You've probably read a lot about the upcoming manifest V3 for Google Chrome extensions and the controversy about changes affecting ad blockers and other extensions on the platform.
A first draft of the Manifest V3 for Chrome extensions was released publicly in January 2019. Criticism erupted because one of the changes would destroy ad blocking features in Chrome extensions.
Without going into too much detail: content protection on Chrome uses an API called webRequest API to block certain elements of web site visits. Google's plan was then to make the API a "legible" and move blocking functionality to a new API called declarativeNetRequest API.
One of the biggest issues with the API was that it had a fixed limit of 30,000; Popular ad-blocking filter lists like EasyList have more than doubled the rules so it would be impossible to load all filters if the new manifest file was launched by Google. One of Google's claims that extensions that would use the old API adversely affect performance were rejected.
Raymond Hill, the creator of uBlock Origin and uMatrix, noted that the change would end his extensions to Google Chrome and similar comments were made by other developers.
Google attempted to resolve concerns in May by making small changes to the API. The company added an opportunity to use 5000 dynamic rules, but the overall consensus was that the restrictions were still limiting.
Companies that use Chrome as the core of their browsers, e.g. Brave or Vivaldi were quickly aware that they would find ways around the border.
Google announced changes it plans to make to the API & nbsp; for Declaring Network Query that would increase the API & # 39; limit to 150,000. Google also noted that it is actively exploring the possibilities of including other methods that can help expansion developers exploit the API better.
We are actively investigating other ways to expand this API, including adding methods to get matched feedback feedback and support for richer redirects that use URL manipulation and regular expressions. In addition, we are currently planning to change the regulatory limit from a maximum of 30k rules per. Extension to a global maximum of 150k rules.
Google notes that the proposed changes were never designed to "prevent or weaken" ad blockers on the Chrome platform and that Google's main motivation behind the change was "to allow developers to create safer and more effective ad blocks".
Another argument that Google produces to validate the API change is that the API has been misused by previously malicious developers to access the user's "credentials, accounts, or personal information".
The argument is scary considering that Google has previously announced that it will only remove the blocking part of the webRequest API when Manifest V3 launches. It appears that malicious extension developers can still use it to access user data by monitoring requests.
Developers have expressed other concerns as Google focuses only on a rules-based approach. Any functionality not based on rules may not be supported by Chrome extensions if the changes begin in the current form.
Now you : What are you taking on Google & # 39; s message?