Implement important / badfilter keywords

[mapx]

Implement a new filter option / keyword: important

The filter option important means to ignore all exception filters (those prefixed with @@).

It applies only to network block filters. The important option will allow you
to block with 100% certainty specific network requests.

Example: ||google-analytics.com^$important,third-party will block all network requests
to google-analytics.com, disregarding any existing network exception filters.
 Another example: ||twitter.com^$important,third-party. Etc.

from ​https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Static-filter-syntax#important

---

Implement a new filter option / keyword: badfilter

Used to prevent a filter from being loaded in memory
One would use https:*_ad_$badfilter to prevent the filter 
https:*_ad_ from being loaded in memory. 
The badfilter option indicates to uBO to not load in memory
 the functional form of a filter. 
For example, https:*_ad_$badfilter would not prevent loading 
into memory the filter https:*_ad_$script, or https:*_ad_$domain=example.com

from ​https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/issues/192#issuecomment-285904675

---

Where to use such options ?

Example:

Pages where whitelisting filters are necessary to fight anti adblocking circumventions.

existing filter in easylist:
@@||sankakucomplex.com^$script

The webmasters are using the exception pushing a first-party script:
https://chan.sankakucomplex.com/javascripts/ps.js
injecting popups / popunders in the page.

A normal user has no weapon, the easylist authors are volunteers and sometimes ignore such issues or delaying for months.

The current UI in ABP platform does not offer a way to fix the issue.
ABP legacy (FF) is dead.

[SMed79]

Similar case with depositfiles.com reported a few months ago ​#p122995.

[greiner]

While $important might help in the short-term, I don't think it's a good idea beyond that because it's merely a workaround. Rather than that, we could introduce a proper model for filter prioritization.

What's the purpose of $badfilter? It sounds like it's the same as commenting out a filter based on ​this comment.

[mapx]

it's not the same: while $important overrides a wrong or too broad exception, $badfilter simply "removes" any filter (marks it "invisible"). $badfilter can destroy an $important filter too

[mapx]

And ...not for short-term, $important is useful maintaining the exception in the list but overriding dynamically for a specific case (faster and without needing to go into UI, enable / disable a filter etc)

[mapx]

see where could be useful $badfilter:
https://issues.adblockplus.org/ticket/6083#comment:9

[greiner]

it's not the same: while $important overrides a wrong or too broad exception, $badfilter simply "removes" any filter (marks it "invisible"). $badfilter can destroy an $important filter too

That's not what I said. I said that $badfilter looks similar to a filter that's commented out (i.e. disabled).

Based on the comment you linked to, it seems that $badfilter is supposed to disable a filter that's in a different filter list - similar to how element hiding exception rules work. In that case, I do see the value of this feature although I do find the name "badfilter" confusing.

And ...not for short-term, $important is useful maintaining the exception in the list but overriding dynamically for a specific case

The reason why I think it's a workaround is because it won't work anymore as soon as you're trying to override a filter that's marked as $important. On the other hand, some proper prioritization model could allow overriding any filter, irregardless of its priority.

[mapx]

the filter marked as $important can be disabled by $badfilter (maximum priority).

[greiner]

Replying to mapx:

the filter marked as $important can be disabled by $badfilter (maximum priority).

Just to make sure I understand you. What you're suggesting is this!?

Highest priority

• filter with $badfilter option (disables the given filter)
• blocking filter with $important option (overrides any exception filter)
• exception filter (overrides any blocking filter)
• blocking filter

Lowest priority

Still, some more generic prioritization model could be more beneficial in the long-term. Here's how this could look like (based on HTML's "tabindex" and CSS' "z-index"):

Highest priority

• filter with $priority=-1 option (disables the given filter)
• filter with $priority=2 option (overrides any filters with priority 1 or lower)
  • exception filter
  • blocking filter
• filter with $priority=1 option (overrides any filters with priority 0)
  • exception filter
  • blocking filter
• filter with $priority=0 or without $priority option
  • exception filter
  • blocking filter

Lowest priority

[mapx]

Replying to greiner:

Replying to mapx:

the filter marked as $important can be disabled by $badfilter (maximum priority).

Just to make sure I understand you. What you're suggesting is this!?

Highest priority

• filter with $badfilter option (disables the given filter)
• blocking filter with $important option (overrides any exception filter)
• exception filter (overrides any blocking filter)
• blocking filter

Lowest priority

yes, exactly, the $badfilter should disable only the exact filter from the list (no wildcards, combinations)

[sebastian]

Sorry, but we switched to GitLab. If this issue is still relevant, please file it again in the ​new issue tracker.