Pros of StevenBlack/hosts

• Comprehensive: StevenBlack/hosts provides a more extensive list of ad and tracker domains, covering a wider range of sources.
• Community-driven: The project has a larger and more active community, with more contributors and regular updates.
• Customization: StevenBlack/hosts offers more options for customization, allowing users to select specific blocklists or create their own.

Cons of StevenBlack/hosts

• Potential privacy concerns: StevenBlack/hosts includes some domains that may be used for legitimate purposes, which could potentially impact user privacy.
• Larger file size: The comprehensive nature of StevenBlack/hosts results in a larger file size, which may be a concern for some users with limited storage or bandwidth.

Code Comparison

StevenBlack/hosts:

0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0
0.0.0.0 1.1.1.1
0.0.0.0 1.1.1.2
0.0.0.0 1.1.1.3
0.0.0.0 1.1.1.4

notracking/hosts-blocklists:

0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0
0.0.0.0 1.1.1.1
0.0.0.0 1.1.1.2
0.0.0.0 1.1.1.3
0.0.0.0 1.1.1.4

The code structure is similar between the two repositories, with both using the format of 0.0.0.0 <domain> to block specific domains. The main difference is the list of domains included in each repository.

Pros of AdAway/AdAway

• Provides a comprehensive ad-blocking solution for Android devices, blocking ads at the system level.
• Actively maintained with regular updates to keep up with changing ad networks.
• Supports custom host files, allowing users to add their own blocking rules.

Cons of AdAway/AdAway

• Requires root access on Android devices, which may not be available or desirable for all users.
• May cause compatibility issues with some apps that rely on ad revenue.
• Requires manual updates to the host file, which can be inconvenient for some users.

Code Comparison

notracking/hosts-blocklists

# Malware domains
0.0.0.0 0-access.com
0.0.0.0 0-cdn.com
0.0.0.0 0-client.com
0.0.0.0 0-count.com
0.0.0.0 0-pixel.com

AdAway/AdAway

# Ads
127.0.0.1 ad.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 googleads.g.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 pagead2.googlesyndication.com
127.0.0.1 pubads.g.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 securepubads.g.doubleclick.net

The key differences are that AdAway/AdAway focuses on blocking ad-related domains, while notracking/hosts-blocklists covers a broader range of malware and tracking domains. AdAway/AdAway also uses the 127.0.0.1 address to redirect blocked domains, while notracking/hosts-blocklists uses 0.0.0.0.

Pros of GoodbyeAds

• GoodbyeAds provides a more comprehensive list of ad-related domains, covering a wider range of advertising networks and trackers.
• The project is actively maintained, with regular updates to the blocklist.
• The repository includes instructions and tools for easily integrating the blocklist into various ad-blocking solutions.

Cons of GoodbyeAds

• The blocklist may be more aggressive, potentially blocking some non-advertising content or functionality.
• The repository does not provide the same level of customization and flexibility as hosts-blocklists, which allows users to selectively enable or disable specific entries.
• The project is primarily focused on ad-blocking, while hosts-blocklists covers a broader range of privacy and security-related domains.

Code Comparison

hosts-blocklists:

0.0.0.0 example.com
0.0.0.0 www.example.com
0.0.0.0 tracking.example.com

GoodbyeAds:

0.0.0.0 ads.example.com
0.0.0.0 analytics.example.com
0.0.0.0 metrics.example.com

Pros of anudeepND/blacklist

• Regularly updated with the latest ad and tracker domains
• Includes a wide range of categories, such as ads, trackers, and malware
• Provides separate lists for different use cases (e.g., mobile, desktop)

Cons of anudeepND/blacklist

• May block some legitimate websites or services
• Requires manual maintenance to keep up with changes in the ad/tracker landscape
• Doesn't provide the same level of customization as notracking/hosts-blocklists

Code Comparison

notracking/hosts-blocklists:

0.0.0.0 0track.com
0.0.0.0 1-800-flowers.com
0.0.0.0 1.cnn.com
0.0.0.0 1.gravatar.com
0.0.0.0 1.revsci.net

anudeepND/blacklist:

0.0.0.0 1.cnn.com
0.0.0.0 2.cnn.com
0.0.0.0 3.cnn.com
0.0.0.0 4.cnn.com
0.0.0.0 5.cnn.com

Pros of EnergizedProtection/block

• Comprehensive blocklist: EnergizedProtection/block provides a more extensive and up-to-date blocklist compared to notracking/hosts-blocklists.
• Customization options: EnergizedProtection/block offers more granular control over the blocklist, allowing users to enable or disable specific categories of blocked domains.
• Active development: The EnergizedProtection/block project is actively maintained and regularly updated, ensuring the blocklist remains effective against the latest threats.

Cons of EnergizedProtection/block

• Larger file size: The EnergizedProtection/block repository has a larger file size compared to notracking/hosts-blocklists, which may impact performance on resource-constrained devices.
• Potential over-blocking: The comprehensive nature of the EnergizedProtection/block blocklist may result in some legitimate websites being blocked, potentially causing issues for users.
• Complexity: The additional customization options in EnergizedProtection/block may make it more complex for some users to set up and maintain.

Code Comparison

notracking/hosts-blocklists:

0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0

EnergizedProtection/block:

0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0

The code structure is similar between the two repositories, with both using the 0.0.0.0 syntax to block domains. However, the specific domains blocked may differ significantly between the two projects.

Pros of WindowsSpyBlocker

• Provides a comprehensive set of rules to block Windows telemetry and spyware
• Includes a GUI tool for easy configuration and management
• Supports both hosts file and firewall-based blocking

Cons of WindowsSpyBlocker

• Requires more system resources than a simple hosts file
• May interfere with some legitimate Windows functionality
• Requires regular updates to keep up with changing telemetry targets

Code Comparison

notracking/hosts-blocklists:

0.0.0.0 www.microsoft.com
0.0.0.0 vortex.data.microsoft.com
0.0.0.0 settings-win.data.microsoft.com

crazy-max/WindowsSpyBlocker:

# Microsoft
$BLOCKHOST,www.microsoft.com
$BLOCKHOST,vortex.data.microsoft.com
$BLOCKHOST,settings-win.data.microsoft.com

The notracking/hosts-blocklists approach uses a simple hosts file format, while the crazy-max/WindowsSpyBlocker uses a more structured rule-based format. The latter provides more flexibility and control, but may require more maintenance.