# Why You Should Approach Google with Caution, but It’s Not as Bad as You Might Think
For years, Google has held a strong position in the tech industry, and this prominence has brought about a fair share of scrutiny. Issues surrounding privacy, data gathering, or modifications to its offerings often place Google at the heart of debates. Recently, the tech behemoth’s decision to roll out **Manifest v3** for Chrome Extensions has triggered considerable unease, especially among users of well-known ad-blockers like **Ublock Origin**. The concern? That Google, fundamentally an advertising entity, aims to eradicate ad-blockers entirely. But is this truly the case?
In this article, we will delve into why it’s wise to scrutinize Google’s choices, while also highlighting that the situation regarding Manifest v3 may not be as bleak as it appears.
## The Manifest v3 Debate: What’s Happening?
Google’s **Manifest v3** introduces a new framework for Chrome Extensions, generating significant buzz, particularly because it alters the way extensions like **Ublock Origin** operate. Many users have taken to social networks and forums to express their worries, with numerous claims suggesting that Google is deliberately attempting to undermine ad-blockers to safeguard its ad income.
Yet, this portrayal isn’t completely accurate. While it’s undeniable that Manifest v3 brings about notable modifications, the main intent, as stated by Google, is to **boost security and privacy** for users. These alterations are in response to events like **DataSpii**, a substantial data breach that revealed sensitive details from Chrome and Firefox users who had particular extensions installed. These extensions were permitted to function under previous regulations, collecting everything from tax documents to credit card numbers.
### Noteworthy Modifications in Manifest v3
Some of the key updates in Manifest v3 include:
1. **Blocking Remote Code Execution**: Extensions are now prohibited from downloading and running unreviewed remote code. This marks a pivotal advance in preventing harmful extensions from executing detrimental scripts on users’ devices.
2. **Changes to the WebRequest API**: This API, heavily relied upon by many ad-blockers, has faced restrictions. While this has raised alarms, it is a component of Google’s endeavor to mitigate the risk of misuse by harmful extensions.
These alterations aim to avert incidents akin to DataSpii, but not everyone is convinced they will be effective. Detractors, including the **Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)**, argue that these modifications might not drastically enhance security and could hinder innovation.
## The Current Scenario: Ublock Origin Remains Functional (For Now)
In spite of the commotion, it’s crucial to recognize that **Ublock Origin** continues to function in Chrome. In fact, many users, including myself, are still utilizing it without facing any problems. Although the extension might have been disabled by default following the update, it can be easily re-enabled in Chrome’s settings. While Google may not prominently advertise this workaround, it remains a straightforward solution for those wishing to keep using the full version of Ublock Origin.
That being said, Google has released a **Lite version of Ublock Origin** that adheres to Manifest v3. For users who feel uneasy adjusting Chrome’s settings, this version offers a more accessible, although slightly less powerful, option.
### Should You Consider Ublock Lite?
If you aren’t particularly tech-savvy or prefer to avoid manually managing extensions, **Ublock Lite** could be the more suitable choice for you. It delivers a simplified experience that still offers ad-blocking capabilities, albeit potentially less extensive than the original version.
For users who are comfortable handling their extensions, the full version of Ublock Origin remains accessible, and there’s no pressing reason to switch. However, it’s advisable to monitor forthcoming updates to assess how Manifest v3 progresses.
## Why Manifest v3 Was Important
While it’s tempting to jump to the conclusion that Google is trying to safeguard its advertising interests by restricting ad-blockers, the truth is more intricate. Some changes in Manifest v3 were long awaited. For example, allowing extensions to execute remote code without prior review posed a significant security threat. It’s surprising that Google permitted this to persist for as long as it did.
As someone who has engaged in Chrome extension development, I can appreciate why certain changes were essential. While Manifest v3 might complicate the operation of specific types of extensions, it effectively closes loopholes that could be exploited by malicious entities.
### Will This Hinder Innovation?
A major worry surrounding Manifest v3 is that it might impede innovation by complicating the creation of new and exciting extensions. While this concern is legitimate, it’s important to recognize that developers still possess alternatives. For instance, they can develop extensions for **Firefox** or **Microsoft Edge**, both of which allow similar functionalities without the identical limitations.
Furthermore, developers can continue to create extensions for
