Understandable, but you shouldn't trust the ads, either.

That's a fine default stance. But uBO is one of, and some would say the only, extension that you should evaluate on its own merits rather than stereotyping with the rest of the category.

Fair, but the risk of malware is probably much greater if you don't use an ad blocker. Most ads are scams are phishing these days. Even if you're quite savvy, you can always misclick.

Then install AdGuard on your network and pick any of the multiple solutions that let you run your DNS for all of your devices through it.

But yeah it's kind of delusional to put a blanket ban on code you could read yourself.

> But yeah it's kind of delusional to put a blanket ban on code you could read yourself.

uBlock origin is 307k lines of code. Yes, you could read it all, but its an impractical task.

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting uBO is untrustworthy, but just because a piece of software is open source doesn't mean it is practical for an individual to audit the code themselves.

Not only that, but what if the browser extension changes owners? We've seen this in the past when suddenly trustworthy code turned not so trustworthy.

How do you keep track of this? Yes you can read the diffs, but not really practical.

I'll just wait until Firefox ships with a secure sandbox for extensions.

You use and trust other software for which you can’t read the source code (either not available or impractical as you said). Why?

I'm not the person who orignally said they dont use extensions. I have no issue using uBO or other extensions.

I'm sure typing this comment and sending it over the internet involves billions of lines of code running on countless pieces of hardware. Of course there has to be some level of trust somewhere.

Ok - you’re delusional, uBlock origin is widely used and safe.