-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 527
Cannot restrict firefox for specific urls #2364
Comments
XPrivacy cannot granularly restrict internet access done through native libraries. This is better done using a real firewall application like AFWall+ or NetGuard. |
the problem is, that xprivacy is the only app, which is able to restrict also via ip&port. any other options than xprivacy? |
How about NetGuard? Julian notifications@github.com schreef op 19 augustus 2016 11:17:41 CEST:
|
if NetGuard wouldn't block my vpn service (need it for openvpn), i would instantly buy the donate version. |
@M66B, I've been struggling with this as well: afwall+ doesn't allow one to block specific domains/subdomains and netguard, although a much superior alternative to the abandoned NoRootFirewall (last release in 2014), doesn't seem to bolster one great feature of this latter app:
This last issue is a huge pain point and one that isn't properly addressed by none of the available firewall apps. |
This is the XPrivacy GitHub, but out of courtesy I will answer you: NetGuard does not and will not support wildcards for performance and battery usage reasons. However, you can block individual domains (including port) using NetGuard. For your next NetGuard support questions, please go here: |
specs overview:
on my old CM installation i was able to restrict or allow the access to specific urls for an app.
with the new installation, when i try to restrict the access for firefox for a specific url it does not work. clearing all rules for firefox in xprivacy and then starting firefox invokes the xprivacy dialog for some sections (nfc, accounts,..) and then
InetAddress.getAllByName
for*.services.mozilla.com
appears. if i choose deny, i would assume to block access to this url. when i enter a url, for example,google.com
the dialog is invoked again, i blacklist the url/domain again but in the background i can see the pages gets loaded.should it be possible to block the access to urls like this? should it work or do i miss something?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: