TrackerControl / tracker-control-android

TrackerControl Android: monitor and control trackers and ads.
https://trackercontrol.org/
GNU General Public License v3.0
1.94k stars 82 forks source link

Add more specific blocking #368

Closed Invictaz closed 1 year ago

Invictaz commented 1 year ago

For now you can only block essential or social but not specific url's within those areas. Please add.

Alphabet1226 commented 1 year ago

+1

kasnder commented 1 year ago

You can already change to domain-based blocking in the settings.

Invictaz commented 1 year ago

No this is not true @kasnder

I cannot block specific urls even with that setting on. Only the whole appsflyer.com domain not the specific wildcards.

Screenshot_20230320_003208_TrackerControl

kasnder commented 1 year ago

Sadly, the currently set-up doesn't allow more fine-grained blocking, but I'll keep this issue open.

Invictaz commented 1 year ago

Fine grained blocking allows the ads to be blocked but not the data transfer in specific apps. Until they move everything under one subdomain but oh well.

Alexandermis commented 1 year ago

This is also one of my most wanted features

kasnder commented 1 year ago

It's not possible to implement this though because Android prevents the installation of custom root certificates since Android 7. Pre Android 7, this used to allow the inspection of contacted URLs. This is not possible anymore. Hence, I'm closing this issue because there's nothing I can do.

Invictaz commented 1 year ago

Strange because I have a custom certificate without root on Android 8.

ilonachan commented 4 months ago

The root certificate thing may be required to do filtering on the entire URL, but in my use case for example that's completely irrelevant. Like @Invictaz, I have a case where I want anything from unity3d.com to be allowed, but everything under unityads.unity3d.com to be blocked. So I only need to differentiate subdomains, which the app already does, it just doesn't let me separately block/unblock the two. This is clearly not a technical issue, but an interface issue, and you absolutely should introduce some way to give the user that control @kasnder