Do you want fries with that project? Thursday October 23rd 2003

The Forum

Standard rules of etiquette apply: be courteous, succinct, and never speak on behalf of a developer -! If you feel you've found a bug, be sure and link to the page you encountered it, including any requisite screenshots. Answers are usually posted within a few hours, so check back frequently. And blah-blah.. everyone knows to check the faq first; "frequently asked questions", duh. If you'd like to pimp Adblock to your homies, check out mozillazine. That said, fire away!

User Notes: [?]
HTML is not allowed in posts.
URLs in the text that use mailto: , https://, http:// and ftp:// will be converted into hyperlinks.

If you do not get a response to a question posted in this forum, please try sending a message to the project's mailing list or to the project owner directly.

[1] Submitted by: Radiowriter Thursday December 5th 2002
Excellent ad-filtering browser enhancement. Works well!
[2] Submitted by: Mike Andersen Friday December 6th 2002
This plugin does exactly what I'm looking for in a banner block tool. Normally, I don't care about advertisement, but some times they can be
realy disturbing and takes the focus away from the article I'm trying to read -- and then I like to use a tool to block them. Getting a function like the one showed here would make this even easier...
[3] Submitted by: Axel S Friday December 6th 2002
Yesss, very nice Addon, and seems to work well even for a 0.1. The only thing is I can't Figure out whats the difference bettween "hide" and "remove", at each pages look the same.

A big THANKS for the Coders

PS: is it planned to block Ads by their Size? That would make this even better.

[4] Submitted by: CatamountJack Friday December 6th 2002
Will there be any support for Phoenix?
[5] Submitted by: CatamountJack Friday December 6th 2002
Sorry, silly-me, didn't read the FAQ
[6] Submitted by: Henrik Friday December 6th 2002
Actually, the FAQ was added after your question, so it's completely valid. :)
[7] Submitted by: alex Friday December 6th 2002
adblock doesn't remove banners. also another banner service isn't blocked. both user long url's with cgi-scripts. can this be the reason for adblock not parsing those url's correctly?


[8] Submitted by: Henrik Friday December 6th 2002
Could you post which filter you use and which sites that are not working? It's my experience that ** gets rid of most of the junk that they throw at us.
[9] Submitted by: Stefan Saturday December 7th 2002
Nice plugin you've done.

I only've got 3 small things:

1. AdBlock does not work on sites with frames: (blocks the banner) (banner still there)

2. AdBlock is case sensitive? Why that?

3. Is it possible to block image while the page is still loading? If I stop the page in mid-loading-process no images are blocked.

Thanx for this great tool.

[10] Submitted by: xtonda Saturday December 7th 2002
what is this good for when ads are only not displayed but are downloaded anyway? The most annoying thing about banners is the bandwidth they consume.
[11] Submitted by: alex Saturday December 7th 2002
The filter I am using ist **
Example: (sorry, can't find any other doubleclick ad at the moment :-)
search for anything stupid, on the results page on the top, there'll likely be a ad. This one doesn't disappear.
I am using Moz 1.2.1
[12] Submitted by: Completely Useless Saturday December 7th 2002
It is not the fact that ads are displayed on a webpage what is annoying, but the fact that downloding those images slows down your internet connection and consumes bandwidth.
[13] Submitted by: jrt Sunday December 8th 2002
If I understand your code correctly, you are calling loadSettings() in your load event handler. Since this rebuilds all of your regular expressions and other setup stuff, this could be a fairly expensive operation. Wouldn't it would be better to call loadSettings() at startup and when adblock.patterns changes?

Anyway, this looks like a great new project - simple and straight to the point. One suggestion off the top of my head is to have an option to apply the "-moz-opacity" style. For example, instead of totally hiding the images/objects, you could make them 90% transparent, so they are still rendered, but are unobtrusive.

[14] Submitted by: Anon9 Tuesday December 10th 2002
Nice idea, I can't wait until it is able to filter out things by regular expression :) I have used proxomitron for that purpose - cutting out 90% of all the crap on the net, but recently, I lost my settings I had created for it :( Think I'll wait for regexps in this addon instead of rebuilding in proxomotron - I'll do it in adblock! :)
[15] Submitted by: Jirka Tuesday December 10th 2002
Re: Stefan, xtonda, completely useless

Well, AdBlock uses addEventListener which is assigned to "load" event and applies to any loaded page. In fact, it's "onload" event, so the page has to be completely loaded first for that event to be triggered. And "completely loaded" means it's loaded with all pics included. You still leave traces (your IP address), you still use bandwidth and time to get those pics, you just prevent displaying them.

I personally prefer to use hosts file with list of ad servers assigned to localhost ( One of the best, most comprehensive and frequently updated lists is at (text file, 600 kB). However, it is a computerwide solution which (1) may not be the best thing for all purposes and (2) some unwanted pics can still pass through.

For those requiring full control there's potentially much better option to use with Mozilla - nsIURIContentListener (nsBrowserContentListener function defined in nsBrowserContentListener.js file is one of such implementations). And nsIURIContentListener's function onStartURIOpen() was designed and has the power to stop loading of ANY file even before Mozilla goes to network. It could use its own list of forbidden sites (which could be even updated in real time when a user would spot something unwanted). That would be much stronger implementation of AdBlock idea.

J. (

[16] Submitted by: Tuesday December 10th 2002

[17] Submitted by: Tuesday December 10th 2002

[18] Submitted by: Tuesday December 10th 2002

[19] Submitted by: Tuesday December 10th 2002

[20] Submitted by: chacham Wednesday December 11th 2002
When I try to install it it gives me an error.

Mozilla 1.2.1
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021210 Debian/1.2.1-3
Mozilla Debian Package 1.2.1-3

I cliked on Install AdBlock 0.1

The error is "-202". In then tells me that the installation failed. It then says permission denied.

I thought that was because I'm logged in to X as a regular user. So, I opened an xterm typed in "su" and after giving the password, typed in "mozilla". I went to the installation page, and got the same error.

[21] Submitted by: Monchanger Thursday December 12th 2002
I've got an addition to someone's earlier comment:
> Make it possible to add a filter by rightclicking on an element
I agree, but can this be made to work on ads using the Flash plugin? Flash ads are the real reason I installed in the first place - Mozilla does a pretty good job on .gifs anyway (though not as good as AdBlock ;-)

A possible solution - could an OptiMoz gesture be created for this? ( for those few who haven't installed it yet)

How about some kind of page (similar to "View Page Info"=>"Media") which displays all the animated gifs/flash, checks for similarities in thier URLs and suggests a filter to add. Maybe a few versions down the road...

Great job, guys. Keep it up.

[22] Submitted by: mike Thursday December 12th 2002
good job!


[23] Submitted by: dirk Thursday December 12th 2002


[24] Submitted by: None Friday December 13th 2002
@ Alex
You have to use the source of an ad not the destination.
[25] Submitted by: Koala Monday December 16th 2002
Great work!!....keep it up!!

Now could we have a editing function?
It's tiring to retype an entire line, just because of one typing mistake. And can we have auto-sorting of the list?

[26] Submitted by: chacham Tuesday December 17th 2002
After a reboot, I ran mozila as root and was able to install AdBlock
[27] Submitted by: Moz user Wednesday December 18th 2002
One big problem with this:

It's great to be able to view a page without ads, but what I really want is for Moz to not even load the ads. Why is this important if I don't see them anyway? Because the ad serving companies use special urls to track web browsers accross many websites. I don't even want to load such urls. There is ABSOLUTELY NO CONTENT I EVER WANT MY BROWSER TO FETCH FROM * EVER. There is no benefit to me for my browser getting that content. So I should be able to configure it so that it enver even contacts any site in that domain. I realize I can do that by hacking /etc/hosts, but that is lame, and I would like to be able to do it by url, too. So that is the feature I would like to see in adblock.

[28] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Wednesday December 18th 2002
This sounds like a *great* program to use in combination with Mozilla =)

However...I'll have to wait for a future version before using it =( I use Mozilla 1.1 (versions 1.2 and above have some minor yet annoying bugs which will keep me from upgrading, for now), and since the to-do list states it crashes Mozilla in versions below 1.2, I'm out of luck...

I'll have to be patient and wait, then...But, I know it'll be well worth it =D

[29] Submitted by: Henrik Thursday December 19th 2002
@Moz user & others.
Non-loading is on top of my priorities for AdBlock right now. I agree that in order to be a complete Adblocking program, it's necessary not to load the ads. I don't have much time for this, though, but I expect to get some after the weekend. Hope to make a new release sometime during christmas.

-- Henrik

[30] Submitted by: Vlad Friday December 20th 2002
Nice addon.

There is problem with bannders in the iframe. The bannerblind has the same problem. Actual HTML code is:

<iframe src="" width=234 height=60 marginwidth=0 marginheight=0 scrolling=no frameborder=0>
<a href="" target= top>
<img src="" alt="blah blah blah" width=234 height=60 border=0 ismap>

[31] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Sunday December 22nd 2002
For those who don't want the images to be loaded at all and don't want / can't hack the hosts file, check this out:
[32] Submitted by: PC1 Monday December 23rd 2002
Excellent, this thing works great. I am blocking most images by using the "Hosts" file ( and AdBlock removes the vacant space or any unfiltered ads. One advantage of AdBlock is that you can use * as in (*.fastclick.*/*)


1) Integrate, import or make use of:

[33] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Monday December 23rd 2002
[feature request]
Please add the functionality of blocking images by its link (if present). Example:
<a href=""><img src="" width=50 height=50></a>

I have *banners* in my list of filters, but *images* would be too general and probably block images I do want to see.
[/feature request]

[34] Submitted by: Asa Monday December 23rd 2002
Excellent ! Just what I was looking for. Can't wait for a new version which will prevent images from loading ! Anyway, making those annoying ads disapear is a great thing.
[35] Submitted by: blah Wednesday December 25th 2002
I hope it will work in Phoenix eventually!
[36] Submitted by: PC1 Wednesday December 25th 2002

Most (not all) "flash" is hidden when I include:
as a filter.
ALthough the flash starts, it is removed as soon as the page is loaded. I hope that a version for Phoenix will be available soon...

To disable "Flash", you can use a utility "jTFlash Manager" from:

[37] Submitted by: JC Thursday December 26th 2002
Why is there no link to download it (meaning not install, but save) anywhere?
My reason for wanting to do this is so that I can put it on a CD (for my own use, not redistribution) thereby making it easier to install these wonderful little toys on my other machines without having to piss around looking for every tool I use.
[38] Submitted by: Henrik Thursday December 26th 2002
The direct download link is I'm not trying to restrict your download. You're also very welcome to redistribute AdBlock.

-- Henrik

[39] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Sunday December 29th 2002
Great, AdBlock 0.2 has been released :)
Still, I don't have the radiobuttons that go with "Hide ads" and "Remove ads".
And the "Add filter" button seems to have disppeared.
Where can bugreports be filed? AdBlock isn't listed on

[40] Submitted by: Dave Monday December 30th 2002
This is sweet. It's a little odd, the Adblock window needs to be larger, the buttons are cut off a bit. Plus, the only other thing I'd wish for is Flash blocking...
[41] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Monday December 30th 2002
Dave, Flash-blocking is already integrated :)
[42] Submitted by: Henrik Monday December 30th 2002
Bugreports can be like you just did here, or by mailing me directly or the mailing list. Your error sounds like a theme-related problem. I must admit that I haven't been too good about testing AdBlock with other themes than Orbit 3+. On the other hand, why would anyone want to use anything else??? :) Could you mail about your configuration, please?

Like mentioned in 41: Flash-blocking is already there. Unfortunately it's not possible to add filters by directly clicking on flash-content, though. You'll have to obtain the address from either the pages source or the media-list-window.

Happy new year!
-- Henrik

[43] Submitted by: Dave Monday December 30th 2002
re: Flash Blocking:
Ah, nice! Thanks for the info!
[44] Submitted by: Alex Radu Tuesday December 31st 2002
YOU ROCK! This is the coolest addon I've found so far, it's even cooler than autoscroll! You should really continue your work, finish up the todo list, doa little bug fixing and than Mozilla will ahve it by default. I really want to help, but I can't code. I am decent at doing some small graphics tough.

[45] Submitted by: Alex Radu Wednesday January 1st 2003
Hi again, I just tried BannerBlind as well. I have to say that both of your programs are aimed at the same thing and each does something better than the other. You should combine your efforts into one awesome program. Currently Adblock can only block an ad on user demand, however on many websites the ads rotate and so thsi means I have to keep clicking for a long time. In BannerBlind all I ahve to do is properties>copy apste size adn the ad is gone forever. But, it doesen't have this blocking feature at the touch of a context menu like adblock and it can only block by sizes. What if the image at the size I specified is the same as the ad. Tough luck? If you combined your efforts a program could eliminate banner ads on user demand and by a defined size.

YOU GUYS NEED TO WORK TOGETHER, NO POINT IN REINVENTNG THE WHEEL! Some of the features in the todolist are implemented in bannerblind. Please work together for the future of the products.

[46] Submitted by: Putzo Wednesday January 1st 2003
Should I uninstall v0.1 prior to the installation of this new version?

I'm really afraid to bork my current Moz setup...

Btw, Happy new year to all :)

[47] Submitted by: Henrik Wednesday January 1st 2003
I must admit that I find size to be a flawed way of detecting ads, so I will probably not be implementing this in AdBLock. I believe that AdBlock and Bannerblind can coexist in the same browser, though, so people wanting both can have it.

It's not necessary to uninstall the previous version.

Happy new year, people! :D

-- Henrik

[48] Submitted by: Putzo Wednesday January 1st 2003

Can you check in 'MozillaZine>Mozilla Extensions' forum the topic 'AdBlock' ?

I've just posted there about a problem I'm having with your extension.

Thanks :)

[49] Submitted by: K. Hopping Wednesday January 1st 2003
I'm a new mozilla 1.2.1 user running SuSE Linux 8.0 (java2-1.3.1-275). I installed AdBlock as root. The tool window comes up with the right side clipped. I can still operate it by using the tab key to select hidden buttons.

However, when I run as a regular user the AdBlock panel comes up as a complete blank! Is this facility usable without root privilege? I made the .jar file readable by all.

la /usr/local/mozilla/chrome/adblock.jar
-r--r--r-- 1 root root 9819 Dec 28 15:30 /usr/local/mozilla/chrome/adblock.jar

[50] Submitted by: Alex Radu Thursday January 2nd 2003
You don't understand what I mean. I said if you guys joined work users could pick the best way to eliminate banners. Not only this, both programs are excellent and BnnerBlind already hs support for some things Adblock doe snot, for example inside frames. As well as Adblock has support for things that BannerBLind doesen't, for example saving your settings.

Currently neither way is perfect and clicking on every ad to disable takes forever, but it makes it less likely that you are eliminating useful images. However, you enver know, the ad server may also have useful graphical content too.

Eliminating banners by size is far more effective because most ads havea specified size, but far more dangerous too. It may mean you are not able to view useful content in the specified size on any server.

But, most ads are rotatinga nd come from at least 2-3 different locations. I have to view a website 20 times to disable only one ad space completely. And what if they add a new add to the already large ad rotation. As you can see this can get complicated, this si why you should both join development. It's much better to have a program that is reliable and suits everyone IMO and you both have some of the same things on the to do lists, like an uninstall function.

[51] Submitted by: JT X Thursday January 2nd 2003
AdBlock has the following bugs with Moz 1.2b for Mac OS 9:

When I control-click on a banner I want to block, it gives me a dialog box. Great, but when I click on the OK button the dialog stays on the screen. No reaction. I can Cancel, but I can't use OK to approve an addition to AdBlock.

More serious: AdBlock frequently turns itself off and deletes all the strings I've added.

Even more serious: AdBlock causes Moz to crash very frequently. Until it turns itself off and deletes all my strings, that is.

How do I remove it?

[52] Submitted by: Henrik Friday January 3rd 2003
@Alex Radu
By reading your feedback, I suspect that you're not using AdBlock correctly. It's not necessary to reload a page 20 times to eliminate a banner, even if they do use rotating banners. Are you sure that you're using filtering correctly?

Let me try with an example. If the address of a banner is "", don't add the whole address. Add a filter like "*", which will take care of any rotation from that server. You can also take a more aggressive approach and add "*ads*" which might also take care of banners on other servers.
More often than not, a single filter and a reload will take care of all banners on a page, since it's common that they originate from the same server.

Sorry to about your bad experiences with AdBlock. I believe (hope) it must be cross-platform incompatibilities. Refer to the FAQ for information on uninstalling.

-- Henrik

[53] Submitted by: Henrik Friday January 3rd 2003
I just discovered and fixed a bug which had the characteristics JT X mention, ie. the add-filter-dialog will not close when "ok" is pressed.
All users are encouraged to update.
My apologies for the inconvenience.

-- Henrik

[54] Submitted by: michael Friday January 3rd 2003
good job! mm
[55] Submitted by: Serge Friday January 3rd 2003
It is a great idea and it also works.

But I hope it is possible to prevent downloading advertisements. Because I have a slow connection and the filter starts working when a whole page is downloaded. But before the page is completed I see the adds.

[56] Submitted by: Alex Saturday January 4th 2003
Yourr ight that does work on most websites. There are a few that take a little more configuring though ( it works pretty well.

I still think it would be nice if you both joined development and implemented the best featurs of both pacakges into one ultimate package.

[57] Submitted by: Andrew Sunday January 5th 2003
Just installed AdBlock for Phoenix. Fantastic! This is functionality that I've wanted to be built into Mozilla and Phoenix for months, and I'm glad you stepped up to fill the void. One feature I'd like to see is the ability to have an exception list, if it's at all possible. Thanks a lot, and keep up the good work!
[58] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Sunday January 5th 2003
When editing a filter, the filter is removed from the list. When hitting the "Done" button without "Add filter " that filter is lost.

It's possible to add the same filter more than once, which obviously is not usefull

[59] Submitted by: Chris Clemson Monday January 6th 2003
This is great! I hope it will get integrated into the main mozilla branch.

I do have a slight problem. Could you make the adblock settings window resizable, as it in windows with large fonts enabled, the buttons extend off the window to the right.


[60] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Monday January 6th 2003
[Feature Request]
Why not borrow the spam anticipation code from the mozilla mail/news program to enticipate which sizes, imagesources and hyperlinks probably are banners.
If a banner is found, add a little cross in the right upper corner to close the banner.
[Feature Request]
[61] Submitted by: Monchanger Thursday January 9th 2003
Two ideas:
* Please add the version number somewhere so we know what version we have installed in the future. (the about button just sends us to the project's home page)
* Create (or delegate) a centeral location where we can "trade" our filters. A simple database table with "filter value" and "Sites filtered" perhaps. I think that would be a hit. And as long as it works that way, an import/export mechanism and even an "auto-update" feature to download the latest filters...
[62] Submitted by: Zarco Friday January 10th 2003
In addition to 61:
I'd would very much like to see a central database, but I do want to update my system with filters that I see fit, not all filters. If all filters are added from the database, one person can screw up the whole system.
[63] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Sunday January 12th 2003
The banner on is not removed by filter *banner*
It should.
[64] Submitted by: Ray Sunday January 12th 2003
Could you add size filters like webwasher does? That would be a really nice feature. Add dimensions of objects you want filtered so that ad sizes (which tend to be standardized) can be blocked. Thus you could block flash and what not.
[65] Submitted by: Brian Monday January 13th 2003
What about making the list of blocked ads alphabetical so that it's easier to find an ad that you may need to unblock?
[66] Submitted by: moo Wednesday January 15th 2003
To get the same effect as BanerBlind all one needs to add is masks for width= and height= am i correct? This just blocks IMG SRC contents. Cant wait for the blocking of downloading adverts instead of just hiding the rendered ones, Do you hnave an ETA on this blocking bug?

How about a quick On/Off button instead of having to go into the config window all the time. Can you also make available a .xpi download ie., a normal A HREF to it as well as onClick install, saves me storing ur html page locally and recoding it to make it downloadable.

Does this also block EMBED tags or just IMG?

How about a resizable window and not a fixed size.


[67] Submitted by: moo Wednesday January 15th 2003
Here is some masks I use:
user_pref("adblock.patterns", "*.dll* *click* *.swf *banner* */ad* *.doubleclick.* *.valueclick.* *.sextracker.* *promo* *reklama* *ad.* *hyperbanner* *clickxchange* *prmo* *click.* *hitbox.* *.ad* *.tribalfusion.* *yimg.* *ads*");

I block swf cuz its not isntalled and i hate those install placeholders on moz.

[68] Submitted by: PORNBOT Wednesday January 15th 2003 banners arnt blocked in frames *G*
[69] Submitted by: moo Wednesday January 15th 2003
How about on the web page you make available some prefs masks that are the most effective?
[70] Submitted by: moo Wednesday January 15th 2003
Have an option to be case sensitive and NOT case sensitive, make it optional and everybodys a winner.

[71] Submitted by: bleh Wednesday January 15th 2003 doesnt work with this , it has a url with /ads/ on it and I have a mask of */ad* and it fails.
[72] Submitted by: fussy git Thursday January 16th 2003
No ability to import/export rulesets, editing prefs. isnt good enough. I want an import/export setting
[73] Submitted by: oldmanshands Friday January 17th 2003
This is great, makes web pages look a lot nicer

Doesn't work for me when the pages are loaded in the back ground in another tab (by middle clicking etc). Refreshing the page makes the ads disappear

[74] Submitted by: Sjoerd Sunday January 19th 2003
Great! I love getting just the information I want on a web page. And then:

Being able to exclude specific pages from having e.g. example flash blocked (like the great which is nothing but) OR a shortkey to turning adblock on/off would be great.

[75] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Thursday January 23rd 2003
Look what I found:
This program (Win32) enables/disables the hosts file through an icon in the systemtray, very easy and usefull when certain sites are inaccessable :)
[76] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Thursday January 23rd 2003
According to the FAQ: "Advanced users can use regular expressions to define filters"
I'm not an expert on regular expressions, so it might not be a bug. I've tried
as a filter on
The image source contains .ad? so it should be removed according to the filter, but it isn't. The filter *ad* works perfectly though!
I choose not to use *ad* as a filter because it would remove all other words with ad in it (like dad, mad, bad etc), while the regular expression mentioned first, should not remove words with ad in it, only strings with "ad" in it, without a letter before or after "ad"
I am using the most recent version of AdBlock.
[77] Submitted by: Henrik Friday January 24th 2003
You need to surround your regular expressions with /, ie. /[^a-zA-Z]ad[^a-zA-Z]/.
The first time you enter a regular expression, you should get a warning. This is a sure
sign that you have entered a regular expression, and that it has been recognized as such.
[78] Submitted by: Tony Friday January 24th 2003
Looking at the Adblock "home" page, it states, just before the "To Do" section, that "Regular expression-based filters must be surrounded by /". Perhaps that is the problem.

Also, why not just use the filter* which appears to work for me (with a very limited amount of testing).

[79] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Friday January 24th 2003
Henrik & Tony: thanx for the help, it works like a charm :)
Tony: I want to use a generic filter that blocks every images with the word ad in it (.ad? /ad/ -ad1 _ad& etc), but not as part of another existing word (mad dad etc)
[80] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Friday January 24th 2003
1) When visiting the banner at the top of the page is not removed by the regular expression /[^a-zA-Z]ad[^a-zA-Z]/ nor by *ad* (while it contains /ad.) but when adding *fastclick* to the filterlist, it is removed.

2) The bug reporting system does not seem to work. I constantly get the error:
Content-type: text/html
Software error:
Can't use an undefined value as an ARRAY reference at /usr/local/sandbox/bugzilla/enter_bug.cgi line 240.

For help, please send mail to the webmaster (, giving this error message and the time and date of the error.

For other mozdev projects I can log on the bugzilla system, but not form AdBlock?

3) Would it be something to add a page on this site with a list which website with ads aren't blocked, but sould be? Including a fixed check box...

[81] Submitted by: Danilo Monday January 27th 2003
Smart & simple!
[82] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Wednesday January 29th 2003
[Feature Request]
To make AdBlock more effective, I think images should be blocked by:
- image source (already possible)
- image title property
- image alt property
- location of link
- name of target frame
[/Feature Request]
[83] Submitted by: skinning = gay Wednesday January 29th 2003
if you skin adblocker to look like a whore in front of the whitehouse and not a normal freakin window i will no longer support adblock
[84] Submitted by: Henrik Friday January 31st 2003
I'll look into the webpage you mention. Thanks.
I'm not sure why Bugzilla is not enabled for AdBlock. I'll mail the Mozdev-crew.
Thanks for the feature-suggestions. They're very interesting!!

-- Henrik

[85] Submitted by: Zippo Friday January 31st 2003
the banner on
is not removed
[86] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Friday January 31st 2003
[Feature Request]
Please add blocking of <iframes> as well. These ads are used at
[/Feature Request]

When a filter is added through "Tools - AdBlock", it's still possible to add a duplicate filter through the right mouse button context menu.

[87] Submitted by: Martin Saturday February 1st 2003
Great plugin!

Minor bug: The dialog is to small when used with large fonts (on Windows, 1280x1024)

Please add support for those really annoying flash ads.

[88] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Saturday February 1st 2003
Blocking of Flash content is already supported :)

[Feature Request]
Please add blocking of ordinary hyperlinks as well.
[/Feature Request]

[89] Submitted by: Henrik Saturday February 1st 2003
Could you elaborate on what you mean by "blocking of ordinary hyperlinks"? Sorry if you have mentioned it before.

[90] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Saturday February 1st 2003
<a href="">Blocking of text between hyperlinks</a>
example: under heading "Advertentie". The text is linked to*snip*
Because the text pushes other content downwards it gets annoying.
Actually, it might be better to block everything contained by <a href> and </a> (this would include text and images)

[91] Submitted by: Toby Monday February 3rd 2003
I noticed that when loading a page in a background tab (i.e. the active tab is a different one that the loading tab) on that tab the ads won't get removed.
If I stay on the tab and press reload, the ads are correctly removed after loading.

I'm using Phoenix 0.5 (built 2002-12-28). I don't know the version of AdBlock because it's displayed nowhere (could you add that somewhere?) but I think it's the actual version.

[92] Submitted by: Henrik Monday February 3rd 2003
We're aware of the loading-problem. It's corrected in the upcoming version 0.3.

[93] Submitted by: Brian Tuesday February 4th 2003
Will filtered ads Not be loaded in v0.3 or is that still being worked on?
[94] Submitted by: Pat Friday February 7th 2003
040102 - AdBlock is now available for Phoenix.
030102 II - Serious bug found.
021228 - AdBlock 0.2 is now available

Something really messed up with the dates! Is the format YYMMDD or DDMMYY ? :-)

[95] Submitted by: Luko Saturday February 8th 2003
I write you only to say this program is something beautiful. THANKS!
[96] Submitted by: Nysv Sunday February 9th 2003
Some method of setting certain rules to hide (when removing messes up the page layout) while having other rules remove would be nice.

Perhaps ability to set hide/remove on per rule basis?

[97] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Sunday February 9th 2003
I'd like to see an exception list (preferably rulebased)
[98] Submitted by: Tony Schulze Monday February 10th 2003

1st I want to thank you for that super-duper filtering addon. It is very easy to use and very effective - you don't know how long I wished to have such a tool.

For 2nd I have a wish: As I define a new filter for blocking some ads, I don't have to see them anymore - that's fine.
But it is still possible to accidently click on this invisible link picture.
Is it possible to remove the whole link from starting <a href ...> to the final </a> tag?

Thanks and keep on improving

Tony Schulze (

[99] Submitted by: bleh Monday February 10th 2003

This is a sweet plugin for IE for stopping ads, how about a UI like this. A button to enable / disable quickly would be nice.

[100] Submitted by: bleh again Monday February 10th 2003
There has to be a better way to manage popups rather than have a HUGE string table that is looked up. This can grow very large, how about some nice features like anything on a certain size, or something or other, smart blocking.
[101] Submitted by: phil Wednesday February 12th 2003
does this not work with the new Mozilla 1.3b? i'm not complaining (merely the price to pay for using beta software) but i can't seem to get adblock to install successfully and the ads are driving me crazy. mozilla's new adblocking features are appreciated but they don't do nearly enough--i want to filter ads from the ny times ad directory, not from the server itself!

[102] Submitted by: Henrik Wednesday February 12th 2003
I haven't tested it with 1.3. I'm waiting for it to come out of beta before I put time into making it work.
[103] Submitted by: yes it does Wednesday February 12th 2003
[104] Submitted by: happyblocker Thursday February 13th 2003
Some positive feedback :) Adblock 0.2 works nicely on my Powerbook G3. Moz 1.3b and Mac OS X 10.1.5.

Right-hand buttons of AdBlock dialog are cut off in Mac OS X. The window is not wide enough and cannot be resized.

[105] Submitted by: doug Thursday February 13th 2003
Adblock on Phoenix. I have blocked* but the large ad in the upper right still appears. (Sometimes it's flash from who-knows-where, but often it's an image from that server) Any ideas?
[106] Submitted by: strife Saturday February 15th 2003
please! make it so adblock makes mozilla not download the images u specified... now u have to wait for the ads to dl anyway and it look strange with an update after the page is dl with a refresh...
[107] Submitted by: dolphinling Saturday February 15th 2003
Can AdBlock block images where the html for them is contained in scripts? What about linked scripts?

Does AdBlock block scripts?

Does AdBlock block iframes?

If "no" to any of the above, will they be supported in the future?

Also, this does not seem to work on certain flash ads, most notably those ones for Nexium, if you've seen them, I think they're pretty common. I might just have the URLs wrong, but I've tried a bunch of things that I thought it was, and nothing seems to work. Any ideas?

[108] Submitted by: dolphinling Sunday February 16th 2003
One other thing - please make it an OPTION whether or not the images that are blocked are downloaded. I have a fast connection, and I want to support the sites I go to a lot. If I don't download the images, the site doesn't get paid as much.
[109] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Sunday February 16th 2003
Currently, AdBlock does not block images when called as background (of the body or tables)? Will it in the future?
[110] Submitted by: Chuck Tuesday February 18th 2003
I second the motion made by dolphinling.

Ads don't cost much time on a fast connection, and making the blocking process transparent to the advertisers will make it that much harder for them to advance in the ad-block arms race.

[111] Submitted by: Henrik Tuesday February 18th 2003
Sorry about the extreme lag in my response-time, but the semester has started again and I suddenly find myself being very busy.

The following is answers to some questions put forward in posts 104 to this one.

Some ads are currently not filtered because frame-support lags behind a bit. This is corrected in the upcoming version 0.3.

When it becomes possible to block images, this will definately be optional. The ethics of completely blocking ads are so complicated that the final decision should be with the user, not the developers.

@Dolphinling: (107)
1. Not sure what you mean. AdBlock removes on a tag by tag-basis, so if an ad is contained in something more advanced than for example an img or object-tag, it's likely that it will not be filtered.

2. No.

3. Yes... to some degree in 0.2.x and fully in the upcoming 0.3.

4. Can you give examples of what kind of scripts you would like to have blocked? It's unlikely that AdBlock will move down that road, as the most annoying script-tricks (pop-ups, mouse-over relocations, windows-resizing etc.) are being adressed by the browser itself.

With regards to background-images in tables and body. That should be looked into. I have not been aware of this before.

Hope this answers most questions.

-- Henrik

[112] Submitted by: Dave Wednesday February 19th 2003
apparently those ads that aren't blocked because of frame support includes the ones that :-
Other than that, very useful.
[113] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Thursday February 20th 2003
My AdBlock filter icw bannerblind blocks almost every banner :)
AdBlock does block those on Try these filter (paste them in prefs.js in your profile dir):
user_pref("adblock.patterns", "** ** *banner* *advert* *penis* *porn* *adult* *webads* *adrotate* *linkexchange.* */amazon/* *sextracker* *adserv* *affilia* *gay* *homo* *eshop.msn* *spylog* *powered* *published* *logo* *discount* *brochure* *cover* *signup* *paypal* *ringtones* *sponsor* *rotat* *tracker* /[^a-zA-Z]ad[^a-zA-Z]/ /[^a-zA-Z]ads[^a-zA-Z]/ /[^a-zA-Z]but[^a-zA-Z]/");

[114] Submitted by: Dave Thursday February 20th 2003
You appear to frequent mp3 sites... or something :-)

I've tried adding filters like *ads* and */ads/* but still see advertisements with those strings in them (just happened at Am I doing something wrong?

Here's the m-w banner that won't go away:

I added the filter *realmedia* but the stupid thing still shows up.

[115] Submitted by: Dave Thursday February 20th 2003
Sorry, didn't mean to widen the page :-
[116] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Friday February 21st 2003
> You appear to frequent mp3 sites... or something :-)

>I've tried adding filters like *ads* and */ads/* but still see advertisements with those strings in them (just happened at Am I doing something wrong?
The large banner is in a frame and cannot be blocked by adblock yet.
But when adding the following filter: /[0-9][0-9]x[0-9][0-9]/
All pictures with their dimensions specified in their filename are block (for example: This is the Britannica ad next to the large banner)

[117] Submitted by: Dave Friday February 21st 2003
> > You appear to frequent mp3 sites... or something :-)
> What?
mp3 sites are full of porn banners... not that I'd know this from personal experience :-)

> All pictures with their dimensions specified in their filename are block
Wouldn't that also block a lot of legit content?

[118] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Sunday February 23rd 2003
> mp3 sites are full of porn banners... not that I'd know this from personal experience :-)
Crack sites are full of them as well.

> Wouldn't that also block a lot of legit content?
Maybe so, but most of them are banners. I haven't noticed legit content being removed because of this filter.

[119] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Thursday February 27th 2003
[Feature Request]
Why not add an option of displaying all blocked images (not in the website, but as a tab displayed inside the "page info").
This way I can verify whether my filters only block ad images and leave legit images on the website :)
[/Feature Request]
[120] Submitted by: Erik Jessup Saturday March 1st 2003
It doesn't work!

I am running Mozilla 1.2.1 on RedHat Linux 7.3

I recently installed the AdBlock add on (installed as root, then chmod adblock.jar [in /usr/local/mozilla/chrome/] to be world readable). Upon restarting Mozilla, I found an AdBlock option under the tools menu, and another in the context menu for images.

I have added a few filters, NONE of which have any effect whatsoever.

sample filters:

ad still shown:

It appears to me that that particular ad should be blocked under any of above filters. Why isn't it?

Note that this is only a single example; absolutely every filter I have tried has had precisely zero effect on any of the ads intended to be blocked by that filter. Even after using the the AdBlock option from the context menu and adding the filter exactly as it appears, the exact same ad I wanted to remove is still shown upon a reload of the page.

Others have given this piece of software rave reviews, so why does it appear to be completely worthless when I use it?

[121] Submitted by: Erik Jessup Saturday March 1st 2003
Quick followup to my previous post.

Perhaps the following lines from the JavaScript console would be useful:

Error: prefObj.getBranch is not a function
Source File: chrome://adblock/content/adblock.js
Line: 195

Error: element has no properties
Source File: chrome://cookie/content/cookieNavigatorOverlay.xul
Line: 128

The second one may have nothing to do with AdBlock, but I thought I would include it just in case.

[122] Submitted by: Ashley H Sunday March 2nd 2003
Doesn't work so well with extra-large fonts like my mother uses. Something to consider and fix, perhaps. I can't even drag the window wider. Also, I really look forward to this thing getting the ability to import lists of common ad servers - getting my mother to learn to use it as it is now is going to be difficult.
[123] Submitted by: Brian Sunday March 2nd 2003
Erik, you have to put / around the word in order for it block it.


[124] Submitted by: Tim Tuesday March 4th 2003
Check out the following for one way to tie into image loading before actual loading occurs (instead of after). This should also allow you to catch framed images. As a bonus, if you check out the interface it implements (nsIContentPolicy), you'll see hooks for non-image things as well (no plugin stuff yet, though, and not all the constants are hooked up yet).

I am breaking up the URL to avoid page-widening. Sorry for the inconvenience. extensions/cookie/nsImgManager.cpp#89

[125] Submitted by: Tim Tuesday March 4th 2003
Looks like the page is already much wider than the URL, so here it is in all its clickable glory.

[126] Submitted by: Adam Friday March 7th 2003
What's the ETA for the next version of adblock? It's great. (only improvement would be to avoid downloading the ads all together for the added benefit of faster page rendering)
[127] Submitted by: Henrik Saturday March 8th 2003
I'm freakishly busy with studying at the moment, so it's hard to promise anything. My bad conscience about not doing something about AdBlock keeps poking at me though, so soon I hope. I've also received some user-patches, so it should be done at least out of courtesy to the person who took his time to work on it.

-- Henrik

[128] Submitted by: some contributor ;) Saturday March 8th 2003
@ 127

Well... you don't need to. I - at least - have a running version with most of the patches in it... >:>

[129] Submitted by: Angus S-F Sunday March 9th 2003
From what I read the following filter _should_ work, but doesn't:


I had to add* to block ads from them even though I already had the example above.

Ditto for http://ads.*.*/* -- it doesn't appear to be working.

[130] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Sunday March 9th 2003
Try this one: /[^a-zA-Z]ads[^a-zA-Z]/
it blocks all images/flash with "ads" in it, but not if ads is surrounded by another letter (so it won't block "dads" etc)
[131] Submitted by: Angus S-F Sunday March 9th 2003
Wishlist: import a list of filters into AdBlock user_pref("adblock.patterns") line in prefs.js. There is a long list of advert servers available at but I don't see any easy way to add them to my list of servers except one at a time.

Wishlist: Sort button to sort list of adservers.

Wishlist: Find button to find a string. Ideally should present a list of adservers containing that string.

[132] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Monday March 10th 2003
Through a few search and replace commands in MS-Word I've created a line which can be pasted into prefs.js :)
I've left out the adservers starting with:
- ads[^a-zA-Z]/
- ad[^a-zA-Z]/
- banner*
since they are filtered out by earlier filters

I've tried it, and it made Mozilla horribly slow. I've got Win2k SP3 running on a K6-2@300 so it's not really advisable on older machines.
What we need is a program or function which can exclude adserver which are included by one of the general filters

[133] Submitted by: Honk-I-Tonk Wednesday March 12th 2003

stringcomparsion with ~242.000 strings is slow - no matter how you do it... and that for every image on a page... wow ... i would say that this list is much too big. You might try to code this list into a chip that only does ad-filtering and make money of it... :)

[134] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Wednesday March 12th 2003
Indeed, I figure
- either all listed are checked once against the filters, and appropriately removed
- or the are blocked based on the resolved ip address (this would be or

I'd think the second one is faster because these ip addresses have already been loaded in memory by lowlevel OS functions that use the hosts file (or comparable)

[135] Submitted by: Kobi Haron Friday March 14th 2003
Just what the doctor ordered. Thanks a lot,Henrik.

For some reason AdBlock doesn't block images from
I have 2 filters aimed at them
I use Phoenix 0.5 on windows 2000/sp3

[136] Submitted by: DeadMan Saturday March 15th 2003
I challenge you to block all the ads from this site

I've tried all the above suggestions. The only one that works 100% all the time is the hosts file. Those in the frames are agressive and I cannot seem to stop them with AdBlock.

[137] Submitted by: DeadMan Sunday March 16th 2003
Ack! I tried using the prefs.js.AdBlock from yoyo's and it made Mozilla take ages and ages to load. I had to kill it in Task Manager.

I suggest you grab yourselves a copy of Bind (If you are a win32 user) and run your own DNS. Throw this into a file called null.dns.file in the /system32/dns/bind/etc folder
-------------------cut here -----------------
; NULL Zone File for hosts blocking
$TTL 36000
@ in soa localhost. postmaster.localhost. (
2002110101 ;serial
3600 ;refresh
1800 ;retry
604800 ;expiration
3600 ) ;minimum

; Zone NS records

@ NS localhost.

* IN A
----------------cut above------------------------

The unzip this

into the same folder and restart Bind. Note: It may take about 30-60 seconds for Bind to fully kick in with this list. It contains about 14,000 known ad addresses.

With Bind not only will you be able to block all these ads you will also be able to get fast DNS access as you are not relying on your ISP's DNS anymore. :)

[138] Submitted by: DeadMan Sunday March 16th 2003
That should read '' not 'null.dns.file'


[139] Submitted by: Posicionamiento Monday March 17th 2003
Hi from Spain!!

[140] Submitted by: DeadMan Monday March 17th 2003
Even better. I found this 'gem' of a utility called eDexter.

It uses the hosts file or it's own pac file (which has some more functionality) in order to block adserver domains etc. But the nice thing about it is that not only does it block them. It stops them trying to load and giving a 'Page not found...' in your browser. Instead it just redirects to a locally stored teeny weeny image file (which you can change if you like).
This prevents pages from loading slowly while it figures out the remote advert image or whatever is not accessible. It means fast loading webpages with no ads and no crap 'Page not found..' etc! :)


[141] Submitted by: DeadMan Monday March 17th 2003
Oops! Forgot the URL
[142] Submitted by: DeadMan Wednesday March 19th 2003
Also found that CSS is usefull. In the latest version of Mozilla you can also apply CCS per site. for add blocking example CSS.

If you also want to block embedded Flash adverts this simple CCS addition to your UserContent.css file is a must.

object, embed {
display: none;

Be carefull with that one though as it may block embedded objects you wish to view. :)

[143] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Wednesday March 19th 2003
Henrik, have you heard any yet about the bugzilla not working?
[144] Submitted by: kcbnac Wednesday March 19th 2003
Does this work under Mozilla 1.3 (Final) yet? Anybody tried it? Just wondering, Thanks!

remove nospam. to email me

[145] Submitted by: rdj Thursday March 20th 2003
adblock increases my happiness.
[146] Submitted by: Henrik Thursday March 20th 2003
Bugzilla not working? No. Haven't heard anything about that.

Seems that the bug is still present. I haven't tested it in 1.3Final, though.

-- Henrik

[147] Submitted by: buscadores Friday March 21st 2003
thanks for the vcd quality link, it's great

[148] Submitted by: Glenn Friday March 21st 2003
Great XPI, but just recently encountered problem -- apparently ads loaded via JavaScript don't get blocked (for an exmple of this, block ** and go to ... This is probably related to as Mozilla's native image blocker has the same problem).
[149] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Monday March 24th 2003
Henrik, the bugzilla system @ mozdev does not yet work for adblock:
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: error
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 21:41:11 +0100
To: webmaster at


> Hi there,
> when visiting:
> I get the following error msg:
> Content-type: text/html
> Software error:
> Can't use an undefined value as an ARRAY reference at
> /usr/local/sandbox/bugzilla/enter_bug.cgi line 240.
> For help, please send mail to the webmaster (, giving this
> error message and the time and date of the error.
> The error occurs when using mozilla, phoenix, internet explorer and opera at
> home, but I noticed it does not when I'm at school.

this error is generated because the adblock project
hasn't been set up with a bugzilla account. bugzilla
accounts are set up at the request of the project
owner. i'm copying the owner on this reply and will
be happy to set up the project with bugzilla access.
to do this i just need a list of components to use for
tracking project bugs.


[150] Submitted by: loic Tuesday March 25th 2003
quote from a message in the bannerblind mailing list:

Olli Kihlberg wrote:
Should BB block the adds before or after they are loaded? Absolutely after, IMO. Personally I only visit sites that have some use or value to me. Many of those sites would die if they lost all their advertising income. Why would I want to help to kill the very same sites I feel are useful enough to visit? Why would anyone? A small fraction of more speed and available bandwith is not worth that. I think BB should keep blocking the adds only after they are loaded. There are other add blocking solutions out there that already do it the other way.

[151] Submitted by: Brian Wednesday March 26th 2003

What about having a whitelist to allow certain sites to load ads and all other sites block the ads before they load?

[152] Submitted by: Seas Wednesday March 26th 2003
In 1.3 Final, Adblock only works for me the first time I start up Mozilla after it's installed. Afterwards, it's still in the menu, and it claims it's still on, but no ads are blocked. Any ideas on how to fix this?
[153] Submitted by: Marshall Friday March 28th 2003
Help. I can't load AdBlock as user under Linux. It loaded fine as root. Help/About verifies Mozilla 1.3 in both.

As user I receive the following messages:

Alert -215

Alert The installation failed

Download and installation status: adblock-mozilla-0.2.1.xpi - Read only

When I start Mozilla from the console as user, I receive a series eight of the following. Doesn't happen as root:

Gtk-WARNING **: Unable to locate loadable module in module_path: "",

Thanks for any assistance.

[154] Submitted by: Patrick Tufts Saturday March 29th 2003
I used to use the Mac browser iCab ( extensively. iCab has some great ad blocking features you should borrow.

When you right-click on an image, iCab gives you the following options:

1. block image url (this is what adblock does)
2. block images refering to url
3. block images of this size

2 is very nice because it makes it easy to block all of those x10 camera ads no matter who is serving them

3 is great because most banner ads are of a few standard sizes, so blocking by size deals with almost all of these.

--Pat /

[155] Submitted by: Putzo Wednesday April 2nd 2003
>When you right-click on an image, iCab gives you the >following options:

> 1. block image url (this is what adblock does)

Mozilla browsers have this feature for a long time now. Try right clicking on the offending image and look for "Block Images from this Server" menu item :)

> 2. block images refering to url

I'm afraid this is not so simple. Ad servers usually use scripts of some kind to track clicks, and these scripts very often don't show their final destination.

>3. block images of this size

[156] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Wednesday April 2nd 2003
As oldmanshands and Toby have mentioned, I also have the problem with ads in pages not being blocked if they're loaded as a new tab in the background, and will only disappear if those pages are refreshed...

On rare occasions, though, I've seen that selecting one of those tabs will cause the ad to disappear all of a sudden (after a delay of half-second or so).

More commonly, however, I have noticed that if you refresh one tab's page with an ad, and then select another tab (waiting for the first page to finish refreshing), the first page's ad will not disappear.

This is being seen on Mozilla 1.3 Final (20030312), using Windows 2000 Service Pack 3.

[157] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Friday April 4th 2003
@ the AdBlock context menu option is not present for but it is blocked when added to the filters.

And a feature request:
please add a checkbox for each filter so one can disable individual filters.

[158] Submitted by: phil Monday April 7th 2003
hi, this software is great! my question is--if i upgrade to a new version of mozilla, is there a way to preserve all of my filters? a certain file i should retain?


[159] Submitted by: Charles Tuesday April 8th 2003
There is no way to obtain your software at this time. The download links are dead on the installation page. I can't find any other URL that allows a download. Could you please rectivate the installation links?
[160] Submitted by: Henrik Tuesday April 8th 2003
Your problem doesn't seem to exist from here. Try again. It may have been a temporary mozdev-error. I believe they're mirroring their content, so perhaps a server is not functioning correctly.

-- Henrik

[161] Submitted by: jonh Friday April 11th 2003
nice info!!!!!!!!
[162] Submitted by: Amerk_5 Saturday April 12th 2003
Phil, If you keep the same profile when you upgrade, everything should be preserved. In your profile folder there will be a file called prefs.js. If you open prefs.js with a text editor, your filters will be in the first few lines.

To backup everything, you can just make a copy the entire profile folder.

This link is to a Phoenix help site but all the info can be applied to Moz too.

[163] Submitted by: Pausanias Sunday April 13th 2003
I was using AdBlock with mozilla 1.1 and everything worked fine. Now I upgraded to mozilla 1.3, and AdBlock doesn't show up in the "Tools" menu. I tried re-installing it as root, but now only root gets AdBlock in the Tools menu. No other user is able to access AdBlock. What am I supposed to do to make it available to every user?
[164] Submitted by: PeterTC Monday April 14th 2003
Very excellent! Thanks for a wonderful tool that makes site readable
[165] Submitted by: S¿ren Tuesday April 15th 2003
Any ETA on a version that also blocks the download of ads?
[166] Submitted by: a fan Wednesday April 16th 2003
Would be nice if adblock removed ads from pages that loan in the background.
[167] Submitted by: a ninny Wednesday April 16th 2003
loan = load
[168] Submitted by: Charles Thursday April 17th 2003
Henrik, I still can't install adblock. I click on the link and nothing happens. I'm using Moz 1.3, should I be having this trouble? I tried both links (moz and phoenix) and nothing happens, the clicked links both are (munged the URL so it won't convert):
This is a link to the same page I'm already on. I looked at your code, and the install link seems to be:
But when I launch that URL by itself in a new window, nothing happens. I'm not using any other blocking tools, I even set Moz to allow popups, etc. No go.
It appears that either adblock is totally incompatible with Moz 1.3, or else your web page is hosed. Maybe you could just tell me where the adblock file resides and how to install it manually.
[169] Submitted by: Charles Thursday April 17th 2003
Oh.. as an afterthought, I tried the .xpi URL in Internet Explorer. The file downloads OK. Now what do I do with it? And why doesn't your page work in my plain-vanilla Moz 1.3 installation?
[170] Submitted by: Henrik Thursday April 17th 2003
I'm a bit baffled by your problem to download the xpi with Mozilla. I really swear I don't remove it prior to each of your attempts! :)
Anyway... I haven't tested AdBlock with 1.3 yet, but I have received reports that the two programs are not entirely compatible. It's sad that compatibility between Moz and its extensions are broken with each upgrade of Moz. The question is: If we manage to correct the incompatibilies with 1.3, will we risk having to do everything over again for 1.4, which is already underway?

-- Henrik

[171] Submitted by: Charles Friday April 18th 2003
I feel your pain, Henrik. I just wish the darn thing would install. I'm baffled too. I'll continue to hammer on it. Can you install .xpi files manually? I did manage to download the file with IE, so if it's just a matter of putting it in the right place, let me know where it goes and I'll give it another try. Thanks again for all your efforts to keep us ad-free.
[172] Submitted by: Paul Saturday April 19th 2003
Thanks you for the web, it is what I needed to complete my work.
You do a very good work and you must feel proud of it.

[173] Submitted by: Trevor Sunday April 20th 2003
Does anyone know why Phoenix/Firebird will not block ads at with the AdBlock extension? Specifically, the ad image I'm trying to block is the large square-shaped-one at the far right and top of

AdBlock seems to work elsewhere when I use it....

Thank you!

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4a) Gecko/20030411 Phoenix/0.5+

[174] Submitted by: beanball Thursday April 24th 2003
Hi! Nice work!

Feature request: Someone else mentioned it before and I want to add my vote -- block images based on "href" (as opposed to "src"). Some sites are pretty crafty with their ads.

[175] Submitted by: Dave Higgins Tuesday April 29th 2003
Is there an easy way to add a load of filters at once to Adblock? I don't want to retype them all out every time I reinstall a new nightly of Firebird.

I need to add things which (it seems to me) can't be put in the hosts file that aren't domains like [mashed URLs]
h-t-t-p://* and
This site has alot of its ads in sub folders.


[176] Submitted by: Amerk_5 Wednesday April 30th 2003
Dave, If you keep the same profile when you install the new nightly you'll have all your filters because they sit in your prefs.js. You can also open prefs.js with notepad to view them.

Unless I'm upgrading to the latest milestone or I haven't upgraded to the latest nightly in about a week or two I don't see a need for a new profile.

You can also block ads in you userContent.css but it's a more advanced way & takes a little while to understand it all as I'm figuring out.

[177] Submitted by: Peter Thursday May 1st 2003

[178] Submitted by: Smack Friday May 2nd 2003
(ditto Monchanger's request for a Flash blocker)
[179] Submitted by: Smack Friday May 2nd 2003
Well, never mind then.
[180] Submitted by: Redhat7 Friday May 2nd 2003
i tried it with a trank version of firebird

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030430 Mozilla Firebird/0.6

most time it works with 1st window

but with tabs, it works ONLY if i reload the page
never works with 1st load

anyone else ?

[181] Submitted by: Orv Monday May 5th 2003
Adblock isn't removing any ads, only hiding.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030429 Mozilla Firebird/0.6

[182] Submitted by: Dan Tuesday May 6th 2003
I'm having a problem with the plugin where when I right-click on images the AdBlock context menu entry doesn't show up. I'm using Firebird 20030504 on WinXP, I also had the problem with 20030429. I didn't/don't have the problem with 20030320. AdBlock still hides stuff ok. I've tried reinstalling after deleting the adblock.jar, I've tried a new profile, but neither helped.
[183] Submitted by: carlo Tuesday May 6th 2003
only problems!

[184] Submitted by: complejo Wednesday May 7th 2003
good site
[185] Submitted by: motilla Wednesday May 7th 2003
hi from spain
[186] Submitted by: adwod Wednesday May 7th 2003
congratulations your site is very good
[187] Submitted by: Alex Friday May 9th 2003
Henrik, great work

[188] Submitted by: ebrown Sunday May 11th 2003
If you add the following line to 'adblock.xul' below the one which sets up the listener for "load" events, then "select" events will also cause ads to be removed from the current page.

window.addEventListener("select", filter, true);

The "select" event is dispatched whenever you select a new tab which may fix the ads in tabs problem. This was a problem because when any tab finished loading, it threw the "load" event which then caused the currently visible tab (not the one which finished loading) to clear the ads.

WARNING: This hack may cause a lot of extra filtering though and shouldn't be used with huge lists of filters. It would be better to filter the tab which sent the "load" event but I don't feel like doing that now.

[189] Submitted by: Reni Tuesday May 13th 2003
Dan: I noticed that sometimes the adblock settings screen hides under the browser window. This seems to happen when there are either multiple windows or multiple tabs open.

[190] Submitted by: Jonathan Anderson Sunday May 18th 2003
Wow, this is great. :)

One suggestion: can AdBlock add itself to the context menus of Flash animations as well as images? When I have to go into the page source to find the address to block, well, it's almost as annoying as the add itself.


[191] Submitted by: Henrik Sunday May 18th 2003
No, sorry. It seems that the Flash-plugin is completely responisble for its context-menu, and thus nothing can be added to it via XUL.


[192] Submitted by: david Monday May 19th 2003

To remove the ad from add* to adblock.

(the ad comes from an IFRAME created by a javascript document.write - seems this perhaps makes adblock unable to block the url you see when rightclick+Adblock).* works fine though.

[193] Submitted by: karbak Tuesday May 20th 2003
Mac OS X AdBlock bug

Has this been fixed ? Essentially, the 'Add filter' button in the AdBlock window is almost completely
outside the popup window. Makes adding filters there
rather difficult.

[194] Submitted by: buscadores Saturday May 24th 2003
Wow, this is great. :)
[195] Submitted by: nightwish Sunday May 25th 2003
Great stuff, thanks for it!
There's a site tho it's not working with (doesn't matter what I set up, the images are always there).
it's pretty damn annoying with it's lot of flash/java/banner stuff, I'm lucky to have click-to-flash and AdBlock (well once adblock works with that site too :)

Thanks again

[196] Submitted by: nightwish Sunday May 25th 2003
hmm the URL seems not have gone through :)
[197] Submitted by: feierwehrmann Monday May 26th 2003
Flash filtering/blocking would be really cooooool!
[198] Submitted by: nightwish Tuesday May 27th 2003
The extension's name is's on firebird's extension page
[199] Submitted by: Henrik Tuesday May 27th 2003
@197 and a lot others.
AdBlock DOES support blocking of flash, as mentioned about 10 times already on this page. The problem is that it's a bit harder to obtain the origin address of the flash-ad, than it is to obtain the address of an ordinary image. It's not possible (.... or at least it seems so...) to add a right-click option to flash-content in Mozilla/Firebird. If anyone knows how to do this, or sees a Mozilla plug-in do it, please contact the AdBlock developers with info.

If you look through the source (hard solution) or use the "media info"-tab in the page-info-window to find the originating address, a filter for this address can be added to AdBlock, which will start filtering the flash-ads.

-- Henrik

[200] Submitted by: nightwish Tuesday May 27th 2003
Sorry, I just told him a solution that actually works right now, in the meantime one can experiment with AdBlock and the developers may find a solution. Until that happens it's not bad at least not to run the flash animation even if it's there and downloaded and all (see how that flash-click-to-view works). AdBlock will do it one day either, I am sure about that. Happy coding..
[201] Submitted by: nightwish Wednesday May 28th 2003

This filter is not working either, if the developers are interested in it.. (okay I don't really want to block's banners, just tried it if it works there). Henrik, do you have an idea how to get it work? (the other non working site is, and yes I know about sites where it _does_ work :) )


[202] Submitted by: nightwish Wednesday May 28th 2003
okay the proper links are always flushed* is the link I pasted...
[203] Submitted by: buran Thursday May 29th 2003
The interface needs to be resizable. On Mac OS X, the 'add' button to the right of the text box is cut off midway through and only the right 1/4-1/3 or so of the rightmost button ('ad'something) underneath that is visible.
[204] Submitted by: TreeGo Monday June 2nd 2003

Is there a way to temporarily disable AdBlock, and then re-enable it later?

[205] Submitted by: Nevyn Tuesday June 3rd 2003

1. A plugin that work like the
"Flash click to view" plugin except for animated gifs only would be awsome.

2. A plugin that could enable/disable flash and animated gifs with a single click on the toolbar would also be nice.

[206] Submitted by: Jim Tuesday June 10th 2003

doesn't work here automatically :

you have to reload to get rid of of the animated gifs.

[207] Submitted by: Arthur Tuesday June 10th 2003

Just installed 0.3 on Firebird... Working fine. Had previously entered section to "userContent.css" that I got from "Tips and Tricks" in the Firebird Help area, but adding your Extension has really improved the results. However, perhaps I should remove the section... Perhaps it will cause conflicts or slow down the loading of pages. What do you think?

[208] Submitted by: Henrik Tuesday June 10th 2003

I doubt that there will be conflict or significant load-penalties (unless you're on a very slow system) when using both AdBlock and the userContent.css-method.

-- Henrik

[209] Submitted by: rue Tuesday June 10th 2003

unleashed into the wild; development builds, for your pleasure:

(feedback is welcome)

[210] Submitted by: rue Tuesday June 10th 2003

link ::

[211] Submitted by: guest Thursday June 12th 2003

does "0.3 for firebird" work for mozilla too ? thanks

[212] Submitted by: rue Friday June 13th 2003

@211 The firebird-version might work for Mozilla 1.4+, but wont filter background tabs.

The mozilla-specific version works and will.

[213] Submitted by: guest Friday June 13th 2003

thanks, but i don't see 0.3 for mozilla, only older version

[214] Submitted by: Friday June 13th 2003

In adblock.js, there is an undeclared variable that is caught with strict JavaScript on. While this does not hinder functionality, it is bad coding practice and causes a very minor performance degradation. The variable prefObj in function initAdBlock needs to have the var keyword placed before it. I would have reported this in Bugzilla, but this project is not listed in mozdev's Bugzilla.

[215] Submitted by: Jonathan Friday June 13th 2003

what kinds of regular expressions are supported? i've been using trial and error to figure it out.
//[aA]d[s]?// works for so many sites, it's ridiculous.

[216] Submitted by: rue Saturday June 14th 2003

@214: I saw that, but thought it might be unique to component-declaration. It will be fixed on the next build.

[217] Submitted by: rue Saturday June 14th 2003


adblock can now completely prevent ads from loading. this is bleeding-edge, i-just-coded-this-hours-ago, "damn, you know you want it"-cool code.

[218] Submitted by: Stephane Rodriguez Sunday June 15th 2003

What's the point of adding a *.gif regexp when you know that so many gif pictures are not ads at all.
In addition, since most urls are dynamic, only a few of them will actually show a .gif URI.

I wonder whether you even care about the HTTP return mime type like image/gif, application/x-shockwave, etc. Those mime types are reliable.

[219] Submitted by: Henrik Sunday June 15th 2003

@Stephane Rodriguez:
Oh my god!! You're right! We've been doing the wrong thing all the time. Damn! How can we have been so stupid? And how come none of the previous 200 posts + the ones Mozillazine didn't point out this problem. So many precious hours wasted....
Thanks for enlightening us with your insightfulnes, Stephane.

-- Henrik (Whose sarcasm-level has tripled since he started studying for exams!)

[220] Submitted by: jkl Monday June 16th 2003

rue, installed it on latest phoenix/firebird nightly. working good so far.

[221] Submitted by: †Mineiro Tuesday June 17th 2003

Excellent extension!
But i have a little problem. I recently installed 0.3 on top of 0.2 (there is nothing telling you not to do it) and now i've got two AdBlock entries in my Tools menu, both pointing to the same adblock. I don't know witch version is instaled since i can't see no diference to the previous one and there is no version info in the UI (sugested improvement).
Question 1? How do i find the version i'am using?
Question 2? How to remove the extra AdBlock option in Tools Menu?

Thanks... for the extension and for any help ;-)


[222] Submitted by: Bob/Paul Tuesday June 17th 2003

It's not blocking ads on ZDNet very well. I've noticed most of their ads come from slightly different servers, but they all have a /Ads/ folder. However, */Ads/* doesn't seem to do anything. Maybe it's this weird JavaScript banner their using that reorganizes the layout when the banner is clicked, but this orange MCI banner keeps bothering me!

Also, what are "Regular expressions" and how do I use them to filter?

Also, what are "Regular expression-based filters"

[223] Submitted by: Zain Thursday June 19th 2003

Excellent extension, thanks!

One question. Is there any first or third party site that provides a comprehensive collection of bad ad sites that we can import into adblock? That would be excellent.

[224] Submitted by: rue Thursday June 19th 2003

@221: the faq explains how to remove older versions. i'll add Uninstall-capability shortly.

@222: wow. look at zdnet's source. Adblock's current dev-build has Deadly Serious Issues with the way their scripts write elements in pieces, on-the-fly. it also dies when trying to set style.display="none" for positioned items (x,y,z). the only solution for the latter is: not to do it. for the former, i'm still working on it.

@those who thanked us: You're Welcome :)

[225] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Thursday June 19th 2003

Why has the edit button been removed in 0.3?

[226] Submitted by: Henrik Thursday June 19th 2003

Because it's now possible to edit each filter by double-clicking it in the list.

-- Henrik

[227] Submitted by: Aqua. Friday June 20th 2003

Please add an area for a list of addresses that AdBlock DOES NOT filter.

I say this because one of my favorite sites (unfortunately) uses conventions in their naming of images that AdBlock's filters catch and dispose of.

[228] Submitted by: rue Friday June 20th 2003

@227: an option to "disable adblock for this site" is definitely planned. right now, we're aiming for a release-build, so feature-development has been frozen.

[229] Submitted by: aaron Monday June 23rd 2003

hey rue, i love the work that has been done recently for the adblock dev builds for mozilla. great work! couple of comments / questions:

1. what exactly is an iframe? and when adblocking them can i just put in the whole address or should i use wildcards?

2. is there going to be any way to have adblock work in email as well?

3. flash blocking works great, but in order to add a flash filter i have to go to view->page info, then find the embed and manually copy & paste the addr into adblock. when you say that "Filters Flash (and embedded media) on context-click," does that mean that i should be getting an adblock on the context menu when right-clicking flash items?

4. i don't really know what sort of regular expressions people use for adblocking purposes. the only thing i can think of is something like can anyone provide examples of their regular expressions? i guess i don't really know what those are.

5. when installing the dev builds, why do i always have to copy the updated adblock.jar file into my profile/chrome directory, overwriting the 15kb one that is in the xpi? can't the new adblock.jar file be added to the xpi installer so that it would be more streamlined? another note on this.... when trying out different dev builds, i have gotten into the habit of not installing the xpi, but rather copying the adblock.jar file (and usercontent.css up until dev 16) into my profile/chrome directory. is that bad?

well, i think that is all i have to comment on for now. adblock is absolutley great!! i love it. just to let you know, in case you have any questions, i am running Mozilla 1.3, build id 20030312. thanks and keep up the great work.

[230] Submitted by: aaron Monday June 23rd 2003

on #4 above, it should be "the only think i can think of is something like http :// www. ad_site. com /*" (it automatically stripped my example url last time. sorry.

[231] Submitted by: rue Monday June 23rd 2003

@229: my reply:

1. here's a sample iframe to click on -- ads can be contained in these:

2. i don't use mozilla for mail, so i wont be implementing blocking there. if mail doesn't register adblock's bindings, though, i suppose we could add a copy wherever they should be. you'd just have to fire up the browser to add / change filters.

3. Thank You Very Much for responding about flash-clicking. i was using a kind of hack-method to trap context-clicks after they'd fired in the object. it works on my install of moz1.3b, but i knew it might not for newer builds. basically, it should have thrown a "New Filter:" dialog after the flash-menu was clicked out of; the actual flash-menu wasn't really overridden. ah well -- back to the drawing-board.

4. here's the documentation for mozilla's current implementation of RegExp:

5. and you're doing exactly as you should, replacing the chrome file directly. there's no need to install adblock more than once.

the complete, packaged xpi-install will be rolled out when this dev. version hits release.

keep the comments flowin'.

[232] Submitted by: aaron Monday June 23rd 2003

rue --
thanks for the quick reply. that would be cool to have adblock work for mail, and then having to fire up the browser to add/change filters. actually, it already has the adblock entry in the tools menu of mail. again, thanks for the info, and keep up the good work, i really love adblock!

[233] Submitted by: aaron Wednesday June 25th 2003

hey rue, i was wondering if a feature that used to be in one of the dev builds would return? i'm using dev build 16 right now, but maybe around 12 or 13 (not too sure), the list of filters was sorted alphabetically. could you put this back in? also, i am not sure if filters are case-sensitive or not. are they? i would prefer no case sensitivity.

[234] Submitted by: rue Wednesday June 25th 2003

@233: sure -- i'll probably make it a sticky pref in the "lists" menu. It was removed (since i hate it) with the intention of having lists dynamically sorted, but *saved* in the order they're added; superficial-manipulation.

development of UI-features was ceased when i discovered how to implement true adblocking. i'm finishing up the uninstall routines now, and i'll slip list-sort back in for you.

[235] Submitted by: rue Wednesday June 25th 2003

@233 > append: all patterns are case-insensitive by default. you started me considering, but it's probably not worth making individually optional, since that would just add a level of complexity to adblock's use.


then again... if disincluding it when unneeded shaves filter-time-overhead...

i'll do some testing and see.

[236] Submitted by: aaron Thursday June 26th 2003

@225 > ok, that is what i thought about case insensitivity. i actually prefer it that way. i remember on (i think) the 0.2 version of adblock, i had to have separate filters for */ad/* , */AD/*, and */Ad/*. i like case insensitive much better :)

[237] Submitted by: shilmar Friday June 27th 2003

nice info

[238] Submitted by: duckjibe Friday June 27th 2003

A shortcup key to enable/ diable is planned : NICE !!

But it would also be nice to enable/ diable it
by an icon on the toolbar

[239] Submitted by: rue Friday June 27th 2003

Dev. Build 17 is posted, and feedback would be most appreciated.

@237: why did you post that? I can block everything on that site with the current dev. version

@238: a shortcut key is very much planned, but a toolbar icon is very much not. making it cross-compatible with moz, firebird, and anything future-ward would require separate development branches. i *might* add an icon to the status-bar. this would be simultaneously unintrusive, and (i think) cross-compatible.

...we'll see :)

[240] Submitted by: Aaron Monday June 30th 2003

Looking good Rue!!! Thanks for the sorting :) I like the new look (with the buttons on the right). One thing though... I saw that you updated the link on your page to an xpi file to make it easier to install. Would you be opposed to linking directly to the jar file as well (for us old-timers that already have and love adblock, but want to keep current with the latest and greatest version)?

[241] Submitted by: Aaron Monday June 30th 2003

Rue -- installed the 0.4 dev 18 build, and it shows the list sorted when i open the adblock prefs, but it isn't filtering ads anymore!! i installed the mozilla 1.3 version because i have 1.3 installed. i dont' know... should i install the moz 1.4/firebird version??? i reverted back to dev 17 build (had it saved luckily...)

[242] Submitted by: rue Monday June 30th 2003

@241: aaron - a couple of questions:

1. which version of adblock had you originally *installed* prior to updating to d18? -- from an xpi

2. to downgrade, did you just replace the jar -- without deinstalling/reinstalling?

i'm not implying user-error with these questions. rather, i modified some of the install-parameters for preliminary mail-support and i suspect this is the culprit.

but if you just replaced the .jar to downgrade, *and* it's working, then it's something in adblock's code.

i've got d18+ installed and fully functional, so this is puzzling.

[243] Submitted by: rue Tuesday July 1st 2003

d19 is posted, and hopefully all problems are solved. the jar-file is also linked. for the next version, i'll fix the xpi install-routine to "remove" the current version, since it fails (for me) when trying to update. this is not the fault of adblock, but rather xpi-install in general.

once again, the solution is to work around stuff...

[244] Submitted by: JanGB Tuesday July 1st 2003

*LOVE* this functionality! :-D Although there are minor glitches still.

It's much better than hosts-file-hacking, and slicker than a separate application like Webwasher.

I'm not clear on this ... are Rue and Henrik working together or in parrallel?

Kudos and keep up the great work guys! :O) JanGB

[245] Submitted by: JanGB Tuesday July 1st 2003

Oh yeah -- one more thing: if you could find the time to put up a decent FAQ on regular expressions (you know, what it is and how to format strings) that would be truly grand. Thanks!

[246] Submitted by: Aaron Tuesday July 1st 2003

Rue -- some comments for you.
1. I had installed adblock 0.3 from *. xpi from, and had been putting the new *.jar file, replacing the current one. It had worked great up until d18 (tried d19 too and that didn't work either), so I went back to d17. I think I *MIGHT* know why -- I deleted the usercontent.css file before putting the new *.jar file in, and d18 & d19 didn't create one. (Just tried a fresh profile for Mozilla 1.4 and installed your Mozilla 1.4 / Firebird dev 19 *.xpi, and it does not block ads for me either. I can right-click on an image and it brings up the adblock dialog, but after entering the filter, it does nothing on clicking "OK", but if i hit "Cancel", then look in the adblock prefs window it has my filter in there -- but it does not filter the ads! I looked in my profile/chrome directory and saw no usercontent.css file. I know I had problems on the other computer with Mozilla 1.3 when I accidentally deleted usercontent.css, so maybe just fixing that would solve the problem?)

2. I had zipped up the adblock.jar and usercontent.css files, and deleted them (saving the zip file for backup) to install the new dev version. I then placed the new adblock.jar file in my profile/chrome directory. That is when I saw errors. But to downgrade, I just unzipped the file, thereby overwriting the newer adblock.jar file, and copying usercontent.css into the directory.

3. I am away from the house computer right now, but I will look at the house what version I have installed right now. I kinda remember just putting the usercontent.css file in there *MIGHT* have made it work. Might just be a problem of the file not being created if it doesn't already exist... Hope this helps.

[247] Submitted by: Richard Tango-Lowy Tuesday July 1st 2003

Godlike. Thank you.

[248] Submitted by: Henrik Tuesday July 1st 2003

Rue and I are working sort of serially. :) He's building on version 0.2 at incredible pace, while I ... uhm... watch, listen and occasionally give feedback.

About the regular expressions. I don't think it's really a good idea for us AdBlock-people to put one together, as there are already plenty available on the net. Try a google search for tutorials or introductions on regular expressions.

-- Henrik

[249] Submitted by: rue Tuesday July 1st 2003

@246: aaron- excellent. you isolated the problem. now, since i don't have access to your machine, i'll need you to do a few things.

from build 16 onward, adblock has included code to regenerate the userContent.css file -- and that code hasn't changed. so with d17 installed, you should see the same problems as d19.

try removing the usercontent file. restart mozilla. the expected behaviour is: a warning pops up before the first window is shown, telling you the file has been regenerated, and please restart. if this doesn't happen, go to the tools-menu > web-development, and open the javascript-console. is anything listed?

..and is there a usercontent file in your dir?

if absolutely nothing happens, then i'll make a separate version of adblock for you to test what methods of disk-access might work. i'm using cross-platform read/write api's, which have been shown to work in other people's code, so this strikes me as incredibly odd.

ps: i apologize for all the problems. good code never fails.

[250] Submitted by: rue Tuesday July 1st 2003

@246 > append: i fixed the uncaught exception that locked the adblock dialog. it was due to a @?&+*bersome approach for "immediate-filtering". it now correctly fires the img/item's filter-trigger method (which our overlay watches for). again, my fault for not keeping everything evenly up-to-speed. apologies.

build 20 is shaping to be a major bugfix.

[251] Submitted by: Aaron Tuesday July 1st 2003

Rue, I deleted userContent.css and fired up Mozilla 1.4 (just installed it on the home machine with a new profile) and it did not warn me to restart because the file was regenerated (I know what screen you are talking about -- have seen it in the past). Here are the javascript console errors I got:

Error: uncaught exception: [Exception... "Component returned failure code: 0x80520012 (NS_ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND) [nsIFile.isDirectory]" nsresult: "0x80520012 (NS_ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND)" location: "JS frame :: chrome://adblock/content/adblock.js :: checkUserContentcss :: line 480" data: no]

Error: uncaught exception: [Exception... "Component returned failure code: 0x80520012 (NS_ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND) [nsIFile.isDirectory]" nsresult: "0x80520012 (NS_ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND)" location: "JS frame :: chrome://adblock/content/adblock.js :: checkUserContentcss :: line 480" data: no]

[252] Submitted by: Aaron Tuesday July 1st 2003

Rue, also noticed with the recent install @251, going to does not display the flash on there (might be that ALL flash is broken??) It just shows a white box where the flash would be, with the words "flash "(in italics and red), then "[[Click to play]]"

Any ideas? I do want flash to work on some sites, like hmmmm.....

[253] Submitted by: rue Tuesday July 1st 2003

@252: !!!

i messed with some binding-stuff, toying with the idea of incorporating flash-click-to-view into adblock and forgot to disable it before posting d19.

i *knew* i'd adjusted something else between d19 and d20. i can't believe i forgot about that. d20 rv1 will be posted shortly.

..and hey- thanks to your console-output, i've reproduced the error. yay- i can fix it now.

d20 will be a complete fix :)

[254] Submitted by: rue Tuesday July 1st 2003

d20 is posted. this should fix everything.

[255] Submitted by: Aaron Tuesday July 1st 2003

d20 looks great! I'll test the uninstaller for you tomorrow at school...

[256] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Wednesday July 2nd 2003

Rue -- I just tried out your deinstall routine on a fresh profile, with Mozilla 1.4, and the Adblock 0.4 d20 (moz 1.4 / firebird) *.xpi install link.

It worked perfectly! All traces of adblock are gone after deinstalling it then restarting. The adblock.jar file still lives in the profile/chrome directory, and so does userContent.css, but it is empty. Good job. One thing I would suggest (and this is just a personal opinion) is changing "deinstall" to "uninstall"... I've always heard of uninstall but this is the first time i have heard the term deinstall. Keep up the good work, I look forward to being able to adblock flash on context-click!!

[257] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Wednesday July 2nd 2003

Crap! After @256 I happened to look down at the component bar, and realized there is a problem with the uninstaller for the Adblock 0.4 d20 (moz 1.4 / firebird) *.xpi install link. Please see for a full description and photos.

[258] Submitted by: rue Wednesday July 2nd 2003

@256: excellent- it's 95% working.

2 questions: to clarify, the jar-file was not renamed "adblock-deinstalled-jar"? ..and did you notice an "adblock-temp" dir? ::both these operations are encased in try-blocks, so unfortunately, if they fail, you might not have been notified.

regarding 'deinstall', that was a very conscious decision, stemming from the generally unpleasant effect of seeing the removal-button every time i open settings. the word "Uninstall" has a very negative connotation, carrying as it does the force of permanence. "DeInstall", rather, has the positive connotation of empowerment: the user simply stepping-back their decision to install. ...and, of course, if i bury the item in a button-menu, the issue becomes moot :P

[259] Submitted by: rue Wednesday July 2nd 2003

@257: whoa- you followed-up before i had refreshed. standby..

[260] Submitted by: Aaron Wednesday July 2nd 2003

in response to your two questions:
1.after deinstallation, the file was named adblock.jar
2.i did not notice an "adblock-temp" directory... I'm on the home computer now, and don't remember seeing one on the test computer at school. (hehe i do most of my testing at school in case something goes wrong, my profile is safe).

[261] Submitted by: rue Wednesday July 2nd 2003

@260: hehe, very prudent (testing-wise). when you next have a window on campus, could you install the m1.4/firebird xpi, deinstall, and then zip the chrome-dirs from both profile and app, posting them to that site? there's probably an errant file i've missed.

ps: your contributions will be duly noted in the next release :)

[262] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Wednesday July 2nd 2003

@261: That probably won't be until tomorrow, but I might create a dummy profile here at the house and try it out for you. In either case, I will post on this page when the zip file is up there for you.

[263] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Thursday July 3rd 2003

@261: Rue, I've updated the web page with the zip files after starting out with a new profile, then installing d20 for moz 1.4, then deinstalling d20. I installed d20, restarted moz, it said restart one more time so I did, then adblocked an image, restared moz, then deinstalled d20, and quit moz. Then I zipped everything up for you. Also, I noticed that when installing from *.xpi, the moz 1.3 link says "Adblock 0.4 has successfully been installed" as a confirmation, but the moz 1.4 *.xpi link says "Adblock 0.3 has successfully been installed"... hope I'm not too much of a pest to you. But I just want to say that I really appreciate the work you've been doing. Adblock is great!

[264] Submitted by: Aaron Thursday July 3rd 2003

Here is the web page... sorry :(

[265] Submitted by: rue Thursday July 3rd 2003

@263: thanks for posting those directories -- i'll delve into them momentarily.

the newer "moz1.4/firebird" xpi uses the exact same install-script as the official .3 release for firebird, so yea- that's correct that it says ".3 has been installed". Because moz1.3 (older) can't register profile-chrome extensions, i had to update the install-script not to do this; while i was at it, i updated the dialog to correctly state "1.4... installed". it actually would have slipped by me if you hadn't noted it -- i'll update the firebird xpi for the next build.

in turn, i'd like to thank you for helping me test on the newer browsers / windows-platform. you're adblock's official software tester -! :)

ps: did you just modify the image to read "uninstall"? -- and was that post left-over from yesterday.. or a subtle way to harangue the point? :P

[266] Submitted by: m123 Thursday July 3rd 2003

I have been using this AdBlock for a while and like what is developing. About stopping ads before they are downloaded... perhaps you could incorporate some of the code from ZeroServ which does this. The source code (and compiled executable) is available at This is combination with AdBlock works pretty well for me. Both are lightweight so they don't sloooow down your browser too much.

[267] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Thursday July 3rd 2003

1.That makes sense about the install scripts. Anyway, it's still in development so this is the time that these things are expected to happen :)

2.Official software tester? Cool! Glad that I could help you out.

3.About the image with "uninstall" -- I actually modified the adblock stuff (i think a *.js and another file). I did a find->replace with deinstall->uninstall just to see how it looked like that. I was just curious. You're probably right about the conotation of "uninstall" though...

[268] Submitted by: rue Thursday July 3rd 2003

@266: host-blocking directly on your local computer will always be faster than via a plug-in. so, if you're running windows, don't understand regular expressions, and don't mind adding a possible instability to your actual system, then zeroServ might be for you.

adblock, on the other hand, is sandboxed in mozilla, allows fully configurable regular expressions, and selectively blocks or hides ads based on the complete url. for filtering, it does everything zeroServ does (and more), with the ease of "click- add- filtered."

as a final point to consider: incorporating zeroServ's *windows* host-altering capability would make adblock platform-specific, which is antithetical to the goal of the mozilla project: platform agnosticism. technically, yes, we could do it; but, hopefully, you see why we wont.

[269] Submitted by: rue Thursday July 3rd 2003

@aaron: hey- could you post clean-copies of both chrome dir's, too? -- i should have added that yesterday, but forgot.

[270] Submitted by: Aaron Thursday July 3rd 2003

@269 Rue -- I am already away from the school computer and won't be back there until Morning... How about a copy of the chrome dir's that I have on my machine? They do have adblock installed though... If you want, you can use the email address on the website to get in touch w/ me.

[271] Submitted by: Aaron Thursday July 3rd 2003

Man I don't know what's up with my typing today... "Morning" should be "Monday morning".... Sorry.

[272] Submitted by: Douglas Friday July 4th 2003

I find that when I'm loading more than one page using tabbed browsing, AdBlock clears up the ads on the tab that I'm currently viewing, but doesn't tackle the ads that load up in the other tabs that were being loaded up. I switch to the next tab to look at that web page, and the ads are still there. It seems like AdBlock is set to clean up the ads that appear on the current tab but no background tabs.

[273] Submitted by: Douglas Friday July 4th 2003

Second comment, now that I remember: I'm currently using Windows 98 and the recently released Netscape 7.1. When I go to Tools > AdBlock, the control panel for AdBlock is a bit truncated (cut off) at the right and at the bottom, and there's no way to resize the window. This means the "Add filter" and "About AdBlock (?)" buttons are cut off (it shows only "Add" and "About" and the right side of the buttons don't appear. I also don't get to see the scroll bar for the list of filters being used.

Could this be fixed for Netscape? (I haven't tried this for Mozilla 1.3 since Moz1.3 has its own integrated advertising blocker.)

[274] Submitted by: rue Friday July 4th 2003

@270: wow- we had an amazing piece of code turned in by a third-party today which removes the need to modify userContent.css, completely ( -!). simultaneously, we achieved a working flashmenu-trap.

with so many developments in less than 12hrs and the 4th of july now upon us, waiting until monday seems like a fine thing. thanks for helping out, once again.

@272: try the dev. build: :: just don't deinstall :P

[275] Submitted by: Busca Inmobiliarias Friday July 4th 2003

inmobiliarias en Argentina, Espa–a, Bolivia, Chile, Brasil, Costa Rica, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Estados Unidos, Guatemala, Honduras, MŽxico, Panam‡, Paraguay, Perœ, Portugal, Puerto Rico, Repœblica Dominicana, Uruguay, Venezuela, ...
Alojamiento p‡ginas web..

Alta en Buscadores..

[276] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Monday July 7th 2003

@269: I've posted the "clean" chrome directories on the website (, hope that helps you out :)

[277] Submitted by: Smack Monday July 7th 2003

I have a bug to report. I first ran into this on 0.1 with Mozilla 1.2.1. Now I'm using 0.3 on Firebird 0.6, and it's still there. (Both installations are on Windows 2000.) And since I somehow don't have permisson to file a bug the nice way (403 Forbidden), I'm posting it here.

What happens is that Adblock doesn't always work. On maybe one page in six, it just leaves all the blocked ads in place. However, when I reload the page, the ads disappear.

[278] Submitted by: Tomasz Monday July 7th 2003


Is there absolutely no way of using Adblock with
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; pl-PL; rv:1.3b) Gecko/20030210 ? I've installed it "successfully", but no extra item appears in the tools menu. :-(

[279] Submitted by: Smack Tuesday July 8th 2003

New feature request: blocking all images from a given server EXCEPT for a given folder.

That and the bug in message 277 are the only problems I have with your program. Good project :)

[280] Submitted by: rue Tuesday July 8th 2003

@269: hey- thanks. i've been absorbed in finishing up the flash-override, and i'll probably wrap that up before tackling DeInstall. ...just to let you know i'm not ignoring you :)

@278: have you tried the dev. build for mozilla?-

@277 / 279: i encourage you, also, to try the dev. build. further, your "bug" is easily remedied with the proper regular expression. i think you'll be interested in "lookahead" and "lookbehind" assertions. read up on them here:

[281] Submitted by: rue Tuesday July 8th 2003

@277 / 279: er. sorry, i confused the bug and feature-request.

[282] Submitted by: Corey Thursday July 10th 2003

I have to say I am quite pleased with this extension. Its removed those annoying new "slider" ads that I've been seeing on ESPN lately. And its quite easy to use to boot. Good job!

[283] Submitted by: rue Thursday July 10th 2003

d21 is posted -- most impressive.

[284] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Thursday July 10th 2003

Rue, dloaded the d21 adblock.jar file...
I noticed the statusbar right away. One idea for that would be when you clik on the "Adblock" statusbar text, it would open the prefs window since everything else on the statusbar is clickable.

Also, noticed a few issues with d21, please see the website for details.

[285] Submitted by: JanGB Thursday July 10th 2003

Tried to install the d21 on a Moz v1.4 on Win2000 - got "Install failed. Error code 999".

Why do you make the links on your web site so dang hard to spot? I spent a few minutes searching for a download/install link for d21, and ended up tabbing through your pages looking for links.

LOVE your contribution to ad-free surfing! Yay!

[286] Submitted by: rue Thursday July 10th 2003

@284: let's carry this thread over to email; i need you to investigate the dom for me.

@285: um.. yikes. i guess i thought having a 'Linked' section with consistent use of italics would make it all easy.. or somethin'.

regarding the failed install: adblock's current install-routine doesn't remove older versions -- it just fails when it finds adblock already there. for the dev-builds, the easiest way to update is to just download the jar-file (linked at the bottom), and manually copy it into your profile::chrome directory, replacing the original.

i'll try and fix the install in an upcoming build.

[287] Submitted by: Linufan Thursday July 10th 2003

Hi developers!

This is getting better and better, right now I'm using the latest beta version Adblock 0.4, Development Build 21. This is the best pluggin available for Mozilla.

Thanks for your work and please keep improving it!

[288] Submitted by: Linxufan Thursday July 10th 2003

There's something wrong in the beta version I think, if I open for ie. this page: I see this banner:

if I choose to block this particular one it works, but if I create this filter: ** it doesn't work (doesn't filter). With the stable version, this filter works. Regards, JC.

[289] Submitted by: rue Thursday July 10th 2003

@288: there's nothing wrong with the dev. build :P

what's happening is some very clever script-trickery. the page has a bunch of placeholder images that bind (adblock catches those). these images have unique name-properties; a script further down the page then accesses the image-array directly, writing to 'document.images' -- the benign images are replaced with banners.

somehow, this method keeps the replacement images from triggering adblock's xbl "onconstruct" event. until i can figure out how to trap scripts, you'll have to discern pages like this manually.

this pattern blocks the "benign" images

[290] Submitted by: rue Thursday July 10th 2003

@288 > append: on second thought, i *can* add a getter/setter for the src-attribute on items -- it would call the filter-trigger when it was accessed. then, when a script tries to change it, we'll still catch things before they bind.

"why- that's a fine idea, rue!" "i knew you'd like it."

[291] Submitted by: Linuxfan Friday July 11th 2003

@289 && 290

Rue, thanks for your comments; I'll try your suggestion.


[292] Submitted by: rue Friday July 11th 2003

@291: actually, i implemented the 'src'-setter yesterday and it works perfectly. as soon as flashblocking is completely mended (within a day), i'll post d22.

and you're welcome :)

[293] Submitted by: rue Saturday July 12th 2003

d22 is posted -- (now let us inject the poison.)

[294] Submitted by: DanMacMan Saturday July 12th 2003

IS there any talk of adblock development for Camino?

[295] Submitted by: rue Saturday July 12th 2003

@294: do the current xpi's fail for camino? looking through camino's site, i can't determine where it might differ with the regular mozilla branch. par idyllicum, they -should- support the normal install / overlay routines.

[296] Submitted by: Douglas Saturday July 12th 2003

I tried installing the 0.4 build of Adblock (got it from your site) while using Netscape 7.1

Netscape says it's not a valid installation package, and refuses to install Adblock.

[297] Submitted by: rue Saturday July 12th 2003

@296: just to be sure, i first verified both xpi-archives to be validly compressed -- they are.

the problem, i think, is the mime-type. currently, the file is being served as plain-text, and i can't add an entry for 'xpi'. try saving the file to disk (link :: right-click) and then drop it on the browser. i'm pretty sure that will work. --apologies for the extra trouble.

[298] Submitted by: Alta en Buscadores Sunday July 13th 2003

Posicionamos su p‡gina web en principales buscadores.

[299] Submitted by: Busca Inmobiliarias Sunday July 13th 2003

Amplia oferta inmobiliaria en Argentina, Espa–a...

[300] Submitted by: rue Sunday July 13th 2003

@296 > append: i was wrong. the links were broken to the install-xpi's. everything is fixed and should work for you now.

[301] Submitted by: timmy Sunday July 13th 2003

I'm using linux, and AdBlock cannot be installed when mozilla is run as a user. I get the "-202" error message and the install fails. However, it can be installed as root, but this does me no good because then I'd have to run mozilla with root permissions all the time to use AdBlock.

I assume this is because the AdBlock .xpi file puts files into the system's mozilla directories (which require root access to modify).

Is there any way you could implement AdBlock as a user-specific installation, in the "($HOME)/.mozilla" directory only?


[302] Submitted by: rue Sunday July 13th 2003

@301: since the 1.4 xpi installs to profile-chrome, i'm not sure i understand your request. but let me clarify the distinction between the two xpi's posted:

1.3 xpi -- because mozilla 1.3 (and prior) couldn't handle profile-chrome installation for content overlays this xpi installs an app-chrome extension. you would need root for this.

1.4 xpi -- installs as a profile-chrome extension. you shouldn't need root.

[303] Submitted by: Adam H. Monday July 14th 2003

d22 seems to break the 'Save Image As...' in Mozilla 1.4. When I backed it off to d20 that dialogue worked fine again.

[304] Submitted by: Aaron Monday July 14th 2003

I can confirm the breakage of 'Save Image As...' on 1.4. When you click on it, nothing happens.

[305] Submitted by: rue Tuesday July 15th 2003

@303 / 304: the 'src' property-setter method i implemented for had to be backed out -- it completely overrode the c-code, rather than extending it.

i've been working on an alternate method using mutation-events, and will post d23 when it's ready. this absolutely needs to be plugged, as it's a rather large hole in adblock's coverage. sorry for making you wait.

[306] Submitted by: rue Tuesday July 15th 2003

d23 is posted. "supafly -!"

[307] Submitted by: Linuxfan Tuesday July 15th 2003


Thanks! It works flawlessly with
I'll continue testing and will let you know if I find any other trouble.

Kindly, JC.

[308] Submitted by: F & L Tuesday July 15th 2003

Hello from Mexico

[309] Submitted by: Buran Wednesday July 16th 2003

Needs debug mode; the 'feature' photo of the beetle in is being removed and I can't seem to determine why; I don't have any filters that would be causing this as far as I know. It seems to do this regardless of whether or not the article is loaded in a standalone window or in the original frames. I actually want to see this image, so it's very frustrating.

Perhaps a URL can be pasted into a special 'test rules' window, and then checked to determine if any existing rules match it?

[310] Submitted by: rue Wednesday July 16th 2003

@309: since it's not blocked for me, i'm positive it's one of your filters. maybe if you could export your filter-list and toss it on an ftp somewhere i could help you discern which one.

[311] Submitted by: Douglas Thursday July 17th 2003

I tried installing the latest development build of Adblock (0.4 d23 profile) on Netscape 7.1 -- I get an "Install failed: Error code 999". I have also tried installing the root profile, and I get the same error.

[312] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Thursday July 17th 2003

@331- Douglas, did you already have a previous version of AdBlock installed? I believe that is why you are getting the error. If that is the case, then all you have to do is simply download the adblock.jar file and put it into your profile/chrome directory. If you have Windows 2000 or XP, then it is located at C:Documents and Settings(Your username)Application DataMozillaProfiles(Your profile)(some random number).sltchrome If using another operating system, I'm not exactly sure where it is. If you don't feel comfortable finding your profile/chrome directory, then do a search for "adblock.jar" on your hard drive and then it will tell you where it is located. :)

[313] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Thursday July 17th 2003

Hell, it deleted my backslashes from the previous post...
I'm going to write it again for you:
c: documents and settings (your username) application data mozilla profiles (your profile) (some random number).slt chrome

let's hope that works...

[314] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Thursday July 17th 2003

@331 -
Ok, let's try it again!! (Don't know why the backslashes are getting removed from my posts}. So I'm going to put forward slashes in there so they won't get deleted, but replace them with backslashes if you're looking for the directory.

c:/documents and settings/(your username)/application data/mozilla/profiles/(your profile)/(some random number).slt/chrome/

[315] Submitted by: Douglas Thursday July 17th 2003

To Aaron:
Using the instructions in the FAQ page here, I removed Adblock and reinstalled the official release. I might go back to the newer, experimental builds later. But in the meantime, I have another issue that seems really strange, but I think it's been mentioned before:

These are screen caps of the control panel I get when I go to Tools > Adblock. It seems to vary, but I am not sure what causes the Adblock control panel to be displayed in one way (e.g. adblock2.png) and then another time in another way (e.g. adblock3.png).

[316] Submitted by: rue Thursday July 17th 2003

@311: hey douglas- you know what's funny?
the error code you gave is listed under 'success' as
"reboot needed".

check it:

maybe you just need to restart :P

[317] Submitted by: rue Thursday July 17th 2003

@316: hehe- you posted while i was submitting :P
the two versions display differently because they
*are* different. i modified the pref-window to
correctly size itself, persist settings and other
small tweaks.

you can always run the dev. build by first installing
an older version, then searching your drive for
"adblock.jar". just download the replacement jar-file
from the dev. page and replace the copy on your

..or whatever works.

[318] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Thursday July 17th 2003

That's a known bug with the old 0.2 version. The UI was re-written for 0.3 and 0.4 (the newer builds) and I have not seen any issues with problems like that since.

[319] Submitted by: rue Thursday July 17th 2003

@315 > append: hang on- i see what you meant now. you
have adblock v.2 and v.3 installed at the same time.
i'm not sure what would cause one to be preferred only
some of the time, but that doesn't matter. they're both
in conflict.

do a search on your drive for "adblock", then follow
the uninstall directions for *each* folder that
contains it. this will either be both the
profile-chrome and app-chrome, or app-chrome alone with
two adblock files of slightly different names.

tangentally, i should probably get the uninstall

[320] Submitted by: Douglas Thursday July 17th 2003

It turns out that you were right: I had two different versions of Adblock installed (one in my particular profile folder and another in the Netscape chrome folder). I then made sure that the .jar files were the same version. Hopefully this will work out and I won't have any more of those weird control panel resize issues. I also just noticed the new Flash blocker add-on--very cool.

[321] Submitted by: Michael Sunday July 20th 2003

First I want to know if ad text filtering can be added to the the image filtering, the would make browsing the web extremely pleasurable. In addition, how can I help withthe programming? Thanks for the good work thus far.

[322] Submitted by: rue Sunday July 20th 2003

@321: do you mean caption-based filtering? ..if not, i hope you can qualify "ad text" better than 'all text in a page' :P

it would be prudent to note: adblock only serves useful while ads have distinguishing features. When sites begin incorporating server-side compositing to create ad-content indistinguishable from regular, we'll be out of luck.

per your second question: while we aren't lacking for coders, did you see anything in-code you wanted to address?

[323] Submitted by: rue Tuesday July 22nd 2003

d24 is posted -- "somewhere.. beyond the sea"

[324] Submitted by: Linuxfan Tuesday July 22nd 2003

Hi Rue,

This is a small suggestion:
Wouldn't be useful be able to keep enabled the 'flash override' setting for a list of sites ? As I can see, if you enable this option, once you come back, Adblock will not remenber this setting.


[325] Submitted by: Aaron Tuesday July 22nd 2003

@324 --
Linuxfan, this is how the flashblock is supposed to work (I think). You do the flash override, and get the flashblock image hiding the flash item. Then you can right-click the flashblock image to adblock the flash item as you would with images or iframes. If used that way, then the flashblock will "remember" when you go back to that site.

[326] Submitted by: Linuxfan Tuesday July 22nd 2003

Aaron, ok I didn't knew that, will try it.
Thanks for your response.

[327] Submitted by: rue Tuesday July 22nd 2003

@326: stand back, fool!- aaron's packin' serious heat

@henrik: cvs-access just went live

[328] Submitted by: Adam H. Wednesday July 23rd 2003

d24 isn't working at all for me now - moz 1.4. Filters have no effect, Ctrl+Shift+B doesn't cause the bottom-right 'Adblock' to switch states. Is there a repository of previous builds anywhere so I can back off to d23?

[329] Submitted by: Adam H. Wednesday July 23rd 2003

Quick update: downloading the .jar file and replacing it in the chrome directory gets it to work again. Go figure.

[330] Submitted by: rue Wednesday July 23rd 2003

@328: since you got it working, it's probably now impossible to determine the exact cause.

did you note the color of the status-icon?

if it was grey+italic, then adblock failed to load; you'd need to restart before it would work again. this might happen if bindings needed updating, or something was amiss in the chrome-registry. this being the case, then replacing the jar was actually just the instigator for the real solution: the restart.

again, we probably can't determine the true cause, anymore. what version were you upgrading from, btw?

[331] Submitted by: Adam H. Wednesday July 23rd 2003

The status icon was grey-italic, but that was even after reloading Mozilla (I don't use quicklaunch, so it wasn't stuck in memory). This has happened even after a fresh mozilla install, using the profile install link. That one didn't work - then, when I downloaded the .jar and replaced the d24 profile install with the d24 .jar I downloaded, it worked. It did the same thing (grey-italic status) when I upgraded from d23 by downloading the .jar file.

It's a mystery.

[332] Submitted by: JoeSixpack Wednesday July 23rd 2003

I'm sorry but I am not able to find the answers to the following questions:

1. Is AdBlock supposed to work with frames (doesnt on
2. Is AdBlock supposed to suppress Flash ads? If so - how to do? (Doensn't work on
3. Is AdBlock supposed to suppress background images (like the one on top of this page)?

Sometimes the Add AdBlock Filter box doesnt disappear when I click OK. It just keeps adding the entry to the list of filters.

Ok! Thats it - sorry if I have repeated other users.

[333] Submitted by: rue Wednesday July 23rd 2003

@331: that's odd for a couple of reasons: firstly, because the xpi has been verified, which isolates the problem to your box -- or at least your configuration. secondly, because you've had the problem before. what platform / browser are you running? also, do you have other extensions installed?

should this ever happen again (though we hope not!), could you open the javascript console and post any errors you see? the console is located in the tools-menu, under 'Web Development'.

..and apologies for the problems.

@332: i don't know what version you're using, so i'll answer for v0.4 d24.

1. yes, adblock works across frames. add the filter "/.*/" (minus the quotes) and reload. the only images still showing are background images.

2. yes, adblock catches flash and other embedded media. to add a filter for any flash item, either press "ctrl-shift-f" or select "Flash Override" from the tools-menu. the item will be overlayed with a colored div that you can right-click and choose to block.

3. no, adblock deliberately does not suppress background images. many html-elements allow background images, and to trap for them all would be a sizeable undertaking, both in the overhead *and* in the amount of code necessary. besides, i've yet to see ads being embedded as backgrounds.

regarding the filter-dialog not disappearing: could you log the console error it gives when that happens next? check the first part of this message for instructions on how.

[334] Submitted by: JoeSixpack Wednesday July 23rd 2003

@rue: Where can I see wot version I'm running?

I'm sorry to bring this up again but on the F1 page that I mentioned earlier it doesn't help adding the "/.*/" to the Filter List :-( I'm still stuck with a large 10-20-30-40-50-60% Discount ad in the right frame :-(

I dont have a "Flash Override" menu option, and nothing happens when I press ctrl-shift-f.

Will try to reinstall AdBlock


[335] Submitted by: JoeSixpack Wednesday July 23rd 2003

@rue: Right! I have now installed the latest dev. version and everything seems to work tho Firebird crashed on me when trying to block my first Flash ad...

Thanks for the effort :-)

[336] Submitted by: JoeSixpack Wednesday July 23rd 2003

@rue: Hmm... tried it a few more times. Same thing. Firebird goes down pretty hard each time I click a Flash ad. For some reason it seems the "Flash Override" menu is not working for the ctrl-shift-f is so I use that. The url for the Flash ad is actually added to the Filter List but then Firebird dies :-(

Pls advice

[337] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Wednesday July 23rd 2003

@331, 330

Rue, on my machine as well -- the status icon is gray italic (even though Adblock is functioning properly). If I do the shortcut CTRL+SHIFT+B it turns red italic, then doing CTRL+SHIFT+B again turns it black non-italic. Or simply doing Tools->AdBlock turns it black non-italic in one step. This is something that I have noticed for a while but never knew it wasn't working as you had intended.

[338] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Wednesday July 23rd 2003


I'll try out the Flash Override today with Firebird and see if I can reproduce your errors. Which Firebird build are you using and what site is causing the crash?

[339] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Wednesday July 23rd 2003

I can confirm Firebird crashing when adding a filter via flashblock with d24 AdBlock. Clicking the "Flash Override" item in the Tools menu has no effect, but the shortcut CTRL+SHIFT+B does invoke and uninvoke the flashblock overlay.

Confirmation of bug with:
1. Firebird Latest-Trunk (Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5a) Gecko/20030721 Mozilla Firebird/0.6)

2. Firebird Latest-1.5a (Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5a) Gecko/20030723 Mozilla Firebird/0.6)

3. Firebird 0.6 (Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030516 Mozilla Firebird/0.6)

[340] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Wednesday July 23rd 2003

@330, 331

The earlier results were on my home machine. I just tried it at school with a fresh profile and the Adblock statusbar indicator is never grayed out and italic for me. Weird....

[341] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Wednesday July 23rd 2003

Whoa, hold the phone! I just tried to add a flash filter using flashblock and d24 AdBlock with Mozilla 1.4 (Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624) and after adding the filter, it closed out the browser just like with the firebird builds.... :(

[342] Submitted by: rue Wednesday July 23rd 2003

@adam, aaron: alright, i'm with you now. here's the explanation: the status-indicator does a basic pref-toggle once it's been inserted into the window. under moz1.3, this occurrs after the pref-observer has been instantiated -- overlay-scripts are run prior to window construction; it seems the order is reversed for firebird. since the pref-observer controls the status-indicator, this matters.

i can easily fix this for the next build.

@339: this is due to code i added for applets. i'll sandbox it to *only* fire for applets and all should be well.

[343] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Wednesday July 23rd 2003


Sounds good. Looking forward to d25 :)

[344] Submitted by: JoeSixpack Wednesday July 23rd 2003

New env:

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030723 Mozilla Firebird/0.6

AdBlock 0.24 24d

Still I'm having trouble with my F1-Racing site (see [332]). AdBlock now wont bring up the AdBlock Filter window most of the time. Flash Override still only works using ctrl-shift-f. When trying to block Flash ads the url is actually added to the filter list but the ads are not blocked on a reload :-(

Pls note that my "test" site (F1-Racing) switches between image ads and flash ads in the same space from reload to reload.

[345] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Wednesday July 23rd 2003

Joe, I managed to block the ads on that site. It did crash on me, but the filters were added. So when I went to that site again, all I saw were black rectangles where the ads usually are. Here is the filter I used to block them. I suggest you enter these in manually.*

[346] Submitted by: Adam H. Wednesday July 23rd 2003

@333: I'm running Moz 1.4 (Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624) on XP Pro. I have Optimoz and Prefbar installed, but I had that problem once when I did a clean Moz install and had only Adblock d24 in. I'll keep an eye on recurrences, but this one is working great for me now. Nice work!

@344: I can confirm the fast crash on the F1 site, but the filters were added.

[347] Submitted by: Beel Thursday July 24th 2003

D24 has been the best build so far, it no longer blocks essential flash components like the one in Macromedia's website, and others.

Would a table based content blocking a nice feature to add? ie. When we control click a page with table in Moz, it'll automatically select the table, it'll be very useful to block ADVERTISEMENT/PROMOTIONAL content this way...

Many thanks.

[348] Submitted by: JoeSixpack Thursday July 24th 2003

@345: I also get the black rectangles. Even tho I have "Remove ads" checked. Isn't AdBlock supposed to remove them? And not leave a "black hole"...

[349] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Thursday July 24th 2003

The black rectangles are actually tables, with black backgrounds, which are placeholders for the ads. The tables have predefined widths and heights, so that's why you still see them. I actually talked to Rue earlier this week about the possiblility of overriding the set widths and heights and setting them to 0. So that would hide them.

[350] Submitted by: cs Thursday July 24th 2003


I'm using AdBlock 0.24 24d with Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 and somehow AdBlock is unfortunately blocking a flash animation ( ) even if there are no blocking rules defined. Only after disabling AdBlock the flash animation is being displayed.

[351] Submitted by: rue Thursday July 24th 2003

d25 is posted -- "hella' chronic."

[352] Submitted by: cs Friday July 25th 2003

@350: Now with d25 the flash animation is beeing displayed...

[353] Submitted by: Nercc Friday July 25th 2003

Just installed 0.4 d25 and works great.. with my spanish newspaper and the NYTimes at least. (I love the 'hide adds' option: enjoy seeing the empty space...)


[354] Submitted by: rue Friday July 25th 2003

this is loosely target at everyone:

adblock will never block tables, crawl the DOM to collapse container-elements, or filter based on captions/link-text. to those who wish it were othewise: you truly don't know what you ask for. the level of complexity to which this would raise adblock's interface/backend is nothing short of wretched.

if implemented, table-blocking would only work on tables with unique-identifiers, unless we hash-paired the table with a specific site/page. so: a.) the blocking wouldn't be a consistent feature, and b.) it would rely on attributes that no other element would be blocked based on -- its filters would require special listing.

collapsing empty parent-elements of filtered-ads: have you ever snooped the DOM on a collapsed ad you wished this feature for? rarely are the "empty" parent-elements really empty. even just one script-element is "something", and often, there's text-nodes, border-images and noembeds among other things. ad-driven sites are littered with junk. pause a moment and consider the kind of ruleset checking for all the possibilities would require... it's rather staggering. and we haven't even touched on overhead, yet.

filtering based on captions or link-text -- one word: why?

even blocking based on parent-anchor elements -- this had been planned, but i realized shortly after what a bad idea it was. should it start with every anchor and drill down?- or with the image/object elements and crawl up? how many levels through the DOM should it crawl before giving up?- all the way? the overhead and inconsistency of success (if limited), make for a poor feature.

i apologize if this post seems rude, but a healthy dose of reality is sometimes necessary. the day is coming when adblock wont be effective against any ads: the content you want will be superficially indistinguishable from advertising. you might be surprised, in fact, how quickly this day arrives.

[355] Submitted by: Hapless Hero Saturday July 26th 2003

Very good, if not very complex. The best thing about is is that unlike the built-in image blocker, the removed images do not sometimes leave behind anchored empty spaces!

I can't wait to see the media/flash blockers, those I REALLY need.

[356] Submitted by: JoeSixpack Sunday July 27th 2003

Simply can't get AdBlock to pop up... manually adding masks to the filter list works fine but right clicking images and iframes wont bring up AdBlock :(

AdBlock 0.4 25d
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030724 Mozilla Firebird/0.6

[357] Submitted by: rue Sunday July 27th 2003

@356: right-click on a few images. then go to: Tools-menu > Web Development > JavaScript Console".

are there any adblock-errors listed?

also, what page were you trying to block? on a possibly-related note: d26 will have an item to remove area-maps, which can overlay images and other media.

[358] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Sunday July 27th 2003

On the right side of a paypal banner is displayed. It's location is but it is not blocked by the filter /[^a-zA-Z]ad[^a-zA-Z]/ but it is filtered when I go to the image url directly.

Go to and help save our Rainforests!
Please go there every day to make a difference.

[1] Submitted by: JoeSixpack Monday July 28th 2003

@357: Strange... it works like a charm here at work with the same environment as described in 356. I'll have to do a clean reboot at home to recheck. Only difference is that at home I run XP Home DK and here at work I run Win2K SP4 US.

[2] Submitted by: rue Monday July 28th 2003

@358: it filters correctly for me with the latest dev. build. are you using an older version?

[3] Submitted by: rue Monday July 28th 2003

@... 1: yea, i strongly suspect something's amiss with your home config. hopefully adblock wasn't the culprit.

what the hell -? the post-numbers have reset.

[4] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Monday July 28th 2003

@2 I'm using Adblock 0.4 d25 (root chrome) with Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030726 Mozilla Firebird/0.6.1
I actually have 2 filters that should filter the image. The 1 I forgot to mention was *banner*. It should not matter, right? but I'll mention it anyway.

[5] Submitted by: rue Monday July 28th 2003

@04: try changing to the profile-chrome version. the other really is just for older versions of the browser, and i suspect the new firebird extension-handling system might not like having a non-extension registered in the profile directory.

just run 'deinstall', and then get the dev-build for profile-chrome.

[6] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Monday July 28th 2003

I modified your regxp and got it to work with this: /[^a-zA-Z]ad[^a-zA-Z][_]?/. That will look for cases where it sees the word ad not surrounded by other letters, and then it allows for the optional case of an underscore after the word "ad". You regxp did not account for this. I tested it out and it works. Hope that helped :)

[7] Submitted by: Zippo Monday July 28th 2003

can anyone find a filter, that removes the banner at the top of the page?

I'm using version 0.4 d25 profile-chrome.

[8] Submitted by: John Liebson Monday July 28th 2003

Installed Adblock earlier today, then got a reply from tech support on a McAfee forum.

Went to the forum, but could not reply to the message.

Started IE6, replied there.

Seems that one of the entries I made in Adblock takes out the boxes that say such things as "Reply" in the McAfee forums!

Wonder what entry did that?

Wonder about everything else, too....

[9] Submitted by: rue Monday July 28th 2003

@07: adblock currently can't catch it. the img is set by serializing the parent-element, and somehow this bypasses the xbl 'onconstruct' event -- the method by which adblock catches stuff.

let me try adding an mutation-event handler in binding. i'll hold off posting d26 to see if i can get this going.

@08: if you could post the forum url, a screenshot of the filtered page and export/post your filter-list, i'll try to help. it's all about the details, yo.

[10] Submitted by: John Liebson Monday July 28th 2003

Please do not have read my message [8], on the grounds that I figured out the problem.

I was trying to look at some .gif/.jpeg images on web site, and they all disappeared. So, I deleted one entry that I'd put into Adblock, based on a message here.

Either I miscopied that information, or misunderstood what it was supposed to do, as by removing that .*--type entry, the images reappeared.

I then returned to McAfee to see if the buttons were now there, and they are.

[11] Submitted by: Zippo Monday July 28th 2003

@9: thanks rue.
adblock is a great program and it gets better every day.

[12] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Tuesday July 29th 2003

Heh...The newest version of AdBlock (Development Build 25) is working great here (on Mozilla 1.4, BTW) =D

Also...I just thought of a couple ideas for improving AdBlock (if they're worth the effort to add - if not, just ignore them). My apologies if they've already been mentioned before in this forum - As many posts as there are here, I'm sure that I could have overlooked something =P

The ideas are as follows:

1) A more intelligent way of determining what you can and cannot block from where you have currently clicked (for now, I'll call it "smart-blocking"). On right-clicking to block an item, if that item isn't something you can block, the selection for it should be disabled so that it cannot be selected by accident, otherwise it should be available for selection.

In other words, if you're blocking an image, things like "AdBlock Embed" and "AdBlock Applet" should be disabled (as those selections wouldn't help to block the image), but "AdBlock Image" should be enabled (as this selection *can* help to block the image). An exception might be made for the IFrame, which would have "Adblock Image" available in addition to "Adblock IFrame".

I am suggesting this as clicking on the wrong entry will do nothing no matter how many times it is clicked on, and someone might wonder why AdBlock isn't blocking anything - Of course, it's because they're trying to block something that isn't there =P
(I've also had some occasions where nothing happens when blocking something I *know* is there [like an image or IFrame], but unlike the above case, a second click on the correct Adblock entry *will* bring up AdBlock to block what I want.)

2) Condensing all available AdBlock selections into a single, expandable menu item. In other words, instead of having five "AdBlock" selections ("AdBlock Image", "AdBlock IFrame", and so on), you could have just one "AdBlock" selection, with an arrow to the right, that expands to show the entries ("Image", "IFrame", and so on).

This could also make use of the "smart-blocking" idea mentioned in #1, where clicking on just the "AdBlock" item would try to guess what type of filter you want to add, and add in the address of what you want to block.

3) Making the "AdBlock" status bar item open up AdBlock on a double-click. Hey, the Pop-Up, Connection, Cookie, and Security items on the status bar have a use when clicked on - Why not do the same for the AdBlock one as well? ;)

I hope these suggestions can be of use here.


[13] Submitted by: Sagacious Himself Tuesday July 29th 2003

Thank you for your effort! You might want to drop into JD's site and take a look see at his *custom* proxomitron filters:

Long live proxomitron! .... vicariously through AdBlock

[14] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Tuesday July 29th 2003

Glad you like it! Reccommend it to all your friends :)
1. Adblock already does something like this -- if you right-click on an image, it just won't even show "Adblock Iframe, Embed, Applet, etc".

2.As for having all items on a sub-menu, that might not be too good of an idea. I mean, it would show people what Adblock is capable of but you'd have to wade through another submenu to find what you're looking for when right now it's populated for you.

3.I actually suggested this to rue about a week or 2 ago, so hopefully it will get implemented.

note: Rue might have some different stuff to say about #1 and #2, and since he's the dev, whatever he says goes. I'm just a tester and put in my $0.02. :)

[15] Submitted by: rue Tuesday July 29th 2003

@12: i'll reply to each point you made.

1.) that's a bug, and yes (per aaron) adblock already does this. for d25, i tried to make the context-menu code less burdensome, since it runs through several checks for *each* item before showing / hiding it. i'll just.. make it more burdensome again :P

2.) the deployment of submenus is avoided wherever possible. fixing the bug above would remove this need, relevant to your request.

3.) the adblock-status will either gain a popup, or become click+modifier-aware . the user should be able to enable flash-override from there.

[16] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Tuesday July 29th 2003

Re: 1)
Heh - Alright then...I thought there might have been a reason behind listing all the entries instead of just the relevant ones, and was wondering why it was done. I had *no* idea that the reason for showing them all is actually due to a bug =P
(That, and hiding them from view is *much* better than having them visible but disabled - You can ignore my suggestion for this since it's no longer needed)

Re: 2)
I see...Though this would lessen the number of visible items in the right-click menu, it's one more (sub)menu to check into before blocking something...And since the displaying of all the entries instead of the relevant ones is due to a bug (as rue has mentioned in the second #15), this suggestion isn't needed now =)

Re: 3)
Aaron: So you've already suggested it? That's good to hear =) And like I said, I *thought* I might've suggested something here without noticing that someone else already mentioned it =P
Rue: Sounds interesting - I'm curious to see what it'll do when that feature is implemented.

Something else just came to my mind right now: In the right-click menu, I want to place a separator before the first "AdBlock" function. This would be to make it a bit easier to notice, as the menu's a bit cluttered now due to that bug =P Can this be done, and if so, what should I add/remove to do this?

Thanks for the replies to my suggestions, and for any help I can get with my above question =)


[17] Submitted by: rue Tuesday July 29th 2003

@16: you don't need to do anything. d26 will be posted within a day or so. updates on adblock are rather frequent.

i'm currently determining how to add an nsiDocumentObserver to the browser window, since this would allow adblock to catch insertion of document-fragments. when a document fragment is created, its children don't fire any dom-events as they bind; nor is a mutation-event fired when they're appended. scripts that serialize the .innerHTML property of html-objects, end up creating document-fragments.

oddly, i can't find documentation on nsiDocumentObserver at xulplanet. so this is taking longer than expected.

[18] Submitted by: John Liebson Tuesday July 29th 2003

Okay, please _do_ read this message....

I posted on MozillaZine's extension forum about this problem. Aaron was kind enough to reply quickly, and he suggested I post here:

Running Windows XP, I installed Adblock yesterday, on Mozilla 1.4; I believe that I'm using Adblock .3, judging from the January 03 date in its property sheet.

Problem: Works fine, except that, when I reboot the computer, the entries in Adblock disappear. It's happened two or three times now, and I can make it happen by simply entering something into Adblock and the rebooting.

Restarting Mozilla does not cause this untoward behavior, but restarting Windows XP sure does.

Thoughts, suggestions (other than to tell me to go away, or Adblock does not do that, etc...)?

[19] Submitted by: Ashley Tuesday July 29th 2003

What have I should done without this site !

[20] Submitted by: AndrŽ Tuesday July 29th 2003

AddBlocks seems to need Javascript enabled in Firebird 0.6. Without, I can block the adds one byone,but the filters are not applied. Tests were done on Actualities.

I tink I'm using the latest build 0.4 d25 (I don't know where to check for that)

PS: it's wonderful!

[21] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Tuesday July 29th 2003

John, I could not reproduce your error, however I will try it out on a Windows XP computer tomorrow. You definetly should try to upgrade to the 0.4 d25 build. (If your adblock doesn't have a "deinstall" option, you're using the old one...)

I'm assuming you wanted to block the banner at the bottom, I blocked it with the filter http://banners.*

I can confirm that Javascript must be enabled for Adblock to apply its filters. Java doesn't have to be enabled though. My test was on Mozilla 1.4.

[22] Submitted by: rue Tuesday July 29th 2003

d26 is posted -- 2daCrew

[23] Submitted by: John Liebson Tuesday July 29th 2003

@21 Aaron: I installed d26. After one little scare (I restarted Mozilla a second time, Adblock itself was not there, let alone the one entry I had made!), I made one entry, restarted Mozilla twice, rebooted, entry was still there. I guess that calls for an "unsigh"?

Previous install was an older one, no "deinstall" option, other than Ransack Search Engine, delete.

So far (but don't tell Adblock that, lest it hear us), all's well, thanks.


[24] Submitted by: rue Tuesday July 29th 2003

@d23: uhh.. did you manually uninstall v0.3 before upgrading? also, i replied to your post on mozillazine. since other ppl might read it, i figured i might as well post the solution.

[25] Submitted by: John Liebson Wednesday July 30th 2003

@23: Yes, I did uninstall the earlier version before installing d26. I suspect that the strange non-appearance that one time was due to [fill in the blank as you best see misfit.]

This morning, I looked in prefs.js, and my new Adblock entries were there; after rebooting and restarting Mozilla, they were still there.

Problem solved, thanks.


[26] Submitted by: Adam H. Wednesday July 30th 2003

Seems to be a sorting bug in d26 - when I pull up the Adblock preferences, check of "Keep List Sorted" under "Adblock Options", then exit the window (either with "Done" or the closing 'X' at the top right), the list isn't sorted and the keep list sorted option is not checked the next time I bring up the preferences window. d26 was installed by download the .jar and replacing adblock.jar in the profile chrome directory.

It's not affecting the function, though.

[27] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Wednesday July 30th 2003


I just tried to enter a dummy filter -- and it sorted for me. Both on clicking done and the x at top right. I'm using Mozilla 1.4 with d26 adblock.jar on Windows 2000... Adam, what are you using?

[28] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Wednesday July 30th 2003

@26, @27
Ok, I can confirm your bug now. I had my list set to be sorted prior to d26, and that's why it was sorting everything in my list when I added to it. But -- I just tried to turn off sorting and it didn't turn it off. So it looks like the sorting on/off switch isn't working properly.

[29] Submitted by: rue Wednesday July 30th 2003

@26: got it -- the function was still looking for the "list options" menu. it's been fixed for d27.

[30] Submitted by: Jennifer Wednesday July 30th 2003

Okay... I'm still having the trouble I had a few weeks back with an image being filtered out when I don't want it to be. The picture that disappears is the large image of the vehicle at the top of any of these pages:

My AdBlock strings at the time are in:

Which string is the problem? I may be overlooking something obvious, I admit that, but I've looked the list over several times without being able to figure it out.

Currently using d26 under Moz 1.5a but before I was using 0.3 under 1.5a. I also have suggestions:

Change "Adblock Image" contextual menu item to read "Add Image to AdBlock list..."

Add "Check URL for filter match" item to Help menu in Adblock window to make problems like the one I'm having easy to troubleshoot by stating in some way which filters match the URL being presented for testing.

[31] Submitted by: rue Wednesday July 30th 2003

@30: this is the filter that's removing it: */*ads.*?*

it matches on the word "uploads". it's odd that it does, though. the period (.) is a wildcard in regExp, but shouldn't be for simple patterns. i guess that should be filed as a bug. for now, just remove the filter; i'll patch it up for d27.

[32] Submitted by: rue Wednesday July 30th 2003

@30 > append: my bad. *this* is the filter: */*ads/*

..and since it's properly blocking it, that's not a bug. "revert."

[33] Submitted by: giorgio Thursday July 31st 2003

If is possible can you create a distribution list for newer version?



[34] Submitted by: floppymoose Thursday July 31st 2003

This page looks awful in my browser (Mozilla 1.4) due to the light grey text on white. I can't read it. I tried using a bookmarklet to set colors, but it only affected some of the text. Glancing at the source I see lots of !important in the style rules. Why do this? It prevents users from overriding your style choices.

[35] Submitted by: rue Friday August 1st 2003

@34: the scheme was originally to be temporary (hence the '!important' overrides), but i've grown to quite like it. it's my response to mozdev's "normal" look: bright, garrish, and horribly coordinated.

on the subject of this page: since the notes aggregation is server-side, i can't really pare down the page-size, but i do intend to add some javascript, creating a "front-end" that would just show the most recent posts.. with a tabbed-interface to access the rest.

back to the point: this page is even lighter for me, since i'm on a mac and have a higher gamma. i still like it. i'll fix the override-part, and when the final site goes live, i'll have an option to switch to a darker theme. but for now, the general scheme will remain.

[36] Submitted by: Ultima9999 Friday August 1st 2003

Although this is a nice addon to Mozilla, a hosts file that is configured correctly will block TCP/IP connections and prevent the downloading of content. Not to say that this plugin lacks utility (its application is readily available to the user, while the hosts file must be searched for in the Windows directory), but I personally feel that the hosts file is more effective in preventing ads from being displayed.

[37] Submitted by: rue Friday August 1st 2003

@36: as far as i know, you can't put regular expressions into a hosts file. and the current dev-branch filters content in source, preventing any download. there is one type of ad that slips through, but the coming build will catch it.

have you tried the dev-builds? (linked at page-top)

[38] Submitted by: Henrik Friday August 1st 2003

@36 & @37:
Also, hosts-files only block entire servers. They're not usable if a website keeps its ads on the same server as its content.

[39] Submitted by: Dise–o web Friday August 1st 2003

Congratulations for your site

Hector gomis dise–o web

[40] Submitted by: Steve Saturday August 2nd 2003

I had copied some script into my user.js file that was posted on this forum earlier; it woked wonders in adblocking; I happen to loose my users.js; please could some post this scriot again.


[41] Submitted by: james Saturday August 2nd 2003

Great work!

[42] Submitted by: LightStruk Sunday August 3rd 2003

I installed the latest devbuild (d26) on Mozilla 1.4/Linux 2.4 (x86), and now Mozilla will not finish starting. d26 downloaded and installed, and advised me that I may need to restart Mozilla twice. On my first restart, it said something about updating CSS, then told me to restart mozilla again.
When I did, Mozilla never displayed a window. It shows up in ps -A, and I can kill its process, but neither restarting X nor restarting the machine have brought Mozilla back.
I've looked for help in the FAQ and in this forum, I apologize if I missed an already posted solution.

[43] Submitted by: rue Monday August 4th 2003

@42: the only thing i can think to ask is: did you install the app-chrome version? ..if so, i'll probably mark it as deprecated for the next build.

for immediate remedy, try first deleting the xul-cache -- XUL.mfl, located in your profile directory. if that doesn't help, follow the instructions for v0.3 deinstallation from this site's faq.

..oh- a few more questions: you didn't have any prior versions of adblock installed already, did you? what about any other extensions -- possible conflict?

[44] Submitted by: LightStruk Monday August 4th 2003

In response to your question, I installed the profile-chrome version. The only other Mozilla things installed are skins. This is the first version of adblock I have tried.
OK, I deleted XUL.mfasl (there was no XUL.mfl), still no dice. I already followed the old deinstallation instructions, no luck there either. For now I've backed up my .mozilla directory, and mozilla starts just fine with a new clean profile. Please let me know if you have any other suggestions.

[45] Submitted by: Diago Monday August 4th 2003

I used adblock 0.3 along with Click Flash to View in FireBird with content and I waited till both extensions would merge. I just installed d26 to see how 0.4 would develop and I have the following requests for enhancements/issues which I haven«t seen answered/questioned above or in the FAQ:

1. using the *.swf filter the flash animations are blocked, but the sound isn«t.
What«s happening here?

2. Can you please use flash override as default like Click Flash to View does, again including blocking the sound?

3. Enable view per flash object instead of enabling/disabling all flash objects on the page.
However, I like the way that adblock can hide the flash object again after viewing which CFtV can«t.

4. uninstall seems broken in d26. I installed the root chrome version.

Keep up the good work!

[46] Submitted by: Kendric Beachey Monday August 4th 2003

AdBlock is JUST what I was looking for.

I am using it with Firebird, 0.6ish, with pretty good results. I do have one issue to report, though: it only seems to work if you load (or reload) the page on purpose--if the page reloads due to an auto-refresh meta tag, AdBlock forgets to run, or something.

This should be reproducible by going to a site that has ads and auto-refreshes. For example, has some radar screens that can be made to auto-refresh every half-hour. They are always flanked by a few ads.

Feel free to write me for more details.

[47] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Monday August 4th 2003


Kendric, what version of Adblock are you using? Did you install the 0.3 version, or did you install the 0.4 development build? (If you have an option under the Tools menu called "Flash Override", then you installed the 0.4 build). I have quite a few filters on mine, and went to and tried to look at a radar screen to see if there were ads (there were lots but they were hidden with my filters). Could you go to the exact website that you see the radar screen auto refreshing every 30 minuts and post that address up here? I can then try it out with my set of filters and see if I'm getting the same results as you. I couldn't find the radar screen that auto-refreshes.

If you are in fact using the 0.3 build, I would strongly suggest upgrading to the 0.4 build :)

[48] Submitted by: rue Monday August 4th 2003

@44: this is the first i've heard of a linux failure; try the app-chrome version. i've also never heard of the .mfasl extension, so i guess it's specific for the platform. apologies for all the trouble.

@45: i've been waiting for a post like this :P replying in order: 1.) if you could link some url's, i'll check the embedded sound problem -- likely, they're not flash files; 2.) yes, i could. you might not see it until d28 (granted i remember) -- it will be a default-disabled preference; 3.) yes, i can add a click-handler that restores each overlayed item while "Flash Override" is active -- again, likely d28; 4.) uninstall was uniformly broken (d26) and will be fixed next build.

@46: i'm with aaron: you have v0.3 installed?

[49] Submitted by: Hem Ramachandran Tuesday August 5th 2003

You definitely need a better forum software, please look into phpbb.

[50] Submitted by: rue Tuesday August 5th 2003

@49: this is just my opinion, so no need for a flame-war:

php is crap. so are xhtml and all other semantic-markups that attempt to modify html for their own purposes.

i wouldn't mind adding a perl-driven forum, and i'm pretty sure mozdev allows cgi's -- but i can't determine their setup. since it's not high-priority, it might be a while before something goes live. if you have any advice on cgi's, specific to mozdev, let me know.

[51] Submitted by: Kendric Beachey Tuesday August 5th 2003


Hi Aaron,

I am indeed running AdBlock 0.3. Where do I get 0.4?

I need to revise my problem description a bit. It seems the thing that makes AdBlock not run is not auto-refreshing at all: it is loading content in a tab that is not "on top". Much like the way a Jedi Knight cannot fade into nothingness and acquire a cool ghostly body unless he dies in front of Luke Skywalker, ads do not get blocked unless the page is loaded while it is being shown. Does that make sense?

[52] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Tuesday August 5th 2003


The "tab not on top" issue is a known issue with Adblock 0.3 :) To get Adblock 0.4, click on the Dev. Builds link at the top of this page and then the easiest way to upgrade would be to download the 0.4 d26 jar file and place it in your profile/chrome directory, overwriting the old adblock.jar file in there. It might give you a message saying that it has updated your css bindings and you'll have to restart one more time for complete activation -- that is normal. Give that a try and let me know how it works for you.

[53] Submitted by: Anior Tuesday August 5th 2003

How about adding a flag to every filter witch, if set, blocks cookies from that filter. "http://ad.*" and "http://ads.*" would be given hits and as far as I can see it wouldn't be a very advanced (time consuming) thing to code.

Yes, this is not the prime purpose with adblock. But most of the code is allready there and I'm quite sure that atleast some ad-haters has a distaste for cookies from adservers.

[54] Submitted by: Beel Wednesday August 6th 2003

Hi rue,

I'm using build26, this logo display is blocked...


[55] Submitted by: rue Wednesday August 6th 2003

@54: without even knowing your filter-list, i bet i've got the answer :P

the main logo's filename is "Masthead.gif", and you've got a filter for some variant of *ad* ...look again at the filename.

[56] Submitted by: Diago Wednesday August 6th 2003

@48 (45)

Hi Rue, the site @ is where I have the flash sound problem. I haven«t seen other sites yet where flash with sound is available.
Also thanks in advance for remembering to include my requests in d28 ;-)

[57] Submitted by: rue Wednesday August 6th 2003

@56: the source for that page is either clever, or moronic -- i'm leaning towards the latter. enclosing the flash-object, he's got a defined with the object's classid, and since d26 doesn't filter the movie-param if there's a child-embed, i think the movie-param is somehow being loaded by the paragraph-element. this is all speculation, of course, since it's not playing the sound for me at all.

nonetheless, the next build will filter all movie-params -- regardless of whether an embed is present.

[58] Submitted by: rue Wednesday August 6th 2003

@56 > append: li.2 should read:

...he's got a paragraph-element defined...

[59] Submitted by: Diago Wednesday August 6th 2003

@58: k, thx Rue... I«ll wait and test with your next build.

[60] Submitted by: Kendric Beachey Wednesday August 6th 2003


Hmmm, it seems the necessary jar file is not on the server?

[61] Submitted by: rue Wednesday August 6th 2003

@60: dunno why, but you're right; and it's back up.

[62] Submitted by: Beel Wednesday August 6th 2003

Rue, it's not the masthead.gif, the logo is fine, but if you scroll down to the middle of the article, you will se a Konica-Minolta new logo , which is not displayed...

[63] Submitted by: Kendric Beachey Wednesday August 6th 2003

@61: OK, I saved the new jar in place of the old one, quit Firebird and restarted. AdBlock now shows up in the Tools|Options dialog, but nowhere else. Highlighting it in the options dialog and clicking "Disable Extension" doesn't change the button to "Enable Extension" as with others.

Any ideas? Old files of some sort that need to be blown away?

Thanks for your help so far, btw.

[64] Submitted by: Kendric Beachey Wednesday August 6th 2003

@61, @63: A clue perhaps...

[beachey@zimmerdale chrome]$ jar tvf adblock.jar
0 Sun Jul 27 14:53:02 CDT 2003 content/ invalid entry CRC (expected 0xb7f9c60c but got 0x28432c53)

Is the posted jar file perhaps corrupted? I tried downloading it twice to be sure.

[1] Submitted by: rue Wednesday August 6th 2003

@62: uh.. so you've filtered the media directory from their server? i don't understand what you want. without any filters, that logo displays. so it's one of the filters you've added. look at your list, and edit it appropriately.

@64: yea, it does seem like your jar isn't proper. try this: deinstall, as per the faq -- make sure to remove the xul cache-file; then install from the xpi for profile-chrome.

what's the build/date of your browser?

[2] Submitted by: Beel Wednesday August 6th 2003


Rue, thanks for pointing that out, you're right, I blocked the whole media folder. Thanks man, you're cool.

[3] Submitted by: ToolBoy Thursday August 7th 2003


Over all I am liking this plug-in. Thanks for creating it. However it does not do a very good job of blocking ads from "" I have tried many forms of a filter to catch these ads such as "*/ads/*", "**", "*msnads*" "*" and whatever other combinations there are. Sometime they will go away if I refresh the page. Only every once in a blue moon does it block some of these ads when the page first loads. You can find images from this location from tons of links off of Here are a few.

OK, I just realize although I am not 100% sure that it correlates to whether I am looking at the page when it loads or not. If I let the page open in a background tab the ads seem to stay more then if I switch to the tab while the page loads. Please say you are fixing this.


[4] Submitted by: rue Friday August 8th 2003

@03: even better, i can say it's fixed. click the dev-builds link (page-top).

[5] Submitted by: mr.chico Sunday August 10th 2003

I love the extension, but I've found an ad it won't kill.

At the home page for MLB,
go to the list of games in the upper right, they're on alternating blue and white lines. Games in progress have a series of links to the right, the farthest right being Gameday. Click it and the game comes up in a new window.
In the bottm right frame of the new window is an advert for some MLB merchandise. (Frequently, it's a multipage gif.)

[6] Submitted by: Dr. J Sunday August 10th 2003

Your 0.4 development plugin ROCKS!
I'm running it on Mozilla 1.4, no problems, works like a charm!
Keep it up!

[7] Submitted by: John Liebson Sunday August 10th 2003

AdBlock installed in Firebird 0.6.1.

A site I had problems with using Adblock and Mozilla 1.4 shows the same behaviour.

The specific URL is

If I enter a given forum from that URL, often the ads will reappear.

For example, I have, in AdBlock, an entry for *.doubleclick/*. This will work when I access one message thread from the index, but often if I access another thread, the ad that should be blocked by that entry will appear. (I know it should be blocked, as the second ad has the same start to its address as the one that was blocked; the only difference is the specific ad being delivered.)


[8] Submitted by: Craig Sunday August 10th 2003

I think it would be helpful to provide a "generic" filter list or list of ad servers that users could import by default. It's mostly laziness on my part, but it would be nice to not have to block doubleclick or any of the "normal" ad servers manually, since probably everybody ends up adding them to their lists.

[9] Submitted by: k04l4 Sunday August 10th 2003

i love adblock, but:
it doesn't install on my 0.6.1 nor on today's nightly build.

[10] Submitted by: rue Sunday August 10th 2003

@05: i have too many options set which already prevent checking scenario you describe (popups suppressed; nWindows open in tabs), but i can tell you that: i see no ads on the main page; and there is a type of ad that isn't blocked -- the next build will catch it: script-serialized nodes.

@John Liebson: adblock works fine for me on that site. see next reply.

@08: "why- look what i discovered -!"

@09: i defer confirmation to aaron. which version of adblock, and what platform are you running?

[11] Submitted by: walkAbout Monday August 11th 2003

as there is an adblock "button" in the lower righthand side now, why can't we use it to turn on/off adblock quickly. Would be faster, then to go tru the prefs always.

[12] Submitted by: rue Monday August 11th 2003

@11: uhh.. even faster would be the shortcut that's already there: ctrl-shift-b

the statuspanel is going to become a popup.

[13] Submitted by: John Liebson Monday August 11th 2003

@10 Rue, it happened again this morning. I'm not doubting you, just reporting what I get:

From the main page of one forum, I opened several tabs with specific threads. When I then switched to the tabs to read the messages, on one of them the ads were still visible, and did not disappear until I invoked AdBlock once again.

I now have threee entries for*, all created at this web site.

Strange, but so is the rest of the world...

(You said for me to see the next reply. Did you mean the one with the long list of things to use to block ads, the .txt file? If so, what do I do with it; that is, do I put it into a .js or .css file, or ?


[14] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Monday August 11th 2003

John, save that text file to your disk. Then go into Adblock, and use the Import Filters dialog to import a list of default filters.

Which build (date) of Firebird and what OS are you using? I am going to dload the latest-trunk build of Firebird (8/10) and try installing the latest Adblock build (d26). I am running Win2K by the way. I'll let you know how it works out for me.

Did you notice the numbering restarted again? weird....

[15] Submitted by: ktml Monday August 11th 2003

0.4 dev rocks! It works perfectly! Blocking iframe and flash =)
The only drawback is it slow down my firebird a bit when opening new window, and the deinstall doesn't work.

Thanks for the plugin and keep up the good work =)

[16] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Monday August 11th 2003

ktml, Deinstall not working is because the item "Adblock Options" used to say "List Options" in the previous dev build. It has been fixed for d27, which rue says should be out shortly. :)

[17] Submitted by: Aa Monday August 11th 2003

I tried it with the Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030810 Mozilla Firebird/0.6.1+ build of Firebird and d26 Adblock with no problems on Windows 2000....

[18] Submitted by: John Liebson Monday August 11th 2003

@14 Rue, surely you did not believe that I would not be back to bug you, did you?

Followed instructions you provided, saved filter file as text file, but when I try to import it into AdBlock, I get an error message, "File is invalid". Looked at file with QuickViewPlus, it's clearly a text file.


[19] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Monday August 11th 2003

John, I did the same as you and it worked for me....

[20] Submitted by: eric Monday August 11th 2003

i used ad block with firebird to block an ad on the new york times website, now i can't view any images on the the nyt website and i can't delete the filter or disable the extension, so i still can't view any images on the nyt website

[21] Submitted by: statkit Monday August 11th 2003

I want to block ads that are in macromedia flash format, but not block other flash content. I tried using "*.swf*" as an adblock filter, but it eliminates all flash content. Is there another filter string I could use for ads with flash content? Also, if I right click on a flash ad, I do not get the adblock menu choice. Instead, I get a flash menu. I have found no way of finding the URL of a flash ad. Please help.

[22] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Monday August 11th 2003

go to tools-> Flash Override, then you can right click the flash.

[23] Submitted by: John Liebson Monday August 11th 2003

@18: Thanks for trying, but for me, it's a no-go. I just tried copying the file off the Firebird screen into WordPad and saving it there as a text file.

I cannot try it in Mozilla 1.4: Due to the crash of AdBlock there a few days ago, and the fact that right after that I started trying Firebird, I did not get around to reinstalling AdBlock in Mozilla.

When I try to import it into AdBlock, I still get the error message.

It's either a moon-phase or high-altitude problem, alas.

[24] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Monday August 11th 2003

wordpad is the issue. just right-click on the link to the filters, save that text file directly to your hd and then import from there. don't mess with wordpad...

[25] Submitted by: Hellmark Monday August 11th 2003

When will the dev versions be put back up? I really prefered .4 over all previous versions, and today I had a screw up in my profile (for some reason, my main profile only wouldn't allow ANY image to be shown, dispite all settings) so I need a copy of adblock

[26] Submitted by: statkit Monday August 11th 2003

Tools->Flash override does not appear on my pulldown menu. I am using firebird 0.6.1. Is there another way I can block flash

[27] Submitted by: @John Liebson Monday August 11th 2003

@24. Sorry, I should have realized that this was already a text file.

Sorry-sorry, it still does not work. I saved the file twice as a text file, directly from the web site, and each time AdBlock tells me "File not valid."

I'm not sure that I'm valid, either, alas.

[28] Submitted by: rue Monday August 11th 2003


just a heads-up: the dev. build that was posted earlier in the afternoon needed more work. i temporarily disabled the dev-page, since i thought the work would be brief. not so.

there's a bit more ahead, so the old build is back up; i'll post here when the new one is ready.

[29] Submitted by: Decle Tuesday August 12th 2003

I'm quite impressed. Unlike an earlier blocker I've used, this program also removes the hyperlink when the ad is hidden. Very nice.

How about allowing 2 new modes of blocking that change the way a page looks when an ad is removed from the screen? Horizontal preserve and vertical preserve. Horizontal preserve would be the normal hight, but only 1 pixel tall. Vertical preserve would be the normal width, but only 1 pixel wide. This would only require 2 checkboxes instead of 2 radio buttons, neither checked would be hide, both checked would be remove (0x0 pixels).

In addition, Mozilla seems to be loading data from an advertising site that's been blocked. Only after it loads and shows does it remove the ad. This unnecessary data is slowing down the page load. Are there plans to prevent things like this?

[30] Submitted by: rue Tuesday August 12th 2003

@29: those "modes" of collapsation could be added in, but only as advanced prefs. they'll be joining a lot of neat tweaks so keep an eye out.

..and v0.4 does block content-downloads -- you have to install it first, though :P


[31] Submitted by: oliwer Tuesday August 12th 2003

How can I uninstall it ?

[32] Submitted by: rue Tuesday August 12th 2003

@31: that was broken in d26 -- wait for d28 to be posted (today or tomorrow), then upgrade by replacing the jar-file and it will deinstall properly.

[33] Submitted by: buckminster Tuesday August 12th 2003

Good to hear that it will be working - not that I want to uninstall this version ;)

Finally, adblock works on tabs in the background as well! Great work!

Perhaps a nice icon to indicate that Adblock is enabled or disabled? The "Adblock" text on the bottom of the browser is ugly and nonintuitive (I wouldn't assume that italicized red lettering indicates that Adblock is disabled).

On a related note, any chance that Ctrl+Shift+B (to disable/enable Adblock) will work immediately in future versions (instead of after a refresh of the browser)?

[34] Submitted by: rue Tuesday August 12th 2003

@33: the gui will improve, but naturally the backend holds priority. i'm glad you pointed mentioned the key-shortcut bug -- i was unaware. you're using d26?- and with which browser / platform?

[35] Submitted by: buckminster Tuesday August 12th 2003

@34: do believe I'm running d26, I installed it ~5 AM (pacific time).

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5a) Gecko/20030728 Mozilla Firebird/0.6.1

Found another bug: Right-click Adblock Image only immediately works on the image you right-clicked, not other images on that page from the same server (refreshing browser window makes them go away as well). Example page:

[36] Submitted by: jason Tuesday August 12th 2003

I added* to my list by right clicking on an ad on cnn and trimming the end. Sometimes when I go back to cnn, the ads appear, but when I right click them to add them to the list, they have the same source ( Why aren't they being filtered?

[37] Submitted by: rue Tuesday August 12th 2003

@35: single-item-filter on click is expected behaviour; sorry, not a bug :P i'll try another work-around for the key-shortcut issue.

@36: displays no ads for me, period -- adblock or not. the file "" is throwing an error on li. 26, with function-call 'adsCkPlg()'. i'm detailing this so you understand why i can't directly address the problem.

i believe the next build will catch them for you, but this is a blind guess, so if i'm wrong, let me know. what dev-version / browser are you using?

[38] Submitted by: Hellmark Wednesday August 13th 2003

I noticed that in the most current dev release, it'd work for a while, but when I fired up Firebird later adblock wouldn't be listed in the menu. Then, later on after that, it'd start not showing the images at all, and the only fix is to start a new profile without adblock. I have 3 profiles setup, and I've done each one atleast once (and my personal one I've redone about 3 times)

[39] Submitted by: rue Wednesday August 13th 2003

@38: the file userContent.css, in your profile-chrome dir, binds image-elements to adblock. you can safely remove it, should the problem recur.

this has the makings of a serious bug, so i'll need further details:

what platform / browser-build are you running?

have you deinstalled adblock before? did you ever upgrade by switching from the profile to app-chrome install?

have you ever had extension trouble before? what other extensions are / have_been installed?

[40] Submitted by: Marc Wednesday August 13th 2003

Great work!

[41] Submitted by: Hellmark Wednesday August 13th 2003

I'm running Windows 2000, with Firebird .6.1 (which I know you say it may not be stable on because of no testing, blah blah blah)

I have deinstalled adblock before in some of the profiles that fubar'ed, but not all of the ones with the problem. I do know that one of the versions I installed to the profile (can't remember which one).

I haven't had any other extension problems. I use Preferential, XUL MSN Messenger, Chromedit, and Tabbrowser preferences.

[42] Submitted by: Hellmark Wednesday August 13th 2003

I remembered that it was the .26 branch that I tried a app directory install on, but it didn't work. I've since removed it from the profiles and app directory, waiting on the next dev release.

[43] Submitted by: sbsaylors Wednesday August 13th 2003

Once I've installed adblock on firebird 6.1+ it crawls everytime a webpage opens up... is this normal for everyone else?

[44] Submitted by: rue Wednesday August 13th 2003

@42: nothing is certain, but i'd strongly suspect one of the prior deinstallations. did you ever upgrade from v0.3? in any event, it sounds like your chrome is trashed. if you followed the removal-directions from the faq (since d26 wouldn't deinstall), you should be good to go. If the problem happens again, remove these: (both app + profile chrome) overlayinfo, chrome.rdf, (profile -- not chrome) fastload.mfl.

@43: not normal. what platform, which dev-build for which browser? do you have many filters? lastly, any other extensions?

[45] Submitted by: Hellmark Wednesday August 13th 2003

I followed the FAQ's deinstall. And I don't have a fastload.mfl (never have)

[46] Submitted by: rue Wednesday August 13th 2003

d28 is posted -- "izzerb -!"

[47] Submitted by: Paul Wednesday August 13th 2003


Does anyone know when the version of AdBlock that truly blocks ads (prevents them from being downloaded) is coming out?

Also, I'm not sure if AdBlock already works like this, but it should block ANYTHING, not just images and shockwave files. An prime example of "anything" would be text ads. If you go to and use the search engine, right above your search results is an iframe with a text ad served from Currently I have this server blocked in my hosts file. The problem with that is that it leaves a big empty space on the website where the content used to be. I know that AdBlock can "remove" this empty space, which is why I'm asking about this.
Yours Truly,

* Merchandise For Sale --
* Spook Central --
* Best Ghostbusters Sites --

[48] Submitted by: rue Wednesday August 13th 2003

@47: that's interesting.. because i don't see any ads at the top.. even with adblock disabled. try installing the dev-build -- it blocks content-downloads rather well.

it does not block scripts.

lastly, nobody's going to follow links to your spam, so please refrain from including it next time.

[49] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Wednesday August 13th 2003

I just noticed this after upgrading to the most recent version of AdBlock (0.4, Development Build 28):

The context-menu bug I mentioned in comment #12 is still here...But the Changelog shows this was fixed in Build 26 - Is there any chance that this fix somehow came undone in either build 27 or 28?

Just wondering about this, that's all: I've been offline for nearly two weeks due to a ruined cable modem (long story), and had a lot of catching up to do as a result - Including seeing whether or not this was fixed in a more recent build.

Again, if you can provide any information regarding this bug, thank you =)


[50] Submitted by: rue Thursday August 14th 2003

@49: that's not a bug -- i should've realized it never was. something in your setup is either trashed or misconfigured. when you next start mozilla, right-click on an image and then immediately go to: Tools > Web Development > JavaScript Console. Are there any adblock errors listed?

what browser are you using, and at any point have you switched from adblock's profile-install to root (or vice-versa) ? any other extensions installed?

[51] Submitted by: Vigilance Thursday August 14th 2003

I found an interesting problem. After installing AdBlock i'm unable to open the preferences menu. I can't even open the regular mozilla preferences menu. It hasn't done this with any previous builds, only the new biuld 28. I'm fairly certain it's just an incompatability with an extension i'm running. It works if i run it on a clean install of mozilla 1.5a (i keep a backup), but not with the other extensions i'm running. I'm using Mozilla 1.5a, GoogleBar 0.7.06 ( ), PrefBar 2.2.2 build 20030228 ( ), TabBrowser Extensions 1.8.2003080402 ( ), and CookieBar ( ). I don't know which of these is causing the problem nor am i 100% certain that any are causing the problem. But these are the only extensions I run aside from AdBlock. I don't know if you can do anything about it (or are willing to take the time), i just thought i'd bring it to your attention. I also found a very weird bug. Everytime i load while running adblock, mozilla crashes. It only does this when adblock is installed (all builds that i've used - .2, .3, .4 build 26, .4 build 28 - have done this).

[52] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Thursday August 14th 2003

@50 (rue):

>> when you next start mozilla, right-click on an image and then immediately go to: Tools > Web Development > JavaScript Console. Are there any adblock errors listed? <> what browser are you using <> and at any point have you switched from adblock's profile-install to root (or vice-versa) ? <> any other extensions installed? <<

This is about the only thing I don't like about the Suite: Though some menu entries can give away what extensions may have been installed, I can't see *every* extension installed, even those without menu entries =(


I just noticed something interesting: After uninstalling/reinstalling Mozilla, AdBlock was still there (as it should've been)...This time, however, the context-menu entries were working *exactly* as they should've been =D

I installed some extensions to see if any of them may have broke the context menu in AdBlock (I also restared the browser after installing each extension, to see which ones leave the menu alone, and which one breaks it). Here's what they were, installed in this order (all from the Extension Room page, using the most recent versions as of this post): AutoScroll, SmoothWheel, MNG Support, Preferential, Preferences Toolbar, Tab Scroller, This Window, Text/Plain (chose profile-install), and QuickNote. AdBlock (Dev. Build), BlockFall, and ChromEdit were already installed prior to testing this, but did not affect the context menu at all.

After installing QuickNote, the context menu broke...And after another un/reinstallation of Mozilla, installing *only* QuickNote as opposed to the whole list, it broke again...Which is confirmation enough (for me, anyway) that QuickNote is what's causing the context menu to break.

Should I contact the author of QuickNote and see if this is a known bug in the extension when AdBlock is also installed?

My apologies for thinking it was AdBlock that had the problem, and not another extension I had installed that could be conflicting with it.

Thank you for telling me what to check (especially seeing what other extensions were installed) - I would've never found out that it's *not* a bug in AdBlock after all if I wasn't told to look around for the problem =)

[53] Submitted by: rue Thursday August 14th 2003

@51: it never hurts to ask: what platform are you running?

the extensionroom crash is one i can't reproduce. since our main tester is dropping m.i.a. for a time, there's little i can do. apologies.

regarding the extensions, i'll look through them one-by-one. in fact, no... it just occurred to me what probably tripped it: the new function 'sourceCheck()'. it's high time i wrapped all of adblock's functions into a single object; but all that function needs is a simple rename. either way, the next build will the fix.

[54] Submitted by: rue Thursday August 14th 2003

@52: ah, excellent work. actually that's a conflict -- a mutual bug. that extension probably has a function named "makemenu", which being in the same space as adblock, overwrites adblock's of the same name. i could either rename, or wrap it into an object... the latter being my present leaning. look for the fix, next build.

[55] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Thursday August 14th 2003

All right then, thank you for mentioning that. I'll try out the next build once it's available =)

(BTW, the first part of my previous message got messed up due to using angle brackets [and since the problem's been discovered, what was covered in that part of my message isn't needed now] - I should've known better than to use them here =P)

[56] Submitted by: Vigilance Thursday August 14th 2003

Ahhh thanks loads. Quick response too :D

Since you asked... I'm running Windows XP. And i'm not surprised that you can't reproduce the error, in all honesty i don't see how it was produced in the first place. I just thought i'd mention it to see if it sparked anything :P I can't do any coding or anything, but if there's anything i can do to help reproduce the error or even just be a test bed i'd be happy to help.

[57] Submitted by: Dr. J Friday August 15th 2003

I have your 0.4d26(?I think) build installed on my WinXP machine using Mozilla 1.4 and it seems to work perfectly. When I uninstalled it (manually, BTW -- the automatic install doesn't seem to work), and tried to install 0.4d28....all hell broke loose -- unable to access preferences, (R)click context menu suddenly grew to ENORMOUS length of options I never had before (& most of them didn't work), and I was unable to access the Adblock options window, etc.

After reinstalling 0.4d26, everything works fine. What happened to 0.4d28?

[58] Submitted by: rue Friday August 15th 2003

@57: as the posts just prior discussed, some code introduced in d28 conflicts with other extensions. it's not really anybody's fault, just a conflict. d29 will be include the fix.

@everyone: applets are broken in the present build. d29 will be out in short-order.

[59] Submitted by: Beel Friday August 15th 2003

Rue, If I may add:

d28 conflicts with many page/content oriented extensions, like TBE, and CTExtensions by piro, ChromeEdit, etc. Do you keep older builds for us to download?

[60] Submitted by: Andrew Friday August 15th 2003

One thing I've noticed about the new dev. build of AdBlock (28) is that sometimes it doesn't fully remove ads. A good example are the ads on I use a set of regexp (ad, ads, adx, etc.) to get those ads to disappear, but unlike in the previous official build of AdBlock, I still see space on the webpage that doesn't "shrink" when the ads get removed. The Anandtech Forums ( do the same thing. Not annoying, just sort of strange to see such huge swaths of white space.

[61] Submitted by: rue Friday August 15th 2003

@59: recent older builds (oxymoron?)

@60: if anything, adblock catches more ads in the present build than any prior. the whitespace is fixed-formatting designed to accomodate adspace, and cannot be collapsed by adblock. i'm pretty confident that nothing has changed per collapsation across the 0.4 branch.

try d29 (coming momentarily).

[62] Submitted by: rue Friday August 15th 2003

d29 is posted -- snap

[63] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Friday August 15th 2003

I just tried out d29...Heh, QuickBlock's a pretty neat feature here - Although it sets off the "Save As..." window if what you're wanting to block out makes use of a hyperlink.

Also...After installing AdBlock (0.4 d29), followed by QuickNote (0.2d), to see if the context-menu problem was fixed...It came undone again =(

[64] Submitted by: rue Friday August 15th 2003

@63: i just realized what quicknote must be doing: it's setting the "onpopupshowing" property for the context-menu -- something adblock also does. i'll switch to a window-listener. there's no sense in contacting the author, since it's just two extensions vying for the same resource.

and that's *very* unkewl about Quickblock. what browser / platform are you running? does it do this for dragging too?

[65] Submitted by: Vigilance Friday August 15th 2003

Just wanted to note... the problem i described in [51] is still present in the new build (build 29). Although, i've narrowed it down and found out which extension the conflict is with - TabBrowser Extensions 1.8.2003080402 ( ). Also, the weird problem with Mozdev's extensionroom (also described in [51]) seems to have been due to this as well. I found this out by playing around with my backups... trial and error :P

[66] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Friday August 15th 2003

All right then...I was wondering why the menu came undone this time, even though it shouldn't have with the fix added in d29 - Thanks for mentioning that =)

As for what I'm using:

Browser: Mozilla 1.4 [Build Info: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624]
Platform (OS?): Windows 2000 Professional SP4

As for the "Save As..." problem with QuickBlock...There's no way I can tell if the same problem occurs when dragging, because when I do (even when dragging as little as possible), it starts taking out other parts of the page, until the whole page is left blank =(

[67] Submitted by: rue Friday August 15th 2003

@65: actually, i just realized i have no idea what the preferences-menu is. do you mean the pref-window? ..or the edit-menu's "preferences"? i'll have a look at tabbrowser's code if your answer doesn't help.

@66: ok, i think we've got the quicknote problem nailed. i could even release d29r2 right now, but i'll add some features in as usual, and release it tomorrow.

@both: i'll be out for the better part of the evening, so don't worry per responsiveness -- i'll be back.

[68] Submitted by: rue Saturday August 16th 2003

@65: got it -- i'd prototyped a method on arrays for binary-searching. for whatever reason, this breaks all kinds of third-party code. it's now a standalone function, and all is well.


it's sorta unbelievable: i disabled adblock in pieces, and that was the last thing to be checked. the most unsuspecting bit of code... and it wasn't even in use yet -- just a piece of a future feature. unbelievable.

[69] Submitted by: Vigilance Saturday August 16th 2003

ahhhh very cool. Thanks again for the quick responses :D

[70] Submitted by: Beel Sunday August 17th 2003

Rue, b29 still got conflict with either piro's TBE or CTExtension, when one right click, the context menu doesn't show...

[71] Submitted by: rue Sunday August 17th 2003

@70: i'm putting the finishing touches on d30, which i think will solve all conflicts. check back: it'll be up by tomorrow.

[72] Submitted by: rue Monday August 18th 2003

d30 is posted -- Quintana...

[73] Submitted by: fw Monday August 18th 2003


i've installed adblock d30 and tabbrowser extensions on firebird nightly. It still gets very slow and both tabbrowser and adblock doesn't work.

[74] Submitted by: Beel Monday August 18th 2003

This one works in context of the problems with extensions, no problems so far.

[75] Submitted by: rue Monday August 18th 2003

@73: i'm running TBE and adblock under moz1.3.1 -- no trouble; so it's not a function / global-variable conflict. would you check the javascript console for errors: Tools Menu > Web Development > JavaScript Console.

does adblock work properly without TBE? what platform are you on? lastly, which xpi did you install for adblock -- root or profile?

[76] Submitted by: Amanda Monday August 18th 2003

Thanx for your work on this informative site,
discovered interesting details !
Keep on...

[77] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Monday August 18th 2003

Odd...I'm not sure *what* is going on, but even though this update should've worked without problems along with QuickNote...It doesn't =(

I've tried installing AdBlock first and then QuickNote, and vice-versa (uninstalling/reinstalling Mozilla in both cases to remove QuickNote) - Neither method keeps the menu from coming undone.

Also, if this will be of any use, I tried this out with the profile XPI for AdBlock...And you mentioned you tested it with 1.3.1 - Maybe it's something in 1.4 (and above as well) that's keeping the fix for QuickNote from working properly?

[78] Submitted by: rue Tuesday August 19th 2003

@77: installing QuickNote under moz1.3.1 has (so far) produced no visible conflicts. entirely on its own, quicknote has thrown a few errors, and examining the source shows it to be poorly written.. or, at the least, very incomplete.

what were the errors you tried to post in note 52?

@73, 75 > append: apparently, t.b.e. has known issues with the latest fb nightlies. check out the thread titled: "New TBE version, fixed for 08/08 nightlies"

[79] Submitted by: fw Tuesday August 19th 2003


I'm running adblock and TBE 2003080901 on firebird 0.6.1 on WinXP. Without the other, both extensions are working fine. Only if I install them together everything slows down and seems to stop completly and the javascript console doesn't starts up.

[80] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Tuesday August 19th 2003

Thank you for mentioning that - Should I bring this to the attention of QuickNote's author?

(Interesting to note: On QuickNote's feedback page, as of right now, not one person has mentioned problems regarding installing QuickNote along with AdBlock.)

The errors I was trying to post were as follows:

*Loading QuickNote (both Float and Tab give the same error)*
Error: window.arguments has no properties
Source File: chrome://quicknote/content/quicknote.js
Line: 125

*Select text, right-click, select "Send to QuickNote"*
(No errors)

*AdBlock (Right-Click only, no selection)*
(No Errors)

*AdBlock (AdBlock... blocking proper type [e.g. right-click on Image and select "AdBlock Image"])*
(No Errors)

*AdBlock (AdBlock... blocking improper type [e.g. right-click on Image and select "AdBlock Embed"])*
Error: targetItem has no properties
Source File: chrome://adblock/content/adblock.js
Line: 1325 (Varies depending on what's selected)

[81] Submitted by: rue Tuesday August 19th 2003

@79: there's an "a-ha" moment coming, i just know it...

those symptoms precisely were solved-for by removing the array prototype -- our current problem must be similar. i can arrange some test-cases for you, if you're willing. aaron should be back in about a week, so official testing is on-hold until then.

@80: if i edit quicknote, would you mind testing some cases out? then, you can contact the author with an appropriate fix.

[82] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Tuesday August 19th 2003

Sure - I'll be glad to test a few cases out to see if it solves the problem here =)

[83] Submitted by: rue Tuesday August 19th 2003

@82: here it is -- right-click, save as; do a file-search for "quicknote.jar" and replace the chrome-installed copy.

[84] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Tuesday August 19th 2003

Just tried this one out...Unfortunately, it has no effect on the context menu problem =(

Also, I'm not sure if this'll be of any use, but it's something new I ran into after replacing the old quicknote.jar - If I use the "AdBlock... blocking improper type" method mentioned in my last post, I get a different error (not in addition to the original, though - it replaces the original error in that post):

Error: targetItem.getAttribute is not a function
Source File: chrome://adblock/content/adblock.js
Line: 1237 (Varies depending on selection)

And if I do the above with the "AdBlock Object" selection, the error is:

Error: tempTarget has no properties
Source File: chrome://adblock/content/adblock.js
Line: 1282

[85] Submitted by: fw Wednesday August 20th 2003


I tried it again with a newer version of firebird - without success. I'll do the testing, please submit the testcase.

[86] Submitted by: kusti Wednesday August 20th 2003

I still cant make it work on linux. Using mozilla 1.4. I installed 0.4 d 30 with success but no adblock on tools menu :( And yes, I've restarted several times allready.

[87] Submitted by: Vigilance Wednesday August 20th 2003

Well, i tried adblock again with TBE and found that it did the same thing. Perhaps it could be an issue present in Mozilla 1.5a but not the 1.3.1 which you've been testing on. I think [79] summed it up well...

I'm running adblock and TBE 2003080901 on firebird 0.6.1 on WinXP. Without the other, both extensions are working fine. Only if I install them together everything slows down and seems to stop completly and the javascript console doesn't starts up."

Although i'm running mozilla in place of firebird, it's the same issue. I merely took this as an opportunity to make the move over to multizilla (which works fine with adblock btw).

[88] Submitted by: rue Wednesday August 20th 2003

@everyone: i don't want anyone to think i'm ignoring them, because it's quite the opposite. there's three separate bugs -- each specific to their users -- being tracked here. simultaneously, a third-party has submitted code that branches from an older build and changes things radically. so, ok- that said:

@84: wolfeden3, the author of quicknote contacted me when he saw his jar posted to adblock's cvs. we may need you for further testing -- is there an address you can be reached at?

@85, 87: fw and vigilance, the conflict can almost certainly be isolated. if you could check back tomorrow, the test-cases should be ready then.

@86: kusti, can you check for errors in the javascript console: Tools Menu > Web Development > JavaScript Console. and which xpi did you install -- profile or root?

[89] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Wednesday August 20th 2003

Don't worry about it - Take your time, I'm patient =)

As for my address, it's:

[90] Submitted by: kusti Wednesday August 20th 2003

I installed Adblock 0.4 d30 (profile)
javascript console is empty.
I can see that I have the adblock.jar on chrome dir
but there's no adblock stuff on my prefs.js, I assume there should be?

[91] Submitted by: Andrew Wednesday August 20th 2003

Have you considered making an extension for Mozilla Thunderbird (the email client) that uses the Gecko engine to block ads in HTML emails? The core of the extension would be pretty similar (but alas I don't know much about extension creation in the first place), but if you had the ability to use AdBlock settings fromn the browser--or just the ability to import them from prefs.js--that would simplify things greatly. In any case, I'd love to see ad blocking in the mail client, if you're interested in tackling another project. Keep up the good work.

[92] Submitted by: Michael Katzmann Wednesday August 20th 2003

The latest development version is great, but it really makes the loading of tables with lots of images as slow as wet cement! Look at the example page at
without adblock it's 1 sec, with adbloack its 4 sec on
a 2GHz machine. On a 266MHz machine its over 10sec.
And this is just one image (repeated many times).
Having adblock disabled doesn't speed things up, it has to be completely removed to bring things back to normal.
The non-development version is not as bad.

[93] Submitted by: rue Wednesday August 20th 2003

@90: i wish there was an answer i could offer. it's *possible* that profile-extensions don't work properly on linux. try removing the jar-file and installing the root-dependant version.

@91: i tried to implement mail-blocking some time ago and failed. adblock currently works by modifying the html-bindings in userContent.css. mail doesn't seem to register this.

@92: yes, that's the result of the current design. as each element is bound, it fires a keypress event with element-specific charcodes. adblock's chrome-priveleged listener catches this and then filters the image. there's overhead to the keypress event which, unfortunately, is necessary.

an alternate method is being tested, though. it uses xpcom to hook directly into content-policy system and the overhead will then be negligible. it's not here yet, but it's coming...

you can attach this report to the bug.

[94] Submitted by: Dise–o web Thursday August 21st 2003

Congratulations for your great job.

HŽctor Gomis dise–o web estudio

[95] Submitted by: rue Thursday August 21st 2003

@94: hey- thanks. it's the high point of my day, to be congratulated by latin-spam.

[96] Submitted by: Homer J Thursday August 21st 2003

Great extension. I love it! I miss only one thing:
Is there (or will there be) a way to block ads by image size? Would be nice to block everything that is 468x60 and so on.

[97] Submitted by: fw Thursday August 21st 2003

@96 Homer J

have a look at bannerblind

[98] Submitted by: rue Thursday August 21st 2003

@85, 87: fw and vigilance, if either of you could test these out -- one at a time: just right-click, save; search / replace the installed jar.

adblock will not function for any of these, but that's proper. check to see if the "slowing down" and other problems are still present.

[99] Submitted by: rue Thursday August 21st 2003

@85, 87 > append: uh.. whoops. here's the first two again, for convenience.

[100] Submitted by: fw Friday August 22nd 2003

@99 rue

With every testcase the slowdown will disapear for me. I could not find any differences between the tests, preference windows and javacript console will show up and tbe are working as expected.

[101] Submitted by: Michael Katzmann Friday August 22nd 2003

As far as the problem in [92], [98][99] speeds up the
display. On a test page of mine with many images..
Without adblock ~2sec
With 0.4 D30 ~6sec
with updated adblock.jar ~3sec

I'll try it on my 266 MHz machine which at the moment takes ~2 sec without and ~16 sec with !!!

P.S. I get a red error message
initAdblockPrefObserver(); -- redundant to the statusbar binding

[102] Submitted by: Vigilance Friday August 22nd 2003

all 5 of the test jars eliminated the problem but produced the same error as [101] stated:

"initAdBlockPrefObserver(); // trip the pref-observer to set our display-status -- redundant to the statusbar-binding"
there's a second line with a whole lotta -'s and a ^ symbol. All in red letters below the statusbar

I dunno if it's actually an error message (appears to be something commented out of the code) but worth mentioning.

[103] Submitted by: kenketsu Friday August 22nd 2003

Sorry if this was mentioned in the second half of this page but I noticed that a number of people in the first half had the same problem as I did. The problem mentioned is that some things did not filter even though the rules clearly should be filtering them. (eg *ads* should filter a link that clearly has "ads" in it). I've noticed that clicking on a link on the page (or loading a link in a tab) triggers the filter to 'activate'. Somehow, AdBlock is missing some things on load but finding them when something in the page is triggered. But then again, it could be an artifact of my setup. Firebird 0.6.1 on NT 4 (blech)

[104] Submitted by: rue Friday August 22nd 2003

@101: michael, those test-cases disable adblock in various ways, which is why you saw a speed-increase. none of them were relevant to your problem, though. i explained the issue for you in [93].

@102: vigilance, i might have to redo the first testset -- i don't think cdata likes being commented-out by a parent.

before you posted, though, i'd designed testset-2 for fw. no harm in continuing, so here it is.


[105] Submitted by: Sunwolf Saturday August 23rd 2003

Hi, just dropping in for a quick question. When can we expect version .4 to be finalized?

Great work, keep it up!

[106] Submitted by: rue Saturday August 23rd 2003

@105: sunwolf, the v.4 dev-branch could abstractly be considered v.7 or 8. you can install it without worry as stands; nothing is unstable.

we're perpetually listing at .4 until the desired feature-set is complete.

[107] Submitted by: rue Saturday August 23rd 2003

@105 > append: haha- how totally ironic, my posit of stability below vigilance and fw's conflict-reports. ok, so it's *mostly* stable :P

[108] Submitted by: Sunwolf Saturday August 23rd 2003

Alright then, I'll be installing adblock and taking a tour of the interweb's adservers. Gotta catch em at the source. I give my thanks for a wonderful tool. It really complements Mozilla's pop-up stopping capabilities.

[109] Submitted by: Reil Saturday August 23rd 2003

Suggestion: allow a list of sites to be exempt from adblock. AdBlock works too well, and removes an entire flash object which includes a adblock.pattern string in it.

Praise: I think you did a great job with this, it doubles the value of mozilla.

[110] Submitted by: rue Saturday August 23rd 2003

@109: Reil, we're going to do a lot more than that. what's coming is filter-grouping by host. how it will work is this: you'll define a pattern for a host-group, maybe '*arstechnica*' ; under this entry, you can define any number of filters and whether or not it should allow global filters; then, on, before anything else, the host-groups are checked and the appropriate filters, flags and conditionals are parsed.. and applied.

to disable adblock for a site, just toggle a flag on its host-group. snap.

it also just occurred to me: to disable a matched-entry from a Host-Pattern (vs. explicit, the default), we'll need a list of unblocked sites which will be consulted first. so, in the end, this is the order of consultation: unblocked-list (explicit), host-list (explicit), host-pattern-list (pattern), globals.

and, for the record, globals are the way adblock stores patterns currently. they match globally, for every site.

[111] Submitted by: Trey Saturday August 23rd 2003

I have a suggestion for this project. I have an adlbock filter that blocks most ads on the web. I have exported these filters into a txt file and I have imported it on all my OSs and on my friends computers.

I suggest that there be a place in this project or a link to an external server where people can upload their filters and download other people's filters, so that people do not have to go around the web right clicking on every banner they see and making a filter for it. I would be happy to host this on my server and I could allow 100-300MB of space for it. Comments, anyone? Go to the site and email me.

[112] Submitted by: DHerring Saturday August 23rd 2003

Problem with AdBlock 0.4-d30 on
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030823 Mozilla Firebird/0.6.1+

Fresh install of both.

I can add rules and they work, but the adblock preferences dialog doesn't show any rules. They do show up in prefs.js, though.

[113] Submitted by: rue Sunday August 24th 2003

@111: trey, you're more than welcome to aggregate filter-lists and advertise such here. but the official project will neither approve nor offer such listings. this is preemptive, toward adblock gaining credibility with the mozilla suite.

@112: dherring, i'm afraid for the time-being, adblock is unsupported on linux -- notably with firebird. i don't know if profile-extensions aren't correctly / fully supported, or if there's simply an extra-step i've missed, but we're going to be switching the internals to a new codebase very soon. the new code will have linux-support.

[114] Submitted by: fw Monday August 25th 2003


The same result with testcase 2. With every .jar the browser works as supposed. The only difference ist the absence of the error message mentioned by Vigilance.
I compared the two differend testcase .jar's and there is no difference in size for every file in the .jar. Is this correct?

[115] Submitted by: Ryde Monday August 25th 2003

A feature request: adblock a link.

Examples in

Several of the banners in this site are located in the ordinary image content structure and not distinguishable from the others, but the link address is easily pinpointed to an typical advertisment site.

By the way, Adblock really makes the web a much more pleasant experience. Thanks guys.

[116] Submitted by: Trey Monday August 25th 2003

I have made a very basic little site where you can submit and download adblock filters. Hopefully I will find the time to make a CGI script that allows people to upload their filters easily. Remember, this website is not affiliated with this project.

The website is:

[117] Submitted by: Brooks Tuesday August 26th 2003

There seems to be a conflict with MozillaFirebird, Tab Browser Extensions and the latest Dev build of Adblock. When I install any version of the TBE and the dev build, it will no longer allow single browser mode when opening a link called from a target="_blank" and it forces all tabs to open in the background.

I have tried this on the following version of Firebird, 8-21, 8-17, 8-05, 7-15, 7-17, 6-01. On all of those builds, if I use the dev build, this happens. If I use the .3 build, then I have no problems.

I did not try that combo on anything later than 8-21, as something changed about that time and all of Piro's extensions are borked and disable the options page and the about:config.

I also have no idea if this is a problem on your end or on Piro's end, but I am also going to leave Piro a note about it.

[118] Submitted by: Henrik Tuesday August 26th 2003

Testing... (Please ignore! Sorry!)

[119] Submitted by: Harry Wednesday August 27th 2003

I'm having the same problem as DHerring with adblock not showing the filters in itself.

0.4d30 on
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030826 Mozilla Firebird/0.6.1+

[120] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Thursday August 28th 2003

Rue: In regards to the "further testing" you mentioned earlier - Has anything been sent to my address regarding that testing since I posted it here?

Just wondering about this, that's all...Sometimes I haven't received things due to something in the message that's messing it up, and I'm hoping that hasn't happened here.

If nothing was sent, just ignore this - I'll remain patient. I just wanted to make sure that if anything *did* get sent since I posted my address, that my ISP didn't erroneously throw it out before I could read it ;)

[121] Submitted by: EeeK Thursday August 28th 2003

I'm using the dev build for mozilla. FYI, when I set group homepage, another unknown tab came out.

[122] Submitted by: Adam H. Thursday August 28th 2003

@119: I've had the same problem with every Firebuild build past 20030817 on Windows XP.

[123] Submitted by: Arek Friday August 29th 2003

I've tried the dev build "Adblock 0.4, Development Build 30:" on Firebird 0.6.1 and it is very good (better in all)...but be careful because inhibit completely another useful extension Tabbrowser Extension...I hope to find a 0.4 that do not compromise Tabbrowser...ciao

[124] Submitted by: Alex Sunday August 31st 2003

Nice project!

[125] Submitted by: Allan Sunday August 31st 2003

Here's a challenge. I can't get Adblock to block any ads at

It used to work fine when I was running Firebird 0.6, but suddenly stopped working. I have since installed Firebird 0.61 and Adblock still doesn't block ads on that site.

[126] Submitted by: Auston Monday September 1st 2003

Allan I am having the exact same problem @ I tried doing a global block on */ads/* and also even more precise blocks but nothing works. I have never used Firebird before 0.61 so I don't know about it being a Firebird issue versus a adblock one.

[127] Submitted by: Adam H. Monday September 1st 2003

@125, 126:
Odd. I don't have that problem at all. The */ads/* filter works fine for me at fark. FB 0.6.1, Adblock .4 build 30.

[128] Submitted by: rue Monday September 1st 2003

@114: fw, yes the filesizes should all be the same. and, according to your report, the conflict has been resolved. i certainly do hope...

@118: Henrik, yo - we're about to switch to Wladimir's base. he pulled some crazy-impossible code and wrapped XPCOM into the profile. check it- we're even considering how to implement bayesian type algorithms for interaction-free blocking. this project just got a whole lot more interesting.

@120: wolfeden3, jedbro never came through on testing. he sent a few messages asking questions, then stopped. judging by his activity on the mozillazine forums, he's just ignoring us now :P

it's no matter, though -- we're going to sidestep all present issues with the new development branch. in fact, the last of our .4 branch will be posted by wednesday.

out of curiousity: the final test-case in [104] doesn't resolve the problem for you.. does it?

@125-127: allan, adam and auston, according to fw's report, the conflict has been cleared up as of d31. it will be posted by wednesday, so check back... and keep your fingers crossed.

[129] Submitted by: Mook Tuesday September 2nd 2003

Great extension.

I'd like to second an idea from comment 13: the ability to set styles on the blocked element, as opposed to actually blocking. I don't want to miss things, and do not really care about bandwidth; so having a style of "-moz-opacity: 0.1;" would be really helpful.

Oh and for some reason the listbox of filter rules shows nothing for me. I can export the rules okay though. d30.

[130] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Tuesday September 2nd 2003

Rue: No, the final test case listed in 104 didn't work...

...But, I *did* get it to work with the Jar file listed on the Dev. Builds page...Which is *very* strange, since AdBlock XPI's Jar file and the lone Jar file listed on the site should be exactly the same...Right?

Here's what happened:

1) Downloaded Test-Case #7 in Comment #104
2) Closed Mozilla, replaced Jar file
3) Restarted Mozilla; All AdBlock selections are gone, some text (in red) appeared in the bottom of browser below the status bar (which appears to be a piece of the script - JavaScript Console gave no errors)
4) Assumed #7 had a flaw of some sort, and downloaded Test-Case #6, repeating the same steps - Same outcome as above, and wasn't sure why that problem was there
5) Downloaded the Jar file from the Dev. Builds page, repeated above process
6) AdBlock is back to normal - For some reason the status-bar entry is a bit messed up (Now uses a serif font [Times New Roman?] with the underline going all the way to the right, spilling past its boundary into the corner - Before, it used to be a sans-serif font [Arial?] with no underline), but AdBlock works perfectly now, with no QuickNote conflict =D
7) Was wondering why it worked properly all of a sudden; Removed AdBlock and redownloaded the Dev. Build XPI - QuickNote conflict reappeared
8) Redownloaded lone Jar file and replaced the XPI's Jar file - QuickNote conflict disappeared

I could've stopped at #6 as it was working properly after that step, but I went ahead and performed the last two steps because I found it odd that the lone Jar file worked when the XPI's Jar file didn't...And both were the *same* build, #30.

The good news is, it's working now - Thank you for suggesting I try out the Test-Case...Even though it didn't fix the problem, it gave me the idea to look around and find the one file that *did* fix it =D

[131] Submitted by: Zarc.oh Tuesday September 2nd 2003

I'm having the same problem as Dherring and Harry. The filters do not show up in the prefs, but do work. Extra info: the scrollbar in the prefs window is present (and seems to be sized after the numer of filters), but are not visible.
I'm using Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030823 Mozilla Firebird/0.6.1+

[132] Submitted by: carney1979 Tuesday September 2nd 2003

I really like adblock. I'm using it with Mozilla 1.4-3 (Debian package).

One site gives me a LOT of trouble. crashes Mozilla EVERY TIME if I try to access the site with AdBlock activated.

[133] Submitted by: rue Tuesday September 2nd 2003

@everyone: the d30 xpi's were really d29. if you installed this way, you should update.

@129: mook, that's a good idea. i'm not sure if it would work for objects, but i'll do some testing.

@131: zarc.oh (and mook), this has escalated to a severe issue since it's not limited to linux. the common-factor being firebird, i rely on aaron's input for testing -- hopefuly we'll get this figured out.

@132: carney, i'll look into that shortly. you're using d30 with no other discernable issues on linux?

[134] Submitted by: Wolfi Tuesday September 2nd 2003

Is the remove Flash feature working like FlashBlock-01.xpi, so that the *loading* of this nasty Flash stuff is prevented, or does adblock only disable auto-playing the animation?

[135] Submitted by: rue Tuesday September 2nd 2003

@134: wolfi, the xpi you're referring to belongs to ted mielczarek's 'flash-click-to-view'. adblock's "Flashblock" feature is similar only in name: when activated, all loaded objects / applets are overlayed so you can right-click them. and yes, adblock prevents loading of filtered flash.

[136] Submitted by: carney1979 Tuesday September 2nd 2003

I'm not sure what you mean by "d30". I just build Mozilla 1.5B from a tar-ball and AdBlock works perfectly with it, in relation to loading

My "Debian version" seemed to have no other issues. All Debian Mozilla packages on my system (all version 1.4-3) are:

mozilla, mozilla-browser, mozilla-chatzilla, mozilla-dev,mozilla-mailnews, mozilla-psm, and mozilla-xft.

[137] Submitted by: carney1979 Tuesday September 2nd 2003

I may have spoken a bit early on my "no problems with AdBlock and Mozilla 1.5B".

(This is the Mozilla that I built myself). When it loads the page, it tries to load the ad but it doesn't load (or at least it doesn't display). However, the page never fully loads, ie, the "M" spinner keeps working and the status-bar at the bottom of my screen says it's trying to load from the ad url.

The page does fully load with AdBlock disabled, but then I get the ad (of course).

The filter I'm using is*

If you right-click on one of their ads, you'll dee this is probably the only choice for a filter.

[138] Submitted by: Douglas Tuesday September 2nd 2003

using dev build 0.4 d30 / Netscape 7.1
I installed this dev build at root chrome (application chrome) instead of profile chrome. I see the word "Unloaded" where is normally "Adblock" (beside the bottom right's security icon). Adblock doesn't filter any images (I guess that's why it's "Unloaded").

Do I have to use the profile chrome version, or can't I use the root chrome?

[139] Submitted by: Douglas Tuesday September 2nd 2003

Never mind, I got it to work properly (forgot to restart N7.1 again!)

On a side note, I notice that the word "Adblock" in the bottom right has its underline stretch farther than the word "Adblock"

So it looks like "Adblock______" instead of a tidy "Adblock"

[140] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Wednesday September 3rd 2003

I tried it with the latest nightly build and Adblock d30 on and with the filter* and it hid the filters. I then disabled Adblock and the ads appeared. Seems to be working for me...

The only bug that I see so far in d30 that hasn't been previously announced is that the statusbar doesn't show any "Adblock" entry for Firebird 09.02.2003 (nightly)

[141] Submitted by: rue Wednesday September 3rd 2003

d31 is posted -- csatia

[142] Submitted by: Sunwolf Wednesday September 3rd 2003

I'm running Windows XP Pro, the official September 2 2003 nightly build of Firebird, and I have just installed adblock d31. The problem is that I can't import my filters without Firebird coming to a crashing halt. I'll be trying d31 with different versions of Firebird to see if it's adblock or FB.

[143] Submitted by: Sunwolf Wednesday September 3rd 2003

Well, I've just finished testng the import function with Firebird milestone 0.6.1, and it works perfectly. In short, if you use the latest FB nightly, import might not work.

[144] Submitted by: Adam H. Wednesday September 3rd 2003

It seems to be the same as with d30 - all FB builds after 20030817 won't show the list of filters in the Adblock prefs window (Windows). Import works, however, and the ads are blocked - you just can't see what's being blocked in the dialog. I noticed that the 20030903 FB build also did not show the 'Adblock' indicator in the lower left - I don't know about other builds between that and 20030817.

[145] Submitted by: Wolfi Wednesday September 3rd 2003

Rue, unfortunately Flashblock doesn't work ywt as I've hoped for. I cannot autopreset it, so every time a page is (auto/re)loaded, this Flash crap starts playing again.
I really hope you can make it work like Ted Mielczarek's little gizmo real soon ;-) Or can I have both installed at the same time without interference?

BTW you probably can add OS/2 and eCS to your list of supported OSs. As far as I can tell at this time, adblock 0.4 dev30 seems to work fine here with Mozilla/5.0 (OS/2; U; Warp 4.5; en-US; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20030831

[146] Submitted by: rue Thursday September 4th 2003

@143, 144: sunwolf and adam, i'll have to run some blind-tests to see what changed, but i suspect firebird is simply breaking further from mozilla-suite conventions. i might have to rewrite the list-code entirely; check back...

@145: wolfi, uh- you didn't understand. the sole purpose of flashblock is to allow right-clicking of embedded media. mozilla doesn't trap mouse-activity in those regions, so there's no way for adblock to know when you click there. now, try this: activate flashblock, right-click on the media and add a filter; then deactivate it and continue browsing.

ps: you run some rather obscure systems. academia?

[147] Submitted by: fw Thursday September 4th 2003


just installed d31 and now it works with tbe and firebird. great job, thanks.

[148] Submitted by: Hawker Thursday September 4th 2003

Wow, I want uninstall this thing and start over but I can't delete the items you list in the FAQ. I am new at this Mozilla stuff. Is there a simple way to uninstall?

[149] Submitted by: Gena0 Friday September 5th 2003

Hmm. Just installed d31, d30 was removed manually. I also had to rebuild the jar replacing /bindings/ with /widgets/ in the 2 XML files for the Adblock to appear in the statusbar and to show the block filters in 20030903 build of Mozilla Firebird.

[150] Submitted by: Adam H. Friday September 5th 2003

@146, 149: Confirmed - Adblock d31 works correctly with FB 20030903 when the bindings - widgets replacement is done in the Adblock .jar file. Very nice.

[151] Submitted by: Wolfi Friday September 5th 2003

apparently I really don't yet understand the concept behind your implementation of Flashblock :-(

Before Ted Mielczarek's FlashBlock-01 became available, I was using one of Jesse Ruderman's bookmarklets , to "block Flash, using a placeholder, on which you can click to unblock a desired Flash animation" and as far as I know, Ted's FlashBlock is based on Jesse's code.

And from that experience I know, that they just replace the autodownload and autoplay of most embedded Flash animations by a "Click to play Flash" area, which only if you decide to do so, then loads and plays the animation.
And of course, according to your description I expected AdBlock's implementation of FlasBlock to work more or less the same way: default to replace almost *any* call to download and play Flash (I found few, where it didn't work) by a "Click to Play" area.

But according to your answer in #146 I now understand it that way, that I first have to set a filter for each Flash I don't want to see, is that correct?

What do you mean by "ps: you run some rather obscure systems. academia?" ;-)

Despite all efforts from M$, the IT magazines and even IBM itself to declare OS/2 to a persona non grata and make it appear to be dead, they luckily all failed miserably :-)

At the moment OS/2 is more alive than ever and its successor eComStation V1.1 by Serenity Systems is the best OS/2 ever.
Luckily there also is a very strong developer community located beyond the former Iron Curtain in Russia, Moscow area and Ukraina, Kiev area .

OS/2 is almost as stable and reliable as a good configured Linux box but additionally has the unique object oriented WPS as GUI and none of all the worm, virus, instability, forced upgrade, "Big brother's watching", DRM and similar hazzles of M$'s Windows world.

Many of us are using VPC for OS/2 to run Linux and/or Windows in a virtual machine, hosted by OS/2 if there is the need to do so, but hardly anyone is willing to give up OS/2. And our Mozilla/Firebird/Thunderbird builds are actively developed and maintained by IBM, for free.
So the answer to your question isn't 42, but a clear NO, it isn't an obscure system at all ;-)

[152] Submitted by: rue Friday September 5th 2003

@148: hawker, the pref-window has an 'uninstall' item under the adblock-options menu.

@149: gena, whoa- nice work -- i'd never have found that. can you post the exact code-phrase / lines you changed?

@151: wolfi, adblock only blocks filtered items, so you understand correctly. that was an interesting summary, regarding os/2... but actually, my only question was: academia?

..for which i still have no answer :P

[153] Submitted by: Wolfi Saturday September 6th 2003

@153: "academia? ..for which i still have no answer :P"

Nope, daily life use since the first release of Warp 3 in 1995 and exclusively since 1997 ;-)

[154] Submitted by: hamisi Saturday September 6th 2003

Need help!
I want to import a filter. I've saved that as textdokument.
When I go to lists and say "import filter" adblock says:
"file not valid".
what is wrong?
Thank you for help

[155] Submitted by: liphos Saturday September 6th 2003

First of all, AdBlock is by far the most useful extension for moz I've found so far!

You said you're going to filter out ads from the source code in future version so they aren't loaded at all.

I'd really like to have an option that preserves the current behavior: Have them downloaded and only hide/remove them onLoad.

I have a fast connection and I don't care about the fractions of a second it takes to download an ad, I just don't want to see them and getting on my nerves. But I *do* want to support certain sites by giving them ad impressions.

I know that filtering ads in the source code is better for users with slow connections, and you should definitely implmenent that.

Thanks and keep up the work

[156] Submitted by: Adam H. Saturday September 6th 2003

@ 152: I'm going to post what I did as well.

Extract files from adblock.jar.

In adblock.xml, line 492:

change 'bindings' to 'widgets'.

In settings.xml, line 772:

Again change 'bindings' to 'widgets'.

Then rebuild adblock.jar.

I take no credit for finding this fix - that goes to Gena0

[157] Submitted by: Adam H. Saturday September 6th 2003

@156: Forum stripped out the actual lines from the .xml files.
The line in adblock.xml contains

and the line in setting.xml contains

[158] Submitted by: anon Saturday September 6th 2003

i would really like to see the ability to block the downloading of and to remove the placeholders for specified ALL ads: images, links, frames (like the google ads), etc.

[159] Submitted by: EeeK Sunday September 7th 2003

I'm sorry but juz to confirm, does adblock really block by not preventing the browser from downloading images/banner/flash so that the bandwidth is save or the browser downloaded it but adblock juz hide/remove it?

[160] Submitted by: Raj Sunday September 7th 2003

The add-on is great. Please Note the following, am not sure if they are bug....

I have noticed that when I do a ctrl-click on a link the page displayed does not have the ads blocked. They however get blocked when i refresh the page.

This seems to be the case too, when the tab browser preferences are set to open the content in a new tab.

[161] Submitted by: Terence Monday September 8th 2003

A really great idea. but very buggy.

for instance, it won't work half the time with stuff at
for example.
of particular note the pattern */Ads/* or */ads/* does not work at all. This pattern wes suggested on the front page of this project.

If you really want to test/debug this tool. Go to and click on one of the articles. Keep hitting refresh. If you don't get any ads after about 10 refreshes, then the tool is working. I noticed that bannerblind was equally ineffective on this site.

Nice idea though. So far, it's still better than having only the built-in image blocker. Good luck with the project.


[169] Submitted by: Georgie Tuesday September 9th 2003


Adblock 0.4d31 kills Java applets (well, almost...).

You introduced something in a version between d28(?) and d31 that interferes with Java applets. With Adblock enabled a simple Java applet grows into a humongous monster: it will take minutes (!!) to load, and it causes 100% CPU time utilization while loading. Once the applet is loaded and appears in the browser (or in its window), it works perfectly. It is *loading* that becomes a major chore. With Adblock *disabled* the same applet loads in seconds, as one would expect.

I think this side-effect must be the explanation behind the fact that some web pages "don not load" with Adblock enabled. The presence of a Java applet in a web page triggers this rather bothersome behaviour: Mozilla basically hangs for several minutes, for no apparent reason. I am not surprised that most people just kill the browser, thinking that it has hung...

I have been collecting my experience using Mozilla 1.4 and Sun Java VM 1.4.2, under Win98SE.


[170] Submitted by: Mike Tuesday September 9th 2003

I get this pop-up for a login to an ad server on certain sites, its rather annoyaning. It has something to do with my user profile, not firebird it self. Can anyone help me with this problem. Image:

[171] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Wednesday September 10th 2003

I've noticed Mozilla has been crashing a lot recently for reasons unknown (and it's usually *very* stable - the only thing that crashed it like this before was a JNG image)...And after checking out a couple of things, I've found out that it's directly related to the AdBlock extension =(

Here's what I did:

(1) Downloaded AdBlock 0.4 d31 (profile)
(2) Restarted browser twice (to update bindings)
(3) Made sure AdBlock was enabled, as well as JavaScript
(4) Went to (NOTE: Other sites crashed it as well - This one was chosen for testing purposes)
(5) Added a filter for* (The ad beginning with this address appears in the whitespace between the two yellowish tables at the top)
(6) Refreshed page
(7) If the ad for the filtered address above is loaded (it almost always does, refresh the page again if it doesn't), the browser will crash (in some cases, it may lock up instead, and force you to close it out via Task Manager)

Also, I have noticed that the browser will only crash (or lock up) if all three of those conditions are met - If any condition isn't met (AdBlock is disabled, JavaScript is disabled, or if that filter isn't in the list), it won't crash.

It has crashed on the following:
Mozilla 1.4 (current profile, clean profile)
Firebird 0.6 (current profile, clean installation and profile)

[172] Submitted by: Paul R. Wednesday September 10th 2003

A quick suggestion: Double-clicking on the "Adblock" spot on the status bar brings up the Prefs window, right-clicking on the spot disables/enables blocking. Also, there should be some soprt of visual indication that Flashblock is turned on/off.

By the way, I had the same crashing problem "WolfeDen3" (see post right above) when visiting a page at and with a similiar filter for the googlesyndication site enabled. Interestingly, it never happened before yesterday.

-- Paul R.

[173] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Wednesday September 10th 2003

More news on this problem:

It seems to happen with these addresses:**

But surprisingly, no crashes occur with:*
(Or the full address, without wildcards)

Also, the JavaScript Console reported this error on that page (the line number may vary, but it's always the same error):

Error: s has no properties
Source File:
Line: 23

I tried the "googlesyndication" filter on another site, ShortNews ( ), and no crashes occur - Even with the *same* addresses that crashed the GameWinners site. However, ShortNews did not report any errors in the JavaScript Console, unlike GameWinners...Maybe that bad line of JavaScript has a place in this crashing problem as well?

[174] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Thursday September 11th 2003

I just noticed this...On some sites (such as ), when an image is blocked with AdBlock, the image disappears, but the placeholder will remain - You can select it as if the image were still there (except that it's blank, and it cannot be blocked this time).

But, on other sites (such as ;P), it will remove the image entirely, not leaving anything to click on (which is what it should be doing).

In both cases, I have checked my AdBlock settings, and it was set to "Remove Ads", so AdBlock worked as expected for the second test (blocking images on ;P), but not the first (blocking images on ). I haven't specified any images in particular, as the effects of this can be seen by blocking any image on either site.

Is this a bug in AdBlock, or is it something in the coding of the pages I'm visiting that's keeping the AdBlocked image from being removed entirely?

[175] Submitted by: Homer J Thursday September 11th 2003

I had the same problem like WolfeDen3 on several sites. When you set adblock to "hide ads", the problem seems to disappear. Also Mozilla Firebird seems to run faster whith that setting...

[176] Submitted by: Malthe Borch Thursday September 11th 2003

Obviously a grand initiative, but have you considered centralising information about adds, so that the system might eventually learn to block adds by identification or characterisation? It would be along the lines of spam-control systems, which to my belief try this approach to improve synergi amongst users.

If you're interested, please contact me, as I would like to contribute to development. You can reach me at m00mbt at

[177] Submitted by: Hans-Henrik Ravn Friday September 12th 2003

BUG : No visible entrys in my filter list. It removes the ads A-OK, but nothing to see in the list.

[178] Submitted by: Adam H. Saturday September 13th 2003

@177: See 156, 157 on this page for how to fix that problem.

[179] Submitted by: Gasoline Saturday September 13th 2003

Hi, nice stuff

I'm having a trouble, I cant get rid of the flash banners on :(
Can someone tell me what to add to the filter becouse it wont work for me, thx.

[180] Submitted by: Marc Bauer Sunday September 14th 2003

Adblock don't block inside javascript. i've created a filter for "http://ad*" and it will not work here. found on top of

[181] Submitted by: Marc Bauer Sunday September 14th 2003

oh - html is not allowed. i don't know how to post the example. a second try:

[182] Submitted by: Marc Bauer Sunday September 14th 2003

ah - suxxx.

script language="JavaScript" src="

[185] Submitted by: anon Sunday September 14th 2003

is there a way to remove individual filters from the blocklist?

[186] Submitted by: William Gianopoulos Tuesday September 16th 2003

The Adblock status bar entry either needs to be made clickable to do something (as suggested in previous forum posts) or NOT be underlined. It certainly looks like it should do something if you click on becuase it is underlined!

[187] Submitted by: William Gianopoulos Tuesday September 16th 2003

I find that after installing the 0.4 build 31 developement version all works OK but I can't see the entries in the prefs window. If I then apply the "fix" for this issue as described in post #156 above, then whenever I do a File -> New Window, all the bookmarks on the bookmarks toolbar are duplicated. This does not occur until I apply the post #156 "fix". This is occuring with MozillaFirebird 20030911 nightly.

[188] Submitted by: Adam H. Tuesday September 16th 2003

@187: I noticed this as well, with every FB nightly from 20030911 to 20030915. 20030910 does not show this behaviour.

[189] Submitted by: wgianopoulos Wednesday September 17th 2003

@188: Hmm well perhaps I will go back to the 09/10 build. I believe the 9/10 build was the last Firebird nightly built off the 1.5 trunk, so is the last nightly that has the same trunk code as the 0.7 release will, so hopefully this will not be an issue in the 0.7 release.

[190] Submitted by: sic Thursday September 18th 2003


can you tell me how to delete a specific filter. Is this possible?

[191] Submitted by: sic Thursday September 18th 2003

As a work around, since I've seen others with this problem, you can edit the filter to something useful. Double click on the filter and then change what it filters. Still can't figure how to delete a filter altogether.

[192] Submitted by: Henrik Thursday September 18th 2003

It's been quite a while since I took an active part in the development of AdBlock. It has mostly been taken over by Rue.

As for deletion, I think that Rue has implemented it, so that you press the delete key or the backspace key to delete the selected entry.


[193] Submitted by: Adam H. Thursday September 18th 2003

Looks like the developers at mozilla have done something weird (again). The 20030917 FB build no longer dupes the bookmarks on the toolbar when a new window is opened, but Adblock doesn't show in the bottom left anymore.

As well, Ctrl+Shift+B will clear the check box in Adblock properties, but not check it off again, and even with the checkbox cleared, Adblock is still enabled (!). This behaviour is what happens when I use the 20030910 build to first enable Adblock (starting 20030917 with Adblock enabled).

Now, when I use the 20030910 build to *disable* Adblock, and start the 20030917 build, Adblock remains disabled even when the checkbox is filled in Properties. Looks like the latest FB build broke the toggle.

[194] Submitted by: guest Friday September 19th 2003

to sic:

"can you tell me how to delete a specific filter. Is this possible?"

type "about:config", find "adblock.patterns"

to adblock:

adblock works for MY active tab only, it does not filter anything in MY background tabs

any idea?

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5; MultiZilla v1.5.0.2b) Gecko/20030917

[195] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Friday September 19th 2003

Are you sure you're using the 0.4 development build? The older builds only work on the active tab, but the dev builds have worked for all tabs for quite some time now...

[196] Submitted by: guest Saturday September 20th 2003

thanks, the dev build seems working with all tabs

another question:
with this dev build, i noticed a new option "flashblock"
but i got nothing when i clicked it

i've never have "flash player plugin" installed with my mozilla, cause i don't want flash
does this new option "flashblock" need the plugin to work?

[197] Submitted by: Eduardo Saturday September 20th 2003

very well project

[198] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Saturday September 20th 2003

Don't know if you need the flash plugin installed to use it or not... But here's what it does: If there's a flash or java applet, then you can't Adblock it via right-click like with images... So if you invoke flashblock on a page with java or flash, then it throws an image on top of it which will allow you to right-click the flash/java and add a filter for it. And flashblock must be invoked for each time that you want to use it, it's not an on/off switch sort of thing like enabling or disabling Adblock. Hope that helps.

[199] Submitted by: guest Saturday September 20th 2003

i c, i'll just leave it alone
neither JAVA nor FLASH PLUGIN are installed anyway


[200] Submitted by: Kobi Haron Sunday September 21st 2003

Images at the bottom of aren't blocked in 0.3. Filters can be created but they are ignored. The same for the right hand side ads in

On the whole adblock is a major quality of life enhancer.

Do you have installation instructions for the development versions?

[201] Submitted by: anon Sunday September 21st 2003

wow, this has got to be one of the most annoying ads every, and adblock won't block it :-(

[202] Submitted by: Florencia Sarasola Monday September 22nd 2003

good idea, please contact me if you need voluntaries

hosting uruguay

[203] Submitted by: Fred Peeterman Monday September 22nd 2003

Is v. 0.4d31 supposed to work with FB 20030917 on W2K??
I cannot disable the adblock extension, which I really would NOT want to do if it would do anything at all. I cannot add anything to the block list, consequently is does not block anything. Any thoughts? I can provide more detailed infromation if of interest.

[204] Submitted by: Adam H. Monday September 22nd 2003

@203: This problem was noted in message 193, but the unofficial FB 20030919 build at seems to have fixed that problem.

[205] Submitted by: Sunwolf Monday September 22nd 2003

Hi! Just dropping by to ask when the next dev build can be expected. I want to see that amazing code you mentioned!

[206] Submitted by: Neil Tuesday September 23rd 2003

First of all, what the heck is this misty page layout?

Now, I really hate to use this, but I had no other option because this OpenSource project has disabled the bugs page, because most people file not bugs? I don't get it... Here is a bug, dig it.


You are suppost to use lowercase for "chrome:name" and may use uppercase for "chrome:displayName" You seem to have mixed them, please correct this error.

note: No, I am not using AdBlock, but one of our customers does and he ran into trouble because of it!

Btw, why did you name it "AdBlock" if you're not "blocking" but "hiding" content?

FYI: does *block* all sorts of content, a real blocker, including flash or anything else :D

[207] Submitted by: Andy E Tuesday September 23rd 2003

It would be nice if it could remove ads that are placed in the page as an Iframe as well

[208] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Wednesday September 24th 2003

You can :)

I'm eager to see it too.

[209] Submitted by: Mike Wednesday September 24th 2003

I've just upgraded to 0.4d31 and notice there is now a "flashblock" in the Tools menu. I have already installed the "Flash Click to View" extension and now neither one works! Flask Click seems to have been completely disabled and the flashblock only seems to work once -- reloading a page brings back the flash content. Could you please make flashblock an option in the next build? thanks.

[210] Submitted by: beel Wednesday September 24th 2003


I believe they're working on the "blocking" version with the next development branch, let's see if "contentblocker" or whatever it is will do the blocking job soon...

[211] Submitted by: Nicolas Wednesday September 24th 2003

Just installed latest Dev build.

Problem: When I open Adblock Prefs, the Filter list seems to be empty. The scrollbar is displayed thou and Ads get blocked.

[212] Submitted by: Pallex Thursday September 25th 2003

A few questions/comments:

1) How do I know which version of AdBlock i'm using?

2) Some ads seem to not be blocked, even though there is a relevant line in my AdBlock list. I'll post an example when I can get it to happen again (it's not consistently ignoring it)

3) I use firebird in a number of locations. I frequently save the adblock.txt list and take it to another location so that I slowly build up a good list of filters. But this means that I have repeated entries. Is there a plan for a `sanitize` function to remove repeated or redundant lines, for speed? (By redundant I mean you might have**

when you actually only need the most general case)

Great program though!

[213] Submitted by: Adam B. Thursday September 25th 2003

Excellent plug-in. Great work!

[214] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Thursday September 25th 2003

I just realized this - Has anyone seen Rue lately? He hasn't posted here since the fifth of September...

[215] Submitted by: Torsten Friday September 26th 2003


I installed Adblock (current version) yesterday but it keeps losing the rules I set. I enter a rule, push "add filter" and the rule appears in the upper window and starts working. But a couple of times later that I show the Adblock menu some of the rules are simply gone. I have no idea how this happens.
I'm running Adblock in Mozilla 1.4 on Windows XP Pro.

[216] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Friday September 26th 2003

I have not heard anything from Rue in a long time.... Wonder what he's up to?

[217] Submitted by: anon Sunday September 28th 2003

torsten: does mozilla crash after you set the rule? i've noticed that you need to completely and gently exit mozilla before changes you make actually "stick"

are there plans to ad functionality to block the google ads and ads such as the ones on the right hand side of this page (i.e., block + remove the whole table that contains certain text/link, or block any kind of &lt;a href=""&rt; links, in whatever form they appear (text, table, etc.)?

[218] Submitted by: JohnQ Monday September 29th 2003

I love adblock, but asside from many of the things already mentioned here, I only have one problem with it.

It seems that if I open many windows in new tabs, in phoenix, the new tabs do not have their ads removed. If I then go to one of those ad-ful tabs and press reload, they go away.

It might be a conflict with the "Tab Browser Extensions" but it would be nice if adblock would block ads of tabs opened in the background. I often go to news sites: yahoo, cnn, shashdot, etc.. and just middle click the intweresting stories, and then browse them in separate tabs after they are loaded.. and its kinda silly to have to hit reload on each one before I start reading.

Thanks, and great work on this useful extension. When is the next version due?? =)


[219] Submitted by: JohnQ Monday September 29th 2003

Err, Im an idiot.. I should probably have upgraded to the latest dev build before I posted that... please disreguard! =)

[220] Submitted by: JohnQ Monday September 29th 2003

Ok, for real this time.

Just nuked my Phoenix dir, and did a clean install with the latest version of adblock (0.4 build 31).. I dont really know what "iFrames" are, but WOW do they work *GREAT*

However.. I have blocked the ads I have problems with.. but when I go to "Adblock Prefs" nothing shows up under the list of patterns to block. Its an empty list.

They do show up in the prefs.js, and adblock functions correctly, blocking ads better than it ever has before (in ver 3.0) but it wont let me see/edit my patterns. Help?

[221] Submitted by: Kevin Ar18 Monday September 29th 2003

It would be very useful if a future version of adblock would allow blocking ads from ever loading.

[222] Submitted by: Kevin Ar18 Monday September 29th 2003

For clarification on my above post, take adshield as an example. It blocks all content from the URL you specified including even the html page itself if necessary.

[223] Submitted by: Magnus Z Tuesday September 30th 2003

Is there a filter.txt file avalible that I can import already? I know I might sound abit lazy, but it would be nice to have a -filter- section, that is downloadable from here, and then the user could 'import' that file with predefined filters... Anythought?

[224] Submitted by: rue Tuesday October 14th 2003

@171: WolfeDen3: the issue is actually tied to the userContent.css manipulation of dynamically placed objects. we'll be leaving it far behind with the .5 branch. ...stay tuned :P

@193: Adam, I know it's been a while, but is there any console output when the blocking-toggle fails? once again, i'm shooting blind.

@206: Neil, good catch on the bug; but, uh, how did a naming-convention cause trouble for your customer? ..btw, adblock does prevent content from loading -- the front-page has been updated to affirm this.

contentblocker should be renamed "plugin control", since that's all it does.

[225] Submitted by: rue Tuesday October 14th 2003


apologies for the lapse in communicae. the fall term hit especially hard, and i'm only now finding time to allocate here. allowing for testing, there will be a new build shortly.

keep it here.

what i can't promise is when you'll be able to post to this page again. for unobvious reasons, the submission-controls have disappeared. looking around, other projects seem unaffected, so i'm thinking the sheer size of our page ticked-off an admin. sucks to be popular :P   in the meantime, just post here, and, as always, we'll do our best to respond.

ps: yay- i got it working.

[226] Submitted by: macewan Wednesday October 15th 2003

just a raj stated above - third button clicking on an article to open it in new tab in the background loads the page but ad images get displayed. if you click the tab to read the article and see the ads you have to refresh the page to then block the ads.

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030516 Mozilla Firebird/0.6

Beyond that - great extension. thanks for all the hard work! ;)

[227] Submitted by: Ido Wednesday October 15th 2003

pbl with firebird 0.7 : adblock works but the configuration panel doesn't show anyfilter

[228] Submitted by: doug Wednesday October 15th 2003

Same as post #227. Scrollbar seems to indicate that filters are there, but they're not visible. i.e. the whole list area is blank.

[229] Submitted by: rue Wednesday October 15th 2003

@226: macewan, you need to install the latest dev-build. v.4 blocks ads and works across tabs. however:

@227, 228: Ido and doug, since late august, firebird hasn't honored certain chrome urls -- adblock's preference-pane and status-element are broken. look for the first build of v.5 to remedy this, sometime early next week.

[230] Submitted by: Albert Wednesday October 15th 2003

Great extension. One question. Are there any conflicts between Adblock and Flash Click To View? I can't seem to get the latter to work after I install Adblock.


[231] Submitted by: Sunwolf Wednesday October 15th 2003

It's time for an AdBlock Anecdote!

Whenever I see an ad, I click it and block its source, wherever it's from. Meanwhile, I think, "click, adblock, asterisk."

So when my magazine, MaximumPC, came in, I saw an ad and my wrist twitched and I thought, "click, wait...argh!" It happened every single time I saw an ad. Eventually I just put down the magazine. Some day I'll read it. I'll just have to slowly acclimate by disabling adblock.

[232] Submitted by: Adam H. Thursday October 16th 2003

@224: I think the issues with the blocking-toggle and duped bookmarks was a hiccup in FB development. I haven't seen the problem in a while, and it doesn't appear in the official FB 0.7 release. I haven't seen any adblock entries in the JS console for quite a while.

@227, 228, 229: I don't have a problem with the prefs panel in FB 0.7 (or previous pre-releases of that milestone, for that matter). I can see all the filters. Adblock, so far, is working just fine with Firebird 0.7, and that's with my old profile.

[233] Submitted by: Adam H. Thursday October 16th 2003

@232: Spoke too soon, I think. A fresh profile and install of Adblock d31 shows no adblock indicator, no filters appearing in the prefs window.

But then it occurs to me that I did the thing that I posted up in @156, that Gena0 found, and that is what made d31 work with FB in the first place. When I put that hacked adblock.jar in the fresh profile, it works fine. Apparently that was also causing the duped bookmark problem with some FB builds, but I don't have that problem now. Upshot is that the hacked adblock is working great with FB0.7 - no results with Mozilla, I'm afraid.

HTH, rue.

[234] Submitted by: Seth Steinberg Friday October 17th 2003

I have been trying to use adblock with Mozilla under MacOSX. It works great for pictures, but the adblock settings window displays incorrectly, probably because of the large size of the aqua Macintosh buttons. The the New button to the right of the text is off the right edge of the window. Worse, carriage return (ctrl-M) does not get passed to the text line, so there is no way to edit or add a new filter pattern!

Possible fixes:

- Make the window a bit wider than 460 pixels (perhaps 600).

- Put a grow box on the window.

I'd do this myself but I cannot figure out how the Mozilla/Chrome packaging stuff works so I can load the new version. Loading settings.xul into Mozilla (with File>Open) shows a much nicer window, but it is working with another copy of the various databases, not the ones that actually block ads.

[235] Submitted by: slava Friday October 17th 2003

How do i install adblock for all mozilla users? if you know please e-mail me at

[236] Submitted by: Mark Saturday October 18th 2003

maybe a stupid question -- I've freshly installed mozilla 1.5 [ Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 ] and adblock; both installed as root;

if I run mozilla as root then under 'tools' I see the adblock tool menu item; if I work and run mozilla as myself I don't.

the permissions on adblock.har are 0400; changing them to 0644 and restarting mozilla didn't help.


I saw a note about adblock not being supported under linux but didn't catch the context ...


[237] Submitted by: rue Saturday October 18th 2003

@233: Adam, that helps greatly. i couldn't see any way to use multiple-'extends', so just added the inherited features directly to both elements. so far, so good.

@234: Seth, first i need confirmation -- you're quite certain ctrl-m is 'return' for osX mozilla? for reference, the entry-control is bound to the keycode for enter/return.

actually... now that i think of it, using the reference-constant for 'return' would avoid this.

also, the pref-window is set to be resizeable (lower-right). so.. try dragging it larger :P

@235, 236: slava and Mark, yes- you've hit on a limitation in the v.4 install-routine. look for v.5 in the next few days to allow true root-install.

(v.5 will support linux.)

[238] Submitted by: storm Sunday October 19th 2003

I have seen the instructions in but I can't even find adblock.jar with a harddrive wide search and how would I extract it? Once extracted, how to put it together again? After that, what do I do with adblock.jar? Put it somewhere? Install it somehow?

[239] Submitted by: rue Monday October 20th 2003

@238: storm, depending on which install you downloaded -- root or profile -- adblock's jar will reside in appFolder::chrome or userProfile::chrome, respectively. if your search is failing, adblock might not be installed.

as for disassembling the jar, you needn't. v.5 will be posted today, fixing all.

[240] Submitted by: Thomas Monday October 20th 2003

Help! Can't re-install Adblock 0.4 d31 on Mozilla 1.5(20031007).
Must have installed ver 0.2 before. Trying to install ver 0.4, I always get the 'Sorry, a previous version is installed..." error. Tried everything, cleaning as per FAQ, even uninstalled, rebooted and reinstalled Mozilla, always with the same effect!

Any thoughts about this?
Thanks and rgds

PS: Admin, please change the sort order here, the neweste msgs beeing on top.

[241] Submitted by: rue Tuesday October 21st 2003

v.5 d1 is posted -- ahoy!

(mozdev's cvs has been down nearly 18hrs now..)

[242] Submitted by: Georgie Tuesday October 21st 2003

@206 & @224 - With all due respect, and without trying to hurt anybody, Adblock, in its present (04d31) and all earlier forms DOES NOT BLOCK anything from downloading.

I invite everybody to do the following short test:

Step 0: Exit Mozilla, empty Mozilla's on-disk cache, and restart Mozilla.

Step 1: With Adblock enabled, surf to a web site with ads you *know* Adblock "blocks".

Step 2: Surf on to some other site, no matter what. will do it.

Step 3: Now switch Mozilla to "Offline mode". You may even disconnect your internet connection if you wish.

Step 4: Disable Adblock (in Adblock prefs, or with Ctrl-Shift-B)

Step 5: And the fun part: in Mozilla, go back to the previous page with the ads "blocked" from it. You know, click the "Back" arrow.

Chances are, all the crappy ads are now flashing in your face.

Conclusion: ads are not blocked, they are downloaded and then prevented from being displayed. It also explains what is otherwise hard to grasp, that some seemingly simple web pages are very slow to download, with long seconds without anything happening in the browser window, status bar messages being the only indication of connections to notorious doubleclick and other ad servers ("Waiting for ..." and "Transferring from ..." .."", and the like.)

I am eagerly awaiting your take on this one.

Mozilla 1.4, Adblock 04d31, Win98SE.

[243] Submitted by: guest Tuesday October 21st 2003

How come doesn't have adblock v5 posted?

[244] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Tuesday October 21st 2003

Installed 0.5 d1 on moz 1.4, win xp pro: instead of "Adblock" it now says "Unloaded"??? Is that an issue?

[245] Submitted by: rue Tuesday October 21st 2003

@242: georgie, uh- well i think what you mean to say is: adblock doesn't work for you. the v.4 branch did indeed block downloads for most content, but you might frequent sites where it didn't work (script-serialized elements -- this was the exception).

thankfully, all of this is irrelevant now, since v.5 blocks everything.

@243: guest, that's because mozdev's cvs wasn't accepting uploads yesterday. the servers are still dodgy, but they're accepting connections now.

@244: aaron, got it. a silent update has been posted, the fix being trivial. EVERYONE SHOULD REINSTALL V.5 IF THEY HAVE IT.

(hehe, irony)

[246] Submitted by: Homer J Tuesday October 21st 2003

Just installed v.5 from yor site and the statusbar indicator still says "unloaded".
The cmd-shift-b shortcut dooesn't seem to work, too. The other shortcuts work.

Everything else is working great! This 0.5 branch really looks cool! :-)

(Firebird 0.7, fresh install, fresh profile)

[247] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Tuesday October 21st 2003

One problem with the "Adblock-able Items" window... when using frames it doesn't show all the content...
For example, go to and then click on the "Adblock" item in the status bar.

It only shows the items in the left frame -- not the 3 images on the right frame. :(

Also, I uninstalled, then reinstalled the update, and have the "Unloaded" still showing sometimes (but it IS working). A fix for it seems to be opening the Adblock prefs, disabling and enabling it, and closing out the prefs window. Then when you open a new window it shows "Adblock" in the statusbar. Maybe it's just me -- I'm using Moz 1.5 on XP Pro. If anyone else doesn't report this, I'll probably uninstall it again and then re-install.

[248] Submitted by: Adam H. Tuesday October 21st 2003

@246: I have the same problem, FB 0.7. 'Unloaded' persists in the statusbar and Ctrl+Shift+B doesn't work. The solution in @248 doesn't work in FB, it seems.

[249] Submitted by: rue Tuesday October 21st 2003

blast- i posted the update to mozdev, but not
:: -- it's here

[250] Submitted by: rue Tuesday October 21st 2003

@247: aaron, odd- i see all the images here. are there any console-errors?

[251] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Tuesday October 21st 2003

(Hey, rue - I'm late saying this, but welcome back! =D)
Great news! I recently installed AdBlock 0.5 d1 on Mozilla 1.5, and in regards to my previous comments (171 and 173), I'm no longer getting the crash when going to certain pages with a specific filter - I guess I have the script-blocking portion of AdBlock to thank for that :D

(On the other hand, it appears they fixed the script error related to the crash [no errors appear in the JavaScript Console from that one site], so I can't really confirm if it would've still crashed there or not =)

As for script errors in general, though - I'm seeing one in the JavaScript Console, related to AdBlock: The error's in line 134, and it shows up in the list immediately after blocking an image, be it from the right-click menu or from the "Adblock-able Items" window. It will continue to generate this error every time you block something.
And in regard to the "blocked-image-whitespace-that-won't-go-away" problem (174), I see that's fixed too - I tried blocking an image at PHP-Nuke (again, only because they're one of the few sites where that bug showed up :P), and it removed it from the page entirely, so that's fixed :D
As Homer, Aaron, and Adam mentioned, I also noticed it shows "Unloaded" in the bottom-right corner, too (using Mozilla 1.5 and Firebird 0.7 on Windows 2000 Professional SP4)...Just opening a new window will fix the problem (no disabling/enabling of AdBlock is needed), but it ONLY works for THAT window, and the problem will return once all open windows are closed and Mozilla is restarted.
Aaron - I'm seeing all the images too (on your page and in the "Adblock-able Items" list)...Not sure what's going on there =
And, if I may request a feature to appear in a future version: The "Adblock-able Items" portion of AdBlock is a *VERY* nifty feature, but you can only block one item at a time with it. That's good if all the ads are coming from one site, but if there's multiple sites to block...

...Anyway, I'm wondering - Would it be possible to either:

1) Add a preference to not close out that window when blocking something (to allow multiple blockings at once), or

2) Allow the user to use the Ctrl key (maybe the Shift key, too) and block ads from multiple sites at once?

Just a suggestion, that's all.

[252] Submitted by: Chris Tuesday October 21st 2003

Hello, I have a few comments.

First, I find it very difficult to read the grey text on your website or see the grey graphics. I have a white background. I need to disable colors to be able to read things properly. Consider changing the text color to black -- at first I went away just because I couldn't read the webpages, but a few days later decided I'd try AdBlock instead of BannerBlind.

Second -- things seem to work well in 1.5 with the filter list from "Clean My Computer". What is the problem with putting a link to this list on the main page, and writing that it is not endorsed by the project?

Third (and most important for me) -- a "me too" request that somebody else mentioned -- remove hyperlinks to blocked domains from the html. I still find a lot of textual ads that I would rather just have eliminated. You could even make the feature a bit clever by adding an option to remove the entire sentence containing the hyperlink (e.g. "Click Here to see how you too can make $$$!" but only the "Click Here" is a link).

Anyway, just some thoughts, keep it up, the world needs less advertising.


[253] Submitted by: Chris Tuesday October 21st 2003

I thought of one more thing: on Google, there are special green banners marked as "sponsored links" when you search (try it) -- if you could figure out how to block those too it would be great.

[254] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Tuesday October 21st 2003

Ah, I just noticed something on my old computer (Windows 98 SE, Mozilla 1.5, AdBlock 0.4 d31)...The "whitespace" problem doesn't occur on it either, so I guess *that* problem was related to Mozilla, not AdBlock - My mistake for thinking that it was.

[255] Submitted by: rue Wednesday October 22nd 2003

@251: WolfeDen3, regarding the "Adblock-able Items" pane, multiple-selection is definitely planned, but the goal is to auto-generate a pattern based on the selections. may take a while to land, but it's coming. in the meantime, maybe we could have a button that appends an additional entry-field to the window -- each time it's clicked. then, you can enter as many patterns as you like, and commit them all at once.

the console-error for line 134 should list a filename (ending in .js); could you post what it is? and, regarding "unloaded" status-text, i'm still trying to determine the cause.

@252, 253: Chris, filtering for links is actually easily added: just two lines of code, i believe. but it's a totally unnecessary amount of overhead for most users.

every project has a breaking-point, beyond which further-options burden rather than assist. blocking links strikes me as one of those points. as for blocking whole lines of text, that's more the domain of "intelligent" algorithms, which is an area we're looking to move into.

mozilla already has bayesian filtering components. we plan to tap into them for probability assessment on element-criteria. short of rendered-content, this could extend to pretty much any context in the page -- including lines of text. ..of course this is long-range, and we're nowhere near there yet. but, that's the direction we're headed.

regarding google, there's nothing adblock can currently do -- it's all server-side html. but you have to admit, google's ads are fairly unintrusive.

[256] Submitted by: Adam H. Wednesday October 22nd 2003

@248: working fine now, I grabbed it off of

[257] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Wednesday October 22nd 2003


Good to hear multiple-selection blocking is planned for a future release - And as for the method you mentioned, I'm curious to see how it'll be implemented into AdBlock =)
(That, and the fact that, in time and with a future build, AdBlock could "learn" what to block based on what the user selects for blocking =D)
As for the JavaScript Console error, here's what it is:

Error: Object is not defined
Source File: chrome://adblock/content/adblock.js
Line: 134

That line is listed as:
} catch(e) {}

Hopefully this will help in finding out why that line's popping up.

[258] Submitted by: rue Wednesday October 22nd 2003

@aaron: can you confirm the bug in [257] ? the code looks valid in source, and i'm thinking it's likely an issue with wolfeden's version of mozilla.

@257: WolfeDen3, incidentally, as adam indicated, the status-indicator should work now. try reinstalling from the dev-page.

@256: adam, sorry about the de-synchronized sites. the dev-pages here and on are identical now. fact, i should disable mac again.

[259] Submitted by: Mordeth Wednesday October 22nd 2003

hey rue,

i've been using the dev builds for quite some time, but really hadn't had anything to contribute until this last version. i block quite a number of very generic patterns, like "*banner*", and sites such as "**", which isn't entirely ad content. i wanted to suggest that you add in the option to have specific sites for which AdBlock isn't enabled (i.e. if i go to, AdBlock doesn't hit my filter to remove all of the images...which is, i believe. i'm too lazy to check).

also...whether or not you implement the above suggestion, it'd be nice to have some sort of AdBlock toggle in the menu...i.e. one doesn't have to open the preferences to turn it on or off (so that we could quickly toggle between off/on, for sites that have images that we're blocking but don't want to block).

other than that...this is probably THE extension that makes Firebird the only browser i use.

keep up the good work.


[260] Submitted by: Homer J Wednesday October 22nd 2003

Now I installed v.5 from this site. The statusbar indicator still shows "unloaded".
When I open a new window, everything works fine until I restart firebird.

[261] Submitted by: MrFlibble Wednesday October 22nd 2003

wicked program, except i have a problem with Adblock 0.5 d1 and Mozilla 1.5. Now that i have installed it (i was using your last 0.4 version before), no images show up at all nor is there any indication (menu items etc) that adblock is installed. i've tried the uninstall procedure without deleting the bits in the prefs file - i want to keep my ad list.

I've tried reinstalling mozilla and adblock, and previous versions, but nothing works. even though i've gone through the uninstall procedure, it doesn't look like it did before i installed adblock.
How do i turn the images back on (so i can at least surf normally)?

thank you!

[262] Submitted by: rue Wednesday October 22nd 2003

@260: Homer, i should have triple-checked: the cvs was incorrectly reporting an updated copy as committed. totally lame. the true update is now posted.

@261: mrFlibble, manual deinstallation is unrecommended, and mostly unnecessary since there's a "DeInstall" item in the pref-window.

what you probably missed is the userContent.css file. it resides in your profile::chrome directory, and if you'd rather not delete it, the adblock items within can be removed with a text-editor.

[263] Submitted by: Homer J Wednesday October 22nd 2003

This time it works! No problems now. Thanks!

[264] Submitted by: rue Wednesday October 22nd 2003

@259: m0ri, on the dev-page, there's a listing of adblock's key-shortcuts -- including a blocking-toggle, which activates / deactivates adblock completely. but yes, filter-grouping and per-site disablement are slated for near-term inclusion.

[265] Submitted by: Chris Wednesday October 22nd 2003

Hi Rue,

Thanks for the quick reply! If blocking hyperlinks is only two lines of code, I think it would be nice to give something like that a whirl ... you could just put a checkbox for it in the preferences dialog. I'm not trying to badger you into doing this, but I think a lot of people would like it -- it's a feature I've not seen on any other ad blocking program. Anyway, if you do end up doing it, I can test it out for you if you like.

One other thing -- see 259 (Mordeth) -- I would like a list of "never blocked" sites to be incorporated in AdBlock as well, but I see from 264 that that's on your list of things to do. I just went to

(a popular flash-based cartoon site), and it's kind of annoying to see the "AdBlock" thing over the Flash and have no way to get rid of it except by disabling AdBlock and refreshing the page.

Anyway, keep up the fantastic work! This program seems to have all the benefits of something like Privoxy (previously Junkbusters) without the annoyance of needing to run a proxy and is much much simpler.

[266] Submitted by: MrFlibble Wednesday October 22nd 2003

Re [262]: Thank you for the quick reply!
Yes, that did fix the problem and i now have my images back, but i still can't install adblock 0.5 d1 properly. It installs, but i don't get any menu items for adblock

[267] Submitted by: MrFlibble Wednesday October 22nd 2003

further to my 266 comment, adblock seems to be working, which is cool, but still no menus (under tools or right-clicking) or preferences!

[268] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Wednesday October 22nd 2003

Go to Tools->Adblock->Preferences, then uncheck the "Obj Tabs" button to remove the Adblock tab underneath the flash stuff :)

[269] Submitted by: Aaron Spuler Wednesday October 22nd 2003


Like the "Adblock-able Items" window :) One feature request that might be helpful in figuring out what and what not to block. Maybe a "preview" pane on the left or right side of it that shows what it is you clicked on. If the image/flash is too big, then it could get scaled down. And for those that don't like this sort of thing, it could be a preference or something, like a checkbox on the "Adblock-able" window saying "show preview"... Just a thought. Any ideas on this?

[270] Submitted by: Bjorn Stadil Wednesday October 22nd 2003

All Dev versions causes Moz 1.5 to Crash when you try and send as email a whole page. Any idead why? Took me a long time to locate the Bug, as there is no apparent link between Adblock and sending Email from within Moz.

[271] Submitted by: rue Wednesday October 22nd 2003

@267: mrFlibble, now try removing chrome.rdf and overlays from app:chrome, and the xul-cache from profile::chrome.

@269: aaron, this is the first report of obj-tabs working properly. yay!    is "Adblock-able Items" still skipping items in multiple-frames? btw, the list already flashes a border on items when you select them -- it doesn't scroll the page to each item, though; would anyone want this?

lastly, can you confirm the bug in [257] ?

@270: Bjorn, can you give me more details?- browser build-date, platform, other extensions installed.. etc.

[272] Submitted by: Wolfi Thursday October 23rd 2003

After updating to latest release versions of Mozilla 1.4.1, 1.5 and FB 0.7 for OS/2 today, I finally got a hunch, of what seems to cause quite some trouble here lately.
There appears to be quite some severe conflict going on between TBE ( and its predecessors) and adblock-0.5-dev.xpi and the previous V0.4-dev31.

* install the latest TBE 1.8-test version
* install AdBlock 0.5dev1 or 0.4dev31
* browse f.e. to and try to type some characters into the Search-For box at the top, left of the yellow go button. Besides from rare exceptions, it won't take any characters at all and you also won't be able to have any of those p/d menu links functional from any of those 7 blue tabs, directly below that Search-For box.

The problem is reliably reproducable here with Mozilla 1.4.1 (VACPP) and 1.5 (GnuCC) installed in new directories and with new profiles. Modern or classic theme doesn't matter.
Often there also is "Mozilla -P " not working anymore (Mozilla won't finish loading and just aborts) and I have to use "-ProfileManager" instead and from there, the very same profile name, to eventually get it up.

Since I don't know, if TBE is somehow interferring with AdBlock or vice versa, I very much hope, that you might be able to get to the bottom of this.

I also reported this to the TBE forum.

[273] Submitted by: WolfeDen3 Thursday October 23rd 2003


The updated version of 0.5 d1 fixed the "Unloaded" problem - The current and new windows properly show "AdBlock" when it's enabled, and "Disabled" when it's...Well, disabled =P

As for the problem I'm having, I think it's profile-related (in some cases, it would generate the same error multiple times). Here's what I did (using Mozilla 1.5):

* Created a new profile
* Installed AdBlock
* Closed browser
* Reloaded browser (crashed on Win2K for some reason, which it did last time I installed AdBlock 0.5 d1 as well - Removed XUL.mfl and it loaded up properly)
* AdBlock no longer generates errors on right-click blocking or blocking through "AdBlock-able Items"

In Firebird 0.7, the current profile gave a *very* different error, and didn't block the image until the page was reloaded. However, after messing around with uninstalling/reinstalling AdBlock and switching between profiles (unlike with Mozilla, it didn't crash), that bug stopped coming up on my current profile (it never happened at all with the new one).

Something in my current Mozilla profile (possibly an extension, but I'm not sure) is causing it to generate that error, but I'm not sure what. The good thing is, it's not something in AdBlock =)

[274] Submitted by: qbase Thursday October 23rd 2003

WOW! The new dev build 0.5 is awsome! It really blocks everything, almost every webpage loads instantly. No more waiting for lagged banners and scripts :D

Keep up the good work!

[275] Submitted by: MrFlibble Thursday October 23rd 2003

Re: @271 - thank you Rue, that works fine now.
Btw, the object tab bit is wicked!

[276] Submitted by: rue Thursday October 23rd 2003

Announcement: the forum has moved.
The New Adblock Forum

(the link will be updated shortly to reflect the move; please do not post further on this page.)

For questions or comments about adblock, please send a message to the adblock mailing list.
For questions or comments not about a specific project, please read our feedback page.
This page was last updated on Oct 23, 2003.
Copyright © 2003. All rights reserved.