counter.dev

[ihucos]

Prerequisites

• [X] This site DOES NOT contains sexually explicit material;
• [X] The problem occurs only when using AdGuard DNS or DNS filtering with AdGuard DNS filter, it is not caused by other ad blockers;
• [ ] You're using an up-to-date version of AdGuard DNS filter;
• [ ] Browser version is up-to-date;
• [X] If a website or an app is broken, disabling AdGuard DNS filter resolves the issue.

What DNS server do you use?

Other

Version

No response

What DNS upstream(s) do you use in AdGuard apps or AdGuard Home?

No response

What DNS filters do you have enabled?

I don't know

What browser or app do you use?

Other app

Which device type do you use?

Other device

What type of problem have you encountered?

Website or app doesn't work properly

Where did you encounter the problem?

https://counter.dev

Add your comment and screenshots

Hello,

counter.dev is an open source project that can also be found here: https://github.com/ihucos/counter.dev That it is blocked was found unexpected by different users in hacker news here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35144256

Can we remove it from the list?

I am the maintainer of counter.dev and happy to help if needed.

Thanks!

Privacy

• [X] I agree to follow this condition

[physx2494]

While the work you are doing is excellent, and by no means do I want to demotivate, the website is still, in one way or another, an analytics provider.

[ihucos]

Correct, the website is a privacy friendly analytics provider. I thought the expected behaviour of a blocker would be to block activities like tracking - like done by "my" analytics provider. This bug would be about the entire website not displaying on the browser. Is that expected behaviour?

[physx2494]

I see. Certainly an unexpected behavior.

---

From: Irae Hueck Costa @.> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2023 7:08 AM To: AdguardTeam/AdGuardSDNSFilter @.> Cc: physx2494 @.>; Comment @.> Subject: Re: [AdguardTeam/AdGuardSDNSFilter] counter.dev (Issue #1260)

Correct, the website is a privacy friendly analytics provider. I thought the expected behaviour of a blocker would be to block activities like tracking - like done by "my" analytics provider. This bug would be about the entire website not displaying on the browser. Is that expected behaviour?

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/AdguardTeam/AdGuardSDNSFilter/issues/1260#issuecomment-1467213229, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABAA2S2QOZDNRXF5TMITZBDW37D2TANCNFSM6AAAAAAVZZIVHE. You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: @.***>

[Alex-302]

@ihucos Is it possible to use a sub-domain for tracking purposes? Like t.counter.dev. In this case we could block tracking without blocking the main domain.

I see your script is used as inline script, so not "instead", but as a different solution.

Details

``` ```

[ihucos]

Yes, absolutely! I will change the tracking script to to request t.counter.dev (That subdomain naming makes sense). There are some legacy integrations that used the inline script but they will fade out with time.

I'll let you know when its done.

[Alex-302]

Great, thanks)

[ihucos]

I had to be careful to not disturb the service. It is done. The tracking script now calls t.counter.dev which can be added to the blocklist. counter.dev - the website itself - can then be allow-listed.

To verify check: https://cdn.counter.dev/script.js https://github.com/ihucos/counter.dev/blob/master/docs/script.js

Thank you very much and let me know if there are any questions.

[ameshkov]

@ihucos

Quick question: the privacy conscious users will be triggered by a third-party script loading on websites so we'll need to block cdn.counter.dev as well. Will it be an issue for the website functions?

[ihucos]

Hello ameshkov,

thank you very much for asking.

Will it be an issue for the website functions?

No, that is only used to serve the tracking script, feel free to block it.

[Alex-302]

feel free to block it.

t.counter.dev and whole cdn.counter.dev?

[ihucos]

Yes, confirm.

[Alex-302]

@ihucos Thanks! Fixed in the regular filter and created the pull-request in this repo.