You are not logged in.

#1 2014-01-10 11:24:00

Registered: 2012-05-14
Posts: 32

Questions about ad-blocking hosts file

I use a hosts file that's consolidated from multiple well-known sources to block ad/malware/tracking servers, and it works surprisingly well.
After all the researching while doing it, I came up with a question, though. Is there any difference performance-wise with the three following methods?

  • ad_server_domain

  • ad_server_domain

  • ad_server_domain (with local server running to respond with empty data)

As I understand it,, which I'm currently using, simply means unresolvable, and is immediately interrupted.
With the second one it works virtually the same, but some argues that there's still a timeout with every request, although no actual connection is established.

The above two has one tiny annoyance: they fill the browser consoles with "could not connect to server" errors (I'm not sure if that affects anything performance-wise either)
So some take it a little further on top of the second one, which is to run a lightweight local server to return empty respond to eliminate browser errors.

I've tried all three of them, but couldn't seem to catch noticeable differences. I'd love to hear what you guys think about them from a technical view.

Last edited by illusionmist (2014-01-10 14:17:37)


Board footer

Powered by FluxBB