Chrome Web Store migration plan? · uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues · Discussion #2977 (original) (raw)

Has @gorhill or anyone else stated the exact plan for the current Chrome Web Store listing of uBlock Origin? Will it be updated to the Manifest V3-compliant Lite version, or will people have to install the Lite version on their own?

You must be logged in to vote

I haven't decided yet how this will work, and I don't know what is feasible. Forcing uBO Lite on people might not be the best move, as this would essentially obliterate all customization they might have made to uBO -- uBO Lite is too different from uBO to make a seamless transition. People can already move on their own to uBO Lite if they want, probably safest approach is to explicitly opt-in to uBO Lite, some might prefer to install a another MV3-based content blocker.

View full answer

I haven't decided yet how this will work, and I don't know what is feasible. Forcing uBO Lite on people might not be the best move, as this would essentially obliterate all customization they might have made to uBO -- uBO Lite is too different from uBO to make a seamless transition. People can already move on their own to uBO Lite if they want, probably safest approach is to explicitly opt-in to uBO Lite, some might prefer to install a another MV3-based content blocker.

You must be logged in to vote

7 replies

Maybe uBO should alert it's users beforehand that Google is going to disable it soon and all custom stuff should be backupped?

I guess, and point out to uBO Lite as an alternative. Not sure I would be able to replace uBO with uBO Lite, as this would cause the same extension published twice in the Chrome Web Store.

For now it's still months in the future ("June 2024 + 1-X months"), there is still time to think about all this.

Maybe someone made converter uBo-backup.txt to AdGuard-mv3-backup.json.

I guess, and point out to uBO Lite as an alternative.

i think it would be a good idea to also suggest switching to firefox (though i doubt google would allow that, maybe it’s worth a shot?).

many users seem to be very misinformed about the issue, saying that they’ll just switch to edge or another chromium fork not knowing that they’ll have the same problem. i think it’s important that users are made aware of what their options are, and that switching to firefox is the best solution.

uBO probably has >50 million users on chromium browsers.

The main question should probably center around whether to give those users up or not.

Not updating the extension for v3 means that most of those users will likely migrate to no blocker at all or shady ad blockers. Most will not move to uBO Lite.

Updating the extension for v3 means those who use the enterprise policy won't be able to use the old version for another year. The number of users doing that will probably be irrelevant (in the thousands).

Updating the extension in line with v3 (that is, replacing it with uBO Lite but keeping the uBO name) is probably the best solution from a standpoint of influence over ad-blocking in the chromium ecosystem. You could rename the current uBO Lite and make it an experimental or beta version. Adguard devs have shown that you can still do a lot of stuff with v3 that protects users.

If the extension is not moved to v3, a warning should probably be pushed to all users quickly, possibly with the recommendation to back up the settings and import to Firefox, and with a link to the extension store, to direct those to uBO Lite who want to stay with chromium.

uBO probably has >50 million users on chromium browsers.

Not updating the extension for v3 means that most of those users will likely migrate to no blocker at all or shady ad blockers. Most will not move to uBO Lite.

Updating the extension in line with v3 (that is, replacing it with uBO Lite but keeping the uBO name) is probably the best solution from a standpoint of influence over ad-blocking in the chromium ecosystem. You could rename the current uBO Lite and make it an experimental or beta version. Adguard devs have shown that you can still do a lot of stuff with v3 that protects users.

I agree, there's a lot of room here for bad guys to take advantage. It's like suddenly not renewing the domain name, and a malicious actor claims it to push fake versions of the software.

I am re-opening this because I still have final decisions to make.

Here is the official Manifest V2 (MV2) deprecation timeline: https://developer.chrome.com/docs/extensions/develop/migrate/mv2-deprecation-timeline

June 2024 + 1-X months: Chrome MV2 deprecation stable rollout

This means that starting July 2024, uBO could be disabled/removed at any time.

However, there is a way in Chromium-based browser to extend availability of MV2 to June 2025:

Enterprises using the ExtensionManifestV2Availability policy to ensure the continued functioning of Manifest V2 extensions in their organization will have one additional year - until June 2025 - to migrate the Manifest V2 extensions in their organization.

I did experiment with ExtensionManifestV2Availability policy this weekend and it is being recognized by my Chromium browser:

file: /etc/chromium/policies/managed/ubo-policies.json

content:

{ "ExtensionManifestV2Availability": 2 }

For other OS, the way to set policies will be different.

Result:

So if this is a valid way to extend uBO's life time in Chromium-based browsers, users will have to set this policy in their browser. Possible the community could come up with tools so that users with little to no technical knowledge can use these. More details on how to set that policy in all OSes: https://chromeenterprise.google/policies/#ExtensionManifestV2Availability.

Note that setting that policy raise a warnign in the browser:

There are still questions to be answered:

• Will I be able to keep updating uBO in Chrome Web Store?
• Will this really work in mainstream Google Chrome browser?
  • See https://chromeenterprise.google/policies/

    Use of these policies outside of your organisation (for example, in a publicly distributed programme) is considered malware and will likely be labelled as malware by Google and anti-virus vendors.

You must be logged in to vote

18 replies

I followed the instructions and the policy seems to be up too but I don't know why I'm getting " your browser is administered by your organization" is there a way to fix that?

that is normal and Manifest v2 will turn on until next year

No fix, because you set an enterprize policy, this is just expected and 100% normal behavior.

I made an AUR package to make use of this easy: chrome-manifest-v2-policy

Could you please briefly explain to us non-programmers how to use the package? Thanks.

Here is how to enable ExtensionManifestV2Availability on macOS (if you want to):

1. Grab the com.google.Chrome.plist:

1. Use the mcxToProfile tool (https://github.com/timsutton/mcxToProfile) to generate .mobileconfig file. You will also need to install pyobjc if you haven't.

python3 ./mcxToProfile.py --plist com.google.Chrome.plist --identifier [UUIDv4]

Replace the UUID with your own randomly generated UUID! And remember that UUID, you should always use the same UUID when creating the updated policy later.

1. You should find the generated .mobileconfig file under the same folder. Install it.
2. Check chrome://policy. If ExtensionManifestV2Availability doesn't show up, click Reload Policies:

For the obvious reason, I won't upload my already generated .mobileconfig file here. Create one for your own.

You must be logged in to vote

4 replies

It should be --indentifier-from-profile or --indentifier. You can't use both at the same time.

And --indentifier-from-profile only works if you have an existing UUID that you're reusing.

You can also directly edit the plist instead of applying a profile:

defaults write com.google.Chrome.plist ExtensionManifestV2Availability -int 2

com.google.Chrome.plist can be replaced with the appropriate .plist name if you're using a different chromium browser. The chrome://policy page can still be used to ensure it applied correctly.

Thanks !
if you have the error "ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'Foundation'", even after with pyobjc module installed.
See timsutton/mcxToProfile#25
You need to use an other Python 3 interpreter than Apple one...
Also "--identifier-from-profile com.google.Chrome.plist" argument needs to be removed :
python3 ./mcxToProfile.py --plist com.google.Chrome.plist --identifier [UUIDv4]

I just got it to run again, using the following plist and dropping it into /Library/Managed Preferences/com.google.Chrome.plist without needing a .mobileconfig:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE plist PUBLIC "-//Apple//DTD PLIST 1.0//EN" "http://www.apple.com/DTDs/PropertyList-1.0.dtd">
<plist version="1.0">
<dict>
  <key>ExtensionInstallForcelist</key>
  <array>
    <string>cjpalhdlnbpafiamejdnhcphjbkeiagm;https://clients2.google.com/service/update2/crx</string>
  </array>
  <key>ExtensionManifestV2Availability</key>
  <integer>2</integer>
</dict>
</plist>

This forces uBlockOrigin as a required extension, I couldn't flip the switch otherwise.

Chrome version: 138.0.7204.101

chrome://policy/ looks like this:

At Brave we're planning to keep alive the option to keep allow users to install select MV2 extensions brave-browser-stable --enable-features=ExtensionsManifestV2 cc: @ShivanKaul (Privacy Engineering Head) @antonok-edm (Adblock Rust dev)

• uBO
• uMatrix
• NoScript
• Adguard (May or may not be needed)

@gorhill Would it be possible to keep updating the MV2 Chrome crx extension post transition. If not in the play store. via Github?

You must be logged in to vote

13 replies

you can enable brave://flags/#brave-extensions-manifest-v2

No such flag listed in brave://flags, only ryan's method works.

Yes because it's still in Nightly.

Extension package is still hosted at googleusercontent.com, and google could delete it if they make their mind, so Brave should start hostinng extension packages too for mv2 and beyond.

Enough will be drag and drop with xml url in manfiest for compiled localy crx.

Simply writing the policy preference item to the plist of Chrome or Brave seems to work fine in MacOS:

Chrome
defaults write com.google.Chrome.plist ExtensionManifestV2Availability -int 2

Chrome Beta
defaults write com.google.Chrome.beta.plist ExtensionManifestV2Availability -int 2

Brave
defaults write com.brave.Browser.plist ExtensionManifestV2Availability -int 2

Brave Beta
defaults write com.brave.Browser.beta.plist ExtensionManifestV2Availability -int 2

You must be logged in to vote

2 replies

Sadly I can't figure out how to do this for Edge. It seems like it should be defaults write com.microsoft.edgemac.plist ExtensionManifestV2Availability -int 2, but after running that, quitting the browser, reloading the policies and checking ExtensionManifestV2Availability, it still reports "Not Set".

Simply writing the policy preference item to the plist of Chrome or Brave seems to work fine in MacOS:

Chrome defaults write com.google.Chrome.plist ExtensionManifestV2Availability -int 2

Thank you @robert-corlett - This worked perfectly for me on MacOS.

For Vivaldi: run this vivaldi-stable --enable-features=ExtensionsManifestV2 for Linux works

You must be logged in to vote

1 reply

Also for Vivaldi users: they will remove MV2 support once Google Chrome removes it. They show no intention of trying to keep it (Unlike Brave).

Thanks to Chrome Web Store removing the featured badge from manifest v2 extensions, people are now being sent to the scammy "ublock"

This may be solved by nominating uBlock Origin Lite for the featured label

You must be logged in to vote

2 replies

That's just the beginning. I don't understand why @gorhill is allowing this to happen to the product he put so much effort into.

I don't understand why @gorhill is allowing this to happen

Because he does not control what Google does?

On my Ubuntu:

Operating System: Ubuntu 22.04.5 LTS x86_64 
Kernel: 6.8.0-60-generic 
Shell: /bin/bash 5.1.16 
Python: 3.10.12 

it got installed here, probably via apt:

cat /opt/google/chrome/google-chrome
#!/bin/bash
#
# Copyright 2011 The Chromium Authors
# Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
# found in the LICENSE file.

# Let the wrapped binary know that it has been run through the wrapper.
export CHROME_WRAPPER="`readlink -f "$0"`"

HERE="`dirname "$CHROME_WRAPPER"`"

# We include some xdg utilities next to the binary, and we want to prefer them
# over the system versions when we know the system versions are very old. We
# detect whether the system xdg utilities are sufficiently new to be likely to
# work for us by looking for xdg-settings. If we find it, we leave $PATH alone,
# so that the system xdg utilities (including any distro patches) will be used.
if ! command -v xdg-settings &> /dev/null; then
  # Old xdg utilities. Prepend <span class="katex"><span class="katex-mathml"><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><semantics><mrow><mi>H</mi><mi>E</mi><mi>R</mi><mi>E</mi><mi>t</mi><mi>o</mi></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">HERE to </annotation></semantics></math></span><span class="katex-html" aria-hidden="true"><span class="base"><span class="strut" style="height:0.6833em;"></span><span class="mord mathnormal" style="margin-right:0.08125em;">H</span><span class="mord mathnormal">EREt</span><span class="mord mathnormal">o</span></span></span></span>PATH to use ours instead.
  export PATH="$HERE:$PATH"
else
  # Use system xdg utilities. But first create mimeapps.list if it doesn't
  # exist; some systems have bugs in xdg-mime that make it fail without it.
  xdg_app_dir="${XDG_DATA_HOME:-$HOME/.local/share/applications}"
  mkdir -p "$xdg_app_dir"
  [ -f "$xdg_app_dir/mimeapps.list" ] || touch "$xdg_app_dir/mimeapps.list"
fi

export CHROME_VERSION_EXTRA="stable"

# We don't want bug-buddy intercepting our crashes. http://crbug.com/24120
export GNOME_DISABLE_CRASH_DIALOG=SET_BY_GOOGLE_CHROME

# Sanitize std{in,out,err} because they'll be shared with untrusted child
# processes (http://crbug.com/376567).
exec < /dev/null
exec > >(exec cat)
exec 2> >(exec cat >&2)

# Note: exec -a below is a bashism.
exec -a "$0" "$HERE/chrome" "$@"

so this was needed:

sudo mkdir -p /etc/opt/chrome/policies/managed/
sudo nano /etc/opt/chrome/policies/managed/ubo-policies.json

with the above trick, then:

pkill chrome
/opt/google/chrome/google-chrome

and this policy appears.

Even without this policy, still the "legacy" install of Ublock still works, after clicking "yes, you nasty Google Chrome, I do want to keep it and shall keep it" now and then .

You must be logged in to vote

0 replies

I'm a user of Chrome Dev Channel, 139.0.7246.0 has already removed the support of ExtensionManifestV2Availability policy.

I find another way to continue using the uBlock Origin by adding commandline parameter:

chrome.exe --disable-features=ExtensionManifestV2Unsupported,ExtensionManifestV2Disabled

And I also find that WebRequestBlocking is allowed for extensions that are installed using ExtensionInstallForcelist policy(for education and enterprise use) in MV3. I wonder whether there will be a MV3 but WebRequestBlocking version of uBlock Origin for longer support.

You must be logged in to vote

12 replies

And I also find that WebRequestBlocking is allowed for extensions that are installed using ExtensionInstallForcelist policy(for education and enterprise use) in MV3. I wonder whether there will be a MV3 but WebRequestBlocking version of uBlock Origin for longer support.

MV3 extensions can also use webRequestBlocking via the --allowlisted-extension-id command line flag, and using that to port uBO works fine: https://github.com/r58Playz/uBlock-mv3

Holy shit the August update remove it but when i saw your method it actually works!

In my case it didn't remove the add-on and the flags work.

--disable-features=ExtensionManifestV2Unsupported,ExtensionManifestV2Disabled %U still works for me under GNU/Linux, but I can't find a way to make it work on Windows. Any idea?

You paste into the location field and it doesn't work? Remember about the space after " or the bare path after .exe without that character.

On my side it even works with Windows Server 2019 (this is supposedly equivalent to Windows 10 from the 1809/18H2 line) with Chrome 147.

Unless Chrome has already removed this parameter on line 150 or a significant part of the code that is technical debt due to lack of updates.

I just started my laptop, Chrome updated itself, so I lost the extension

I activate the function again with chrome://flags/#allow-legacy-mv2-extensions and using the unpacked version

You must be logged in to vote

2 replies

On my gmail-com profile this too happened, and I solved it the same way.
Enabled the flag and installed the chromium zip version.

My Workspace account profiles all have the MV2 extension set, so no issues there, yet.

For an experimental group of users, I replaced uBO with uB Lite earlier this year, and it works decently well.
Including centrally managing an exclusion list, so certain websites are excluded from content blocking.

On my gmail-com profile this too happened, and I solved it the same way. Enabled the flag and installed the chromium zip version.

That was exactly what happened to me. I normally don't have the updated automatic, but probably Google is enforcing it

For an experimental group of users, I replaced uBO with uB Lite earlier this year, and it works decently well. Including centrally managing an exclusion list, so certain websites are excluded from content blocking.

I tried the Lite, but I just don't like it, haha. Too many years learning and improving the use of my filters, and now changing it, so sad, haha

Hello people i just made a bookmarklet if you want to put into your browser (this will work with any mv2 extension on the chrome web store) (last updated: jul 14, 2025 19:53 CT (one of the merica timezones))

PLEASE DO NOT RUN THIS CODE WITHOUT KNOWING (even though it is safe) PLEASE LOOK AT ANY CODE BEFORE BLINDLY RUNNING IT

Notice: Google will ask you on the next launch to remove it and it will disable the extension, but you can choose to keep it by going to chrome://extensions then clicking on the three dots right where uBO is listed as outdated/dangerous/doesn't follow our policies, then simply click keep, there you go!

javascript:(function(){if(location.host!=="chromewebstore.google.com"){alert("Run on chrome webstore");return;}const buttons=document.getElementsByClassName("UywwFc-LgbsSe");const texts=document.getElementsByClassName("UWpb5");const recommendtext=document.getElementsByClassName("iBNCIb");const learnmorebtns=document.getElementsByClassName("mUIrbf-kSE8rc-FoKg4d-sLO9V-YoZ4jf");for(i=0;i<buttons.length;i++){buttons[i].removeAttribute("disabled")};for(i=0;i<texts.length;i++){texts[i].innerText="Script ran successfully :3"};for(i=0;i<recommendtext.length;i++){recommendtext[i].innerText="Recommendations"};for(i=0;i<learnmorebtns.length;i++){if(!learnmorebtns[i].classList.contains("HVfBne"))learnmorebtns[i].setAttribute("style","display:none!important;");}})();

Here is the code listed out here (with comments)

(function(){ // run in its own function/scope so it doesn't make a mess of the global scope or we can hide from mr goggle idfk lmao (i mean i do know ykw i mean) if (location.host !== "chromewebstore.google.com") { // Basically a check to make sure you are running this on the chrome webstore alert("Run on chrome web store"); return; }

const buttons = document.getElementsByClassName("UywwFc-LgbsSe"); // Add to Chrome buttons
const texts = document.getElementsByClassName("UWpb5"); // Texts that say "oh no you cant have your mv2 extension"
const recommendtext = document.getElementsByClassName("iBNCIb"); // The title for extensions that are similar and are replacements
const learnmorebtns = document.getElementsByClassName("mUIrbf-kSE8rc-FoKg4d-sLO9V-YoZ4jf"); // The learn more buttons that are on the alert this also includes share buttons but don't worry they wont be harmed

for (i = 0; i < buttons.length; i++) {
    buttons[i].removeAttribute("disabled"); // Remove the disabled attribute litterally thats all that is needed
}
for (i = 0; i < texts.length; i++) {
    texts[i].innerText = "Script ran successfully :3"; // Change the alert text to tell you the script ran
}
for (i = 0; i < recommendtext.length; i++) {
    recommendtext[i].innerText = "Recommendations"; // change the Try one of these alternatives to Recommendations
}
for (i = 0; i < learnmorebtns.length; i++) {
    if (!learnmorebtns[i].classList.contains("HVfBne")) // The share button has the HVfBne class so we can use that to filter out of removing the share buttons and only remove the learn more buttons
        learnmorebtns[i].setAttribute("style", "display:none!important;"); // tell the learn more button to get the hell out
}

})(); // call the function that is created

For Chrome on windows (prob mac as well) this does not work so please do the following below

1. Open a new tab and navigate to chrome://flags
2. Enable Temporarily unexpire M136 flags. and Temporarily unexpire M137 flags.
3. (For people who can't find the flag above) Please search Temporarily unexpire and enable any options that are listed with M###
4. Restart Chrome
5. Go back into chrome://flags
6. search mv2
7. Disable Extension Manifest V2 Deprecation Stage Flags, theres 3 of em.
8. Enable Allow legacy extension manifest versions
9. Restart Chrome
10. Now you should be able to install it even without needing my bookmarklet.

You must be logged in to vote

11 replies

it works on my Mac! YES!!!!!!!

It doesn't work anymore! Chrome 140 - Help Please

Use attribute in shortcut or run browser from terminal with same attribute/parameter:

--disable-features=ExtensionManifestV2Unsupported,ExtensionManifestV2Disabled

There must be two minuses when someone uses fonts with ligatures like Fira Code.

Optionally, move your profile to Edge (and back up your uBO settings), because Edge still does not need this attribute.

Did you say that? I activated it again gives manifest error! I can't install manual

After updateing to Windows 11 i also faced this problem

what i did was

first go to chrome://flags/

then enable Allow legacy extension manifest versions

after that i just loaded the unpacked extension, DONE !

You must be logged in to vote

1 reply

The flags for unlocking installation from CWS or dragging&dropping signed CRX into chrome://extensions still work.

Additionally, upgrading from Windows 10 to 11 or from 11 23H2 to 24H2 did not cause a problem, even you jumped from Windows 7 or 8.1 to 10 or 11 (as if the mechanism allows updating outdated Chrome 109 to 139 without reinstallation).

It doesn't work anymore! Chrome 140 - Help Please

You must be logged in to vote

6 replies

Did you say that? I activated it again gives manifest error! I can't install manual

I still can't install both

I was able to open on a Mac via terminal like this:

/Applications/Google\ Chrome.app/Contents/MacOS/Google\ Chrome --disable-features=ExtensionManifestV2Unsupported,ExtensionManifestV2Disabled

I made myself an AppleScript for easier usage:

do shell script "/Applications/Google\\ Chrome.app/Contents/MacOS/Google\\ Chrome --disable-features=ExtensionManifestV2Unsupported,ExtensionManifestV2Disabled"

Use attribute in shortcut or run browser from terminal with same attribute/parameter:

--disable-features=ExtensionManifestV2Unsupported,ExtensionManifestV2Disabled

There must be two minuses when someone uses fonts with ligatures like Fira Code.

Optionally, move your profile to Edge (and back up your uBO settings), because Edge still does not need this attribute. Of the remaining alternatives, Brave and perhaps Opera remain; Supremium/Thorium did not have a release based on code 140.

Thanks! this worked for now on Chrome v140.xxx... but what i wasnt sure about is should we be enabling (or unnecessary) the M138 and M139 flags as well with the added attribute/parameter added to the exe launcher since they removed m136 and m137 or enable/disable the Extension Disable Unsupported Developer flag?

I got it work without any of those 3 flags i just mentioned, just wonder though if I should hard enable or disable any of those as well for better compatibility or to be ahead of the curve.

Haven't resorted to loading a packed crx package route just yet, which I'm assuming will be the last possible outpost that will be available to us next, before these Ggel f*s fully disable these extension workarounds.

I currently use ungoogled-chromium 140.0.7339.137 and able to install ubo 1.66.0

You must be logged in to vote

2 replies

Maybe reverted some code to unable install due to the possibility of using MV2 within the framework of corporate emulation, which was unable to switch to MV3 or migrate to Firefox, Brave, perhaps Opera, or Edge within three years.

Adding commandline parameter:
chrome.exe --disable-features=ExtensionManifestV2Unsupported,ExtensionManifestV2Disabled
Still works in Chromium Development build 144.0.7500.0. 😀️

You must be logged in to vote

4 replies

Adding commandline parameter: chrome.exe --disable-features=ExtensionManifestV2Unsupported,ExtensionManifestV2Disabled Still works in Chromium Development build 144.0.7500.0. 😀️

I've been doing this for over a month now and works great, however, with one huge caveat which I forget at least once a day which causes the whole whole app to crash and having to relaunch and restore everything.

Anyone noticed that when you click the Omni box the program will crash with this command flag being used?

I may have some flags or something on that's causing this if no one else is reported it for a month now but thought I'd ask. The weirdest thing about it is that it doesn't happen when you open a new tab in your typing or clicking in the Omni box.

Bro it worked great on Linux on Chrome Version 142.0.7444.59. Thanks!

This method has successfully worked for me for Google Chrome Stable 142.0.7444.60 and for Google Chrome Dev 143.0.7489.0 on macOS 15.5! All the Manifest v2 extensions are back and I am even able to freshly install them from Chrome Web Store.

Here's the command I use to run the app:
/Applications % open Google\ Chrome.app --args --disable-features=ExtensionManifestV2Unsupported,ExtensionManifestV2Disabled

UPD 19.11.2025: both browsers has been updated and the trick has successfully worked on Chrome Dev 144.0.7524.0 and Chrome Stable 142.0.7444.176.

@HGP23 I don't experience any Omnibox issues after enabling these flags.

添加命令行参数： chrome.exe --disable-features=ExtensionManifestV2Unsupported,ExtensionManifestV2Disabled 在 Chromium 开发版本144.0.7500.0中仍然有效。😀️
Chrome 已是最新版本
版本 142.0.7444.60（正式版本） （64 位）---按照此法，我也成功了！win11系统！！！！感谢！！！

Why can't u just make a god dammed Manifest V3 compatible version of ublock?

You must be logged in to vote

9 replies

It can't block YouTube ads effectively

It does, even better than uBO itself when you factor in that uBOL does reliably at browser launch, which uBO can't do in Chromium-based browsers (though this works fine in Firefox-based browsers for both uBO or uBOL). If you have issues with Youtube ads not being blocked, most likely a configuration issues with other interfering extensions. I cannot reproduce Youtube ads issue in any browsers with uBOL.

And ofc I don't know how to do it myself unless I spend time on research but I'd rather use another blocker instead then

Feel free to use what you want. If you want full uBO to work in MV3, that's not possible. MV3 removes the APIs required for uBO to work. Without those APIs, uBO is useless.

"Why can't you just do god damned X?"
"Why can't you just do god damned Y?"

People, if you think some "god damned" work can "just" be done, please undertake it yourself and you'll know why. Don't just come here to ask and demand like that.

And yes, as said above, uBOL also injects the scriptlets much more reliable than uBO on Chromium browsers.

Thanks bros. I get the picture now. Hopefully the other browsers will stay on V2 for a while. Btw the only thing that worked for me was the command line trick:

--disable-features=ExtensionManifestV2Unsupported,ExtensionManifestV2Disabled

This comment was marked as off-topic.

添加命令行参数：
chrome.exe --disable-features=ExtensionManifestV2Unsupported,ExtensionManifestV2Disabled

解决的！Chrome 已是最新版本
版本 142.0.7444.60（正式版本） （64 位）---成功了！感谢！

You must be logged in to vote

1 reply

解决的！Chrome 已是最新版本
版本 142.0.7444.60（正式版本） （64 位）---成功了！

You must be logged in to vote

0 replies

This morning I got the 145.0.7560.0 Development version of Chromium and the commandline parameter/shortcut modification still does the job. 👍️
chrome --disable-features=ExtensionManifestV2Unsupported,ExtensionManifestV2Disabled

You must be logged in to vote

3 replies

As for me, I'm ready to migrate to Firefox as soon as Adlock Origin on Chromium can no longer be used...

There's no "Adlock Origin" (if there is, that must be scam). The download page clearly states that uBO is NOT an adblocker, and the author commited to keep correcting such a mislabeling: #875 (comment)

This morning I got the 145.0.7560.0 Development version of Chromium and the commandline parameter/shortcut modification still does the job. 👍️ chrome --disable-features=ExtensionManifestV2Unsupported,ExtensionManifestV2Disabled

You are literally a hero. I cannot believe it was that simple.

This comment was marked as off-topic.

Can anybody confirm if the workarounds still work on current Canary? We've had somebody on Reddit comment that uBO uninstalled itself in Canary for them.

You must be logged in to vote

22 replies

When installing Chromium Development Build 150.0.7853.0 today, my remaining mv2 extensions were all turned off, including uBO...
Turning them on again was still possible.

@nicolaasjan How do you turn them on again?

Thanks, I got it, Inspect element did a good job.
Just remove the disabled attribute of the toggle switch.

I did notice that the webstore extension for the dev build hasn't been updated since 9th May,
Did Google block it for gorhill to update it?

The dev build is pending review, I published a new version two days ago.

Chrome Dev 150.0.7865.2 doesn't allow the mv2 extensions to be turned on already.

@user334 At least in v150, a workaround still exists. Just remove the disabled attribute, and it could be turned on.

But for v151, the workaround doesn't work anymore.

You gotta patch Chrome.dll for v151 for g_allow_mv2_for_testing.

You must be logged in to vote

1 reply

Will a simple hex patch work?
What hex values need to be found?
What should they be replaced with?