
    handler: function(details) {
        if ( µb.canInjectScripts() === false ) { return; }
        const fctxt = µb.filteringContext.duplicate();

AdguardBrowserExtension (content-script.js):

const adguard = window.adguard;
const contentPage = adguard.contentPage;
const requestFilter = adguard.requestFilter;
const filteringLog = adguard.filteringLog;
const safebrowsing = adguard.safebrowsing;

Both projects use content scripts for ad blocking, but AdguardBrowserExtension's code structure appears more modular with separate components for different functionalities. uBlock's code is more compact and focused on core ad-blocking features.

Pros of EasyList

• Focused solely on filter lists, providing a comprehensive set of rules for ad-blocking
• Community-driven project with frequent updates and contributions
• Can be used by various ad-blocking extensions and software

Cons of EasyList

• Requires integration into other software to function as an ad-blocker
• May include some false positives or overly aggressive rules
• Limited customization options for end-users

Code Comparison

uBlock:

var µBlock = (function() {
    'use strict';
    var µb = {
        userSettings: {
            advancedUserEnabled: false,
            alwaysDetachLogger: false,
            autoUpdate: true,
            // ... more settings
        },
        // ... more code
    };
    return µb;
})();

EasyList:

! Example EasyList rules
||example.com/ads/*
##.ad-banner
@@||example.com/assets/images/*

Summary

uBlock is a full-featured ad-blocker with its own engine and UI, while EasyList is a collection of filter lists used by various ad-blocking tools. uBlock offers more customization and control for users, whereas EasyList focuses on maintaining comprehensive filter lists for blocking ads and trackers.

Pros of Privacy Badger

• Learns and adapts to trackers automatically without relying on predefined lists
• Focuses specifically on privacy and tracking protection
• Developed by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a respected privacy advocacy organization

Cons of Privacy Badger

• Less comprehensive ad-blocking capabilities compared to uBlock Origin
• May require more system resources due to its learning algorithm
• Limited customization options for advanced users

Code Comparison

Privacy Badger (JavaScript):

function updateOrigin(tabId, frameId, origin, action) {
  if (!origin) {
    return;
  }
  if (!(origin in tabData[tabId])) {
    tabData[tabId][origin] = {};
  }
  tabData[tabId][origin][frameId] = action;
}

uBlock Origin (JavaScript):

µBlock.staticNetFilteringEngine.matchString(
    fctxt,
    requestType,
    requestURL
).then(response => {
    if ( response === 0 ) {
        return;
    }
    // Block the request
});

Both projects use JavaScript for their core functionality, but uBlock Origin's code appears more focused on efficient filtering, while Privacy Badger's code emphasizes tracking and managing origin data.