search

Ultimate-Hosts-Blacklist / dev-center

The place to talk about our infrastructure or everything related to the Ultimate Hosts Blacklist project.
MIT License
11 stars 2 forks source link

A more aggressive whitelist list ? #45

Closed funilrys closed 3 years ago

funilrys commented 4 years ago

I said:

I have to get my finger into the DNS server after I fixed the central repository but we could create a more aggressive whitelist list for such cases (later of course) 🤔

Your opinion?

smed79 commented 4 years ago

I prefer to be more specific for each case.

Who use the lists hosted on our repo should check what the list includes and what it will block before using it, especially when she is dedicated to block specific content.

So, it will have no sense to use "facebook" or nsfw list then say i don't have access to FB or PH !!

funilrys commented 4 years ago

@dnmTX @smed79 True, I forgot we have a data directory for some specific whitelist which anybody can fetch and use with our whitelisting tool.

As an example, Facebook one https://github.com/Ultimate-Hosts-Blacklist/whitelist/blob/master/data/facebook

We should probably do more promotion of them in the future.

funilrys commented 4 years ago

But actually I could fetch the data whitelist lists into the DNS server later. Thanks for reminding me about that @smed79 :-)

funilrys commented 4 years ago

And yes, it's probably time to clarify a bit the central README :thinking:

dnmTX commented 4 years ago

Guys,the issue with the nsfw list is that it's included in the Ultimate-Hosts.. and whoever uses it ending up with PornHub being broken.I'm guessing @smed79 would like all of his lists here so they can be filtered from dead domains(nothing wrong with that),aggressive list simply(in my opinion) will not work(still wondering how it would be applied and in which lists and we have regular whitelist and so on and so on...) I can think of only one solution, @funilrys to figure out a way all the present lists that are on rotation for filtering to remain there but not all of them to be offered in the Ultimate-Hosts... or the feature DNS service.This way any agressive(extra) lists will be excluded and there will be minimal complains from users.

dnmTX commented 4 years ago

@funilrys any thoughts on what i suggested above ☝️? Reason i'm asking,and i don't mean to rush you or something but we still have open whitelisting request pending which is very relevant to the discussion here.

funilrys commented 4 years ago

@dnmTX, I agree that we need to be more flexible in the future. And that's in one of my todo-list. As I mentioned previously, in the future when our backend will be stable enough (code side), I will spend a big amount of time working on the API and the web app in order to let people choose what they want. Imagine it as a list compilator for their specific needs. In fact, we already have a database that is updated daily. We only need to make use of the available data. But that takes a bit of time because there is a lot to take into consideration and I don't know if @mitchellkrogza's server can handle the amount of request we might get.

About NSFW, the problem is that removing it goes against @mitchellkrogza description in the central repository:

The Ultimate Unified Hosts file for protecting your network, computer, smartphones and Wi-Fi devices against millions of bad web sites. Protect your children and family from gaining access to bad web sites and protect your devices and pc from being infected with Malware or Ransomware.

The Protect your children side might be problematic. Unfortunately, we can change everything else in the infrastructure but for that repository description, @mitchellkrogza has to take action.

So the question is actually where are we going? You (@dnmTX & @smed79) and I can make and take all decisions and necessary changes about that. But on the other side, @mitchellkrogza has to approve the little part about the central repository description.

What can we do for/with that NSFW case?

As you can see, almost everything is ready as I planned some of those cases in the long term. It's just up to us to make a temporary decision now @dnmTX @smed79, and a definitive decision in the future one we can propose a tool for end-user to compile their own list. :smile_cat:

Cheers!

smed79 commented 4 years ago

@funilrys The best solution in this case is to completely ignore the nsfw repository.

I recommend also to ignore facebook repo.

dnmTX commented 4 years ago

@funilrys The best solution in this case is to completely ignore the nsfw repository. I recommend also to ignore facebook repo.

I second that.This is the way to go for those two lists 👍

funilrys commented 4 years ago

Applied. With a bit of luck, it will also be in the central repository with the next update (in a few minutes).

As I mentioned we just remove them (temporarily) from the central repository. Not from the infrastructure.

dnmTX commented 4 years ago

@p1r473 this ☝️ should solve the issues you have with PornHub. We will still need you to confirm though. Update your lists,test it and report please so i can close your issue in the whitelist repo.

p1r473 commented 4 years ago

All good now, thanks!

p1r473 commented 4 years ago

@p1r473 this ☝️ should solve the issues you have with PornHub. We will still need you to confirm though. Update your lists,test it and report please so i can close your issue in the whitelist repo.

This was really fun homework ;)

smed79 commented 4 years ago

@funilrys

"_Airelles_Anti_Sex_Hosts_" repo should also ignored as what you did for the nsfw list.

dnmTX commented 4 years ago

"Airelles_Anti_Sex_Hosts" repo should also ignored as what you did for the nsfw list.

This is also related to one of our newest whitelist requests

funilrys commented 4 years ago

@dnmTX @smed79 We (@mitchellkrogza and I) decided to completely delete "Airelles_Anti_Sex_Hosts" from our infrastructure.

I just deleted it.

mitchellkrogza commented 4 years ago

:tada: long overdue, that must have felt good :grin: