So I check with the often recommended https://d3ward.github.io/toolz/adblock to test Windscribe’s adblock. It comes in at around 70% with a newly installed browser, so it’s 100% testing Windscribe’s adblock. Some of the allowed links are google analytics or other suspicious trackers, and they aren’t blocked. I put them into ROBERT’s custom blocklist and they still aren’t blocked. I try putting in every tracker or ad domain listed and they still aren’t blocked. So either changing ROBERT’s manual blocklist doesn’t do anything, or the site is broken or there’s something else I’m missing. Since Windscribe won’t reveal their blocklists I’m forced to use third-party adblock tests, and those tests show Windscribe isn’t blocking what it’s supposed to be blocking.
*Potentially solved. Different browsers were giving different results for some reason. Also, Opera Mini completely bypassed the VPN for no reasons that I could find.
** Edit again. Different browsers give different results, from 43% to 97%. It’s frustrating and aggravating trying to figure out which result is accurate. I have no idea what’s actually being blocked and what’s not. The lack of transparency regarding ad/tracker blockers is probably going to keep me from renewing my subscription. I’d rather have an imperfect list that I can actually verify than a supposedly huge list that I have to take someone’s word.
Something is wrong with your browsers. Many new browsers tend to have DNS over HTTPS settings, and other stuff enabled by default that change or override the DNS. Disable DNS over HTTPS and tell it to use the system DNS. The only reason ROBERT gets 97% on the test you linked is because of its DNS based nature, being that it works by blocking domains only, it is simply impossible for it to block static and javascript based advertising if it isn’t hosted by a domain such as Google Adsense.
I am getting 3% after disabling ROBERT, meaning it is blocking all the domains on the list. The only ones left blocked after it’s disabled are domains that I suspect simply do not work in the United States. I have disabled uBlock Origin for these tests.
u/kalzEOS ^ You are doing something wrong. Claiming that ROBERT doesn’t block ads is false.
Ok. I’m not thrilled with the adblock lists being closed sourced, but if nobody else is reporting problems then it’s probably not a WS issue. I don’t mind getting a 97% score. Mullvad has the same 97%. My concern here is that depending on which browser I used, results were as low as 43% with some domains showing up that were blocked in other browsers, and I couldn’t find a way to figure out what’s actually happening. What do you think of Via browser? I tried it to run the same test as you and it seems like a good browser, but other comments suggest not using it because it appears to be Chinese.
It used to be over 97% on the d3ward check, now it’s between 60 or 70 and the manual entry isn’t changing the results. Since they won’t make the blocklists public, I have no confidence it’s blocking trackers either.
Not challenging your results, but is it possible your browser is doing some of the blocking? I get 97% on a browser that has some blocking capabilities, but lower than 70 on a browser that doesn’t.
The reason Via is likely passing the test is likely because it doesn’t have the aforementioned DNS over HTTPS settings, or it doesn’t have those enabled by default. These settings are configurable in every browser I’ve seen. Via seems to be owned by a solo Chinese developer, which isn’t the worst thing possible, but I highly recommend against using it.
Personally, I use Firefox. Brave is also a decent alternative, though I do have some issues with the CEO’s behavior. It doesn’t really effect the functionality of the browser though. Both browsers have configurable DNS over HTTPS settings. Turn it off and set the DNS to system. DNS over HTTPS is a good thing IF you aren’t using a VPN. When you are, it causes problems with the VPN’s built in DNS.
Honestly, I don’t care if I get downvoted, but I’m not renewing with windscribe after this one time. I paid for a year and it has not been great at all. Their Linux client had so many issues when I first used it. It got much better now thankfully, but the speed is horrible. No ad blocking. It’s just not working out at all. I get 150mbps on WS on the paid version and 500mbps on the free version of protonvpn.
I’m on the fence myself. I was/am a Mullvad user and used to be Proton. One of the reasons I left Proton for Mullvad was (aside from the price) the lack of transparency in Proton’s ad/tracker blocking, since they don’t make it public. Turns out Windscribe doesn’t either. That’s right on the edge of being a deal-breaker for me, since transparency actually matters. I want to compare and balance various features myself, not just what the company claims they offer. I bought a year of Windscribe to see how it plays out, but I can’t find many reasons to bump it above Mullvad. I can actually verify what Mullvad claims without having to jump through the hoops of using third-party adblock test sites to verify what should already be transparent.
I downloaded opera mini to retest my results and it’s completely bypassing the VPN. Block connections and everything is enabled. WS is connected. IP is coming back Opera Software Singapore. How the hell is this happening.
Via browser gave the same results as yours. Odd. Opera Mini completely bypassed the VPN connection. On both Windscribe and Mullvad. It must have some sort of setting, but the block connections should presumably have prevented that.
It isn’t bypassing the VPN, it’s tunneling through the desktop VPN then going through the opera VPN. So you’re end point is the opera VPN. It’s a double hop.
It is frustrating and makes a valid comparison hard to do. Either a provider is transparent, or it isn’t, regardless of how great they make it sound. Windscribe actually leaves a lot to ‘trust me bro’.
You do have a valid point about Mullvad disconnections. I do get random server drops and support does blame my network.