Rules for hosts file

[Partyzan]

Hello.

I am a maintainer of a blocklist and am interested to make some Blokada-optimized version of it.

Rules of blocking:

mtxadmin/ublock/blob/master/docs/policy_en.md#to-block-requests-to-hosts-by-category

Source files for generating host file divided by categories:

mtxadmin/ublock

[Partyzan]

Technical question here about asterisk rules:

BETA feature: Advanced adblocking rules

You can use an Asterisk (*) to block all subdomains of a domain. E.g.: *.example.com . This will block all requests ending with .example.com . This means a domain like news.example.com wouldn’t be accessed anymore. A request like news.123example.com would still be accessed when using .example.com . If you want to block that domain as well, you simply set *example.com as rule in Blocked Hosts. You cannot block a top-level domain. E.g.: *.com . This won’t be allowed by the app. Will asterisk…

And, yes, I didn’t want such formatting above, it was autogererated

[Karol]

Hi and welcome!

Blokada supports any hostlists (ie. lists containing only domain or subdomain names). No CSS manipulation or such.

You may also use asterisks, to block all subdomains of a domain (wildcards). I noticed you were already answered on that other topic about how the wildcards work.

[Partyzan]

Thanks for reply!

Of course, there are no any CSS manipulations. It is not possible by hosts file, it’s obvious.

Yes, I have read that conversation about asterisk subdomains. I will remake my experimental hosts file. Confirmation from the Blokada author is very valuable, of course Initially I thought to make several rules for every such deep subdomains but I am glad it won’t be needed.

What is your position about comments in hosts file? In source files they will remain (it is very convenient to read and edit commented files). But in hosts file maybe they should be removed for compactization? Or it doesn’t matter for RAM footprint?

[Karol]

No, they can stay, Blokada removes them before loading.