Do VPNs affect Pup Advert Blocker efficacy?

[JASpup]

I'm looking at the same page in Tor and Chrome.
Tor puts me in Dresden.
Tor shows ads blocked in Chrome.

Related:

Does the hosts file accept wildcards?

127.0.0.1 005.free-counter.co.uk
127.0.0.1 006.free-counter.co.uk
127.0.0.1 007.free-counter.co.uk
127.0.0.1 008.free-counter.co.uk
127.0.0.1 008.free-counters.co.uk

*.free-counters.co.uk?

127.0.0.1 d169bbxks24g2u.cloudfront.net
127.0.0.1 d1fc8wv8zag5ca.cloudfront.net
127.0.0.1 d1jikhx1ssl81z.cloudfront.net
127.0.0.1 d1l6p2sc9645hc.cloudfront.net
127.0.0.1 d1lxhc4jvstzrp.cloudfront.net
127.0.0.1 d1piupybsgr6dr.cloudfront.net
127.0.0.1 d1v9u0bgi1uimx.cloudfront.net
127.0.0.1 d1xfq2052q7thw.cloudfront.net
127.0.0.1 d1z2jf7jlzjs58.cloudfront.net
127.0.0.1 d1zatounuylvwg.cloudfront.net
127.0.0.1 d24n15hnbwhuhn.cloudfront.net

*.cloudfront.net?

[tallboy]

The /etc/hosts file only accept - and +

The IP address can conform to either IPv4 or IPv6. Fields of the
entry are separated by any number of blanks and/or tab
characters. Text from a "#" character until the end of the line
is a comment, and is ignored. Host names may contain only
alphanumeric characters, minus signs ("-"), and periods (".").
They must begin with an alphabetic character and end with an
alphanumeric character. Optional aliases provide for name
changes, alternate spellings, shorter hostnames, or generic
hostnames (for example, localhost). If required, a host may have
two separate entries in this file; one for each version of the
Internet Protocol (IPv4 and IPv6).

I have two host files;
1) /etc/hosts-orig containing only the default contets of /etc/hosts
2) /etc /hosts-mod containing all the blocked urls from https://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm

I symlink one of them to /etc/hosts, depending on what I need to get a job done. For example, I use the /etc/hosts-orig when I visit a site that uses Google's 'captcha', which is blocked in /etc/hosts-mod.

tallboy

[williams2]

Does the hosts file accept wildcards?

From: https://superuser.com/questions/135595/ ... hosts-file

There is not. The hosts file isn't very clever, you have to list every subdomain individually (including www and no-www)

See: https://serverfault.com/questions/13633 ... ork/136379

To force host/subdomain lookups to resolve to a specific address, you'd probably want to use the address keyword. The second example below should allow web1.devbox and web2.devbox and web73872.devbox to all resolve to the address specified.

In the file /etc/dnsmasq.conf:

# Add domains which you want to force to an IP address here.
# The example below send any host in doubleclick.net to a local webserver.
address=/doubleclick.net/127.0.0.1

See: DNSmasq dns caching:
viewtopic.php?f=89&t=440

[williams2]

I just tested dnsmasq in BionicPup64.

I added the line address=/puppylinux.com/127.0.0.1 to /etc/dnsmasq.conf
I restarted dnsmasq and the new Puppy forum and the old Puppy forums were both blocked.

address=/puppylinux.com/127.0.0.1 has the same effect as *puppylinux.com*

I have been using dnsmasq since August 2020.

Search https://html.duckduckgo.com/html/ for dnsmasq block

[JASpup]

I symlink one of them to /etc/hosts, depending on what I need to get a job done. For example, I use the /etc/hosts-orig when I visit a site that uses Google's 'captcha', which is blocked in /etc/hosts-mod.

+/- are just character possibilities in a hosts address?

This feature is from Windows and they can do it too? Why do we need that file in addition to the three Pup Advert sources?

Captcha is a bane, too difficult. I think you mean you have a 2nd hosts file to let captcha through.

I've been imagining blocking all Google.

[JASpup]

Blocked on a VPN?

I think you're addressing blocking the suffix part (i.e., puppylinux.com). I'll try that too, but it looks like if it's a different service where you'd either have to duplicate the block or edit one to enter it in the other abbreviated.

I just tested dnsmasq in BionicPup64.

I added the line address=/puppylinux.com/127.0.0.1 to /etc/dnsmasq.conf
I restarted dnsmasq and the new Puppy forum and the old Puppy forums were both blocked.

address=/puppylinux.com/127.0.0.1 has the same effect as *puppylinux.com*

I have been using dnsmasq since August 2020.

Search https://html.duckduckgo.com/html/ for dnsmasq block

[JASpup]

The big coup is blocking autoplay video.

I haven't looked for an extension, but there isn't a browser content setting for it.

If XYZ News Co. wants you to watch their video, it will play.

[TerryH]

The big coup is blocking autoplay video.

I haven't looked for an extension, but there isn't a browser content setting for it.

If XYZ News Co. wants you to watch their video, it will play.

Firefox for some time now has had a setting to allow/block media playing on visited sites. Unfortunately it doesn't work on all web sites as stated. It seems to also have capacity to individually cater for particular web sites, but I haven't been able to figure it out. Under Privacy & Security.

[JASpup]

Terry I've seen that and I'll have to deliberately experiment, but my experience when I enter major news sites is their videos are unavoidable with conventional browsers settings.

I will double check.

CNN & NPR (America) have friendly, slow pc text-only sites if we don't mind limiting our content.

[williams2]

Related:

Does the hosts file accept wildcards?

Dnsmasq works if the browser or other software is using resolv.conf and the hosts file.
If the software is bypassing resolv.conf and the hosts file, for example, a VPN or Firefox's encrypted dns, then dnsmasq will not do anything.

address=/puppylinux.com/127.0.0.1 has the same effect as *.puppylinux.com/*
that is, it will block anything.puppylinux.com/anything.
that is, it will block that domain name with any prefix and any suffix.

[JASpup]

VPN is ad game, but what about the redundancy?

We're using two integrated blocking data files, one supporting wildcards, the other not?

Dnsmasq works if the browser or other software is using resolv.conf and the hosts file.
If the software is bypassing resolv.conf and the hosts file, for example, a VPN or Firefox's encrypted dns, then dnsmasq will not do anything.

address=/puppylinux.com/127.0.0.1 has the same effect as *.puppylinux.com/*
that is, it will block anything.puppylinux.com/anything.
that is, it will block that domain name with any prefix and any suffix.

[williams2]

DNS, or the Domain Name System, translates human readable domain names (for example, www.amazon.com) to machine readable IP addresses (for example, 192.0.2.44)

The IP address of you dns server(s) is usually in /etc/resolv.conf.
When the computer asks for the IP address numbers for a URL,the computer first looks in the /etc/hosts file.
If the URL is in the hosts file, it uses that ip address.
If the IP address number is 0.0.0.0 or 127.0.0.1, it will try to get data from there.
0.0.0.0 and 127.0.0.1 are addresses for your own computer, so it has the effect of "blocking" that URL.

The hosts file does not support wild cards.

Dnsmasq can also force a URL to be a specified ip address. From /etc/dnsmasq.conf

Code: Select all

# Add domains which you want to force to an IP address here.
# The example below send any host in double-click.net to a local
# web-server.
#address=/double-click.net/127.0.0.1

address=/double-click.net/127.0.0.1 in the dnsmasq config file will force any URL with the domain name double-click.net with any prefix and with any suffix to have the address 127.0.0.1, which will effectively block that domain.

Dnsmasq uses configuration options in the file /etc/dnsmasq.conf and it uses the addresses in the /etc/hosts file. If the URL is not listed in the hosts file, it asks the dns servers in /etc/resolv.conf.

If a VPN bypasses /etc/resolv.conf, then dsnmasq will not do anything.

[tallboy]

I use the latest Vivaldi browser. I activate both blocking of tracers and ads in the settings, it works flawlessly. My active NordVPN does not affect anything I do.

[JASpup]

My active NordVPN does not affect anything I do.

I see NordVPN available as Chrome extension & subscription plans on its site.

If a ho-hum VPN is free is & ad block is free, the issue we're presented is if we can use a ho-hum VPN with adblock or pay for a decent VPN with adblock.

I think you're claiming success with the latter. I'm not sure what is possible without a headwrench (e.g., Williams2 last post).

I can't get decent VPN bandwidth on Tor but I can in Brave.

Opera VPN on Android seems to work pretty well (newbie, it always puts me in Chicago).

VPN with adblock seems like it would help slower speeds by not trying to download all the ads. The real coup is blocking video like I just encountered to learn what Vitalik did for India.

[tallboy]

I run NordVPN and Vivaldi 4.0 on both PC and Android phone.