[ENHANCEMENT] Fully Functional YouTube AdBlocking Add-ons For Automatic Inclusion in the YouTube Config #316

GW72 commented 2026年06月12日 15:10:58 +02:00

Confirmation Checklist

• I confirm that this feature is not already present on the latest release of Phoenix. You can check what the latest version is on the Releases page.
• I confirm that this feature has NOT already been suggested on the Codeberg issue tracker, the GitLab issue tracker, and/or the GitHub issue tracker.

Please explain your proposal with as many details as necessary (Ex. what you're suggesting, why you're suggesting it, what need you thinks it will fill, who it will benefit, etc...).

I propose for the pure enjoyment of ALL Youtube Cofig users to include as an automatically available add-on in the YouTube config, alongside UBO, either of 1. AdBlocker for YouTube Adblock-for-youtube or 2. LiteTube: Fix YouTube Lag & Adblock Detection LiteTube.

uBO does not block embedded YouTube ads, but both of these do. Simply zero ads, and uBO shows additional blocking on the badge.

Option 1. is simpler, no config required, and the only permission required is: Block content on any page. Optional permission: Access your data for sites in the *://youtube.com domain.

Option 2 has a menu of settings accessed by clicking the toolbar icon, all of which are extremely useful, in addition to the basic permission: Block content on any page. Additional optional permissions include many other domains one might like to directly block as well, eg, Access your data for sites in the *://youtube.com domain, and these, *://doubleclick.net, *://google-analytics.com, *://googlesyndication.com, *://googleadservices.com, and *://sponsor.ajay.app.

I had first tried Option 1. and it performs flawlessly. Then trying to add it into IronFox, I found Option 2. (works fine in IronFox) since Option 1. was not listed.

I am now also using Option 2. in the YouTube config in FireFox, and it's also working flawlessly. To be clear I am not affiliated with either of these products, but I am impressed with both of them, since I've found nothing else (including uBO) that actually blocks ALL ads whilst watching YouTube videos.

One drawback can be that they are left unattended, and eventually stop working, or YouTube does its magic and renders them useless by some point. I do not know if that would be enough to prevent their inclusion, but it currently makes for a seriously nice experience similar (but better in terms of privacy) to FreeTube or Pipepipe. (I am not the expert but it appears to me neither of these collect or share any data)

### Confirmation Checklist - [x] I confirm that this feature is not already present on the **latest release** of Phoenix. You can check what the latest version is on [the `Releases` page](https://codeberg.org/celenity/Phoenix/releases). - [x] I confirm that this feature has **NOT** already been suggested on [the Codeberg issue tracker](https://codeberg.org/celenity/Phoenix/issues), [the GitLab issue tracker](https://gitlab.com/celenityy/Phoenix/-/issues), **and/or** [the GitHub issue tracker](https://github.com/celenityy/Phoenix/issues). ### Please explain your proposal with as many details as necessary (Ex. what you're suggesting, why you're suggesting it, what need you thinks it will fill, who it will benefit, etc...). I propose for the pure enjoyment of ALL Youtube Cofig users to include as an automatically available add-on in the YouTube config, alongside UBO, either of 1. **AdBlocker for YouTube** [Adblock-for-youtube](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/adblock-for-youtube/) or 2. **LiteTube: Fix YouTube Lag & Adblock Detection** [LiteTube](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/litetube-adfree/). uBO does not block embedded YouTube ads, but both of these do. Simply zero ads, and uBO shows additional blocking on the badge. Option 1. is simpler, no config required, and the only permission required is: **Block content on any page**. Optional permission: Access your data for sites in the `*://youtube.com` domain. Option 2 has a menu of settings accessed by clicking the toolbar icon, all of which are extremely useful, in addition to the basic permission: **Block content on any page**. Additional optional permissions include many other domains one might like to directly block as well, eg, Access your data for sites in the `*://youtube.com` domain, and these, `*://doubleclick.net, *://google-analytics.com, *://googlesyndication.com, *://googleadservices.com,` and `*://sponsor.ajay.app`. I had first tried Option 1. and it performs flawlessly. Then trying to add it into IronFox, I found Option 2. (works fine in IronFox) since Option 1. was not listed. I am now also using Option 2. in the YouTube config in FireFox, and it's also working flawlessly. To be clear I am not affiliated with either of these products, but I am impressed with both of them, since I've found nothing else (including uBO) that actually blocks ALL ads whilst watching YouTube videos. One drawback can be that they are left unattended, and eventually stop working, or YouTube does its magic and renders them useless by some point. I do not know if that would be enough to prevent their inclusion, but it currently makes for a seriously nice experience similar (but better in terms of privacy) to FreeTube or Pipepipe. (I am not the expert but it appears to me neither of these collect or share any data)

koru commented 2026年06月13日 06:49:16 +02:00

@GW72 wrote in #316 (comment):

I propose for the pure enjoyment of ALL Youtube Cofig users to include as an automatically available add-on in the YouTube config, alongside UBO, either of 1. AdBlocker for YouTube Adblock-for-youtube or 2. LiteTube: Fix YouTube Lag & Adblock Detection LiteTube.

uBO does not block embedded YouTube ads, but both of these do. Simply zero ads, and uBO shows additional blocking on the badge.

Option 1. is simpler, no config required, and the only permission required is: Block content on any page. Optional permission: Access your data for sites in the *://youtube.com domain.

Option 2 has a menu of settings accessed by clicking the toolbar icon, all of which are extremely useful, in addition to the basic permission: Block content on any page. Additional optional permissions include many other domains one might like to directly block as well, eg, Access your data for sites in the *://youtube.com domain, and these, *://doubleclick.net, *://google-analytics.com, *://googlesyndication.com, *://googleadservices.com, and *://sponsor.ajay.app.

I had first tried Option 1. and it performs flawlessly. Then trying to add it into IronFox, I found Option 2. (works fine in IronFox) since Option 1. was not listed.

I am now also using Option 2. in the YouTube config in FireFox, and it's also working flawlessly. To be clear I am not affiliated with either of these products, but I am impressed with both of them, since I've found nothing else (including uBO) that actually blocks ALL ads whilst watching YouTube videos.

One drawback can be that they are left unattended, and eventually stop working, or YouTube does its magic and renders them useless by some point. I do not know if that would be enough to prevent their inclusion, but it currently makes for a seriously nice experience similar (but better in terms of privacy) to FreeTube or Pipepipe. (I am not the expert but it appears to me neither of these collect or share any data)

I don't think these add-ons make sense, considering that every add-on in Firefox increases fingerprint.
Also, in my experience, uBO can block embed YouTube ads, and when paired with SponsorBlock, you can pretty much forget about ads altogether. Honestly, though, I'd recommend using a front-end like Invidious, FreeTube, PokeTube, or a bunch of other alternatives for watching YouTube.

If you're going to add any add-ons by default, it should only be uBO + SponsorBlock, the rest of the functionality (of other add-ons) can easily be done using userscripts.

@GW72 wrote in https://codeberg.org/celenity/Phoenix/issues/316#issue-5787257: > I propose for the pure enjoyment of ALL Youtube Cofig users to include as an automatically available add-on in the YouTube config, alongside UBO, either of 1. **AdBlocker for YouTube** [Adblock-for-youtube](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/adblock-for-youtube/) or 2. **LiteTube: Fix YouTube Lag & Adblock Detection** [LiteTube](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/litetube-adfree/). > > uBO does not block embedded YouTube ads, but both of these do. Simply zero ads, and uBO shows additional blocking on the badge. > > Option 1. is simpler, no config required, and the only permission required is: **Block content on any page**. Optional permission: Access your data for sites in the `*://youtube.com` domain. > > Option 2 has a menu of settings accessed by clicking the toolbar icon, all of which are extremely useful, in addition to the basic permission: **Block content on any page**. Additional optional permissions include many other domains one might like to directly block as well, eg, Access your data for sites in the `*://youtube.com` domain, and these, `*://doubleclick.net, *://google-analytics.com, *://googlesyndication.com, *://googleadservices.com,` and `*://sponsor.ajay.app`. > > I had first tried Option 1. and it performs flawlessly. Then trying to add it into IronFox, I found Option 2. (works fine in IronFox) since Option 1. was not listed. > > I am now also using Option 2. in the YouTube config in FireFox, and it's also working flawlessly. To be clear I am not affiliated with either of these products, but I am impressed with both of them, since I've found nothing else (including uBO) that actually blocks ALL ads whilst watching YouTube videos. > > One drawback can be that they are left unattended, and eventually stop working, or YouTube does its magic and renders them useless by some point. I do not know if that would be enough to prevent their inclusion, but it currently makes for a seriously nice experience similar (but better in terms of privacy) to FreeTube or Pipepipe. (I am not the expert but it appears to me neither of these collect or share any data) I don't think these add-ons make sense, considering that every add-on in Firefox increases fingerprint. Also, in my experience, uBO can block embed YouTube ads, and when paired with SponsorBlock, you can pretty much forget about ads altogether. Honestly, though, I'd recommend using a front-end like Invidious, FreeTube, PokeTube, or a bunch of other alternatives for watching YouTube. If you're going to add any add-ons by default, it should only be uBO + SponsorBlock, the rest of the functionality (of other add-ons) can easily be done using userscripts.

GW72 commented 2026年06月13日 09:44:02 +02:00

@koru thanks for this.

I also have used SponsorBlock, alongside uBO, but stilll see ads. If uBO can block all ads, I sincerely request you to share what works for you to accomplish that (links to scripts or actual config elements) as I'd much prefer to solely use uBO. I find when the ads start, once play is pressed, if I refresh the screen, the ads do not come back, but that seemed to stop working for me a while back.

I also use FreeTube, but any app built on Rust has its own possibility for problems related to telemetry exposure that is not necessarily clearly disclosed. In any case, this thread is with concern to users of phoenix's YouTube config; alternatives are really not the focus here.

As for anti-fingerprinting, while I have not checked lately, in the past year or so, my browser set-up was quite unique regardless of efforts taken, based on available fingerprinting analyses freely found online. I'm not convinced anti-fingerprinting efforts will ever be anything to rely upon, especially in the age of AI; a dog chasing a car it will never catch. User habits and practices are IMHO, much more useful and effective.

@koru thanks for this. I also have used SponsorBlock, alongside uBO, but stilll see ads. If uBO can block all ads, I sincerely request you to share what works for you to accomplish that (links to scripts or actual config elements) as I'd much prefer to solely use uBO. I find when the ads start, once play is pressed, if I refresh the screen, the ads do not come back, but that seemed to stop working for me a while back. I also use FreeTube, but any app built on Rust has its own possibility for problems related to telemetry exposure that is not necessarily clearly disclosed. In any case, this thread is with concern to users of phoenix's YouTube config; alternatives are really not the focus here. As for anti-fingerprinting, while I have not checked lately, in the past year or so, my browser set-up was quite unique regardless of efforts taken, based on available fingerprinting analyses freely found online. I'm not convinced anti-fingerprinting efforts will ever be anything to rely upon, especially in the age of AI; a dog chasing a car it will never catch. User habits and practices are IMHO, much more useful and effective.

koru commented 2026年06月13日 10:57:21 +02:00

@GW72 wrote in #316 (comment):

I also have used SponsorBlock, alongside uBO, but stilll see ads. If uBO can block all ads, I sincerely request you to share what works for you to accomplish that (links to scripts or actual config elements) as I'd much prefer to solely use uBO. I find when the ads start, once play is pressed, if I refresh the screen, the ads do not come back, but that seemed to stop working for me a while back.

I can't say for sure, but I think there are a lot of different things/settings that could be blocking the ads: maybe it's certain filters, or the channels I watch just don't have ads, or something else entirely, I really can't say for sure. Sorry.

I also use FreeTube, but any app built on Rust has its own possibility for problems related to telemetry exposure that is not necessarily clearly disclosed. In any case, this thread is with concern to users of phoenix's YouTube config; alternatives are really not the focus here.

I'm not sure what you're getting at, but if you're saying that FreeTube is built in Rust (Tauri), that's not the case. FreeTube is built on Electron: Vue + JS. Correct me if I'm missing the context.

As for anti-fingerprinting, while I have not checked lately, in the past year or so, my browser set-up was quite unique regardless of efforts taken, based on available fingerprinting analyses freely found online. I'm not convinced anti-fingerprinting efforts will ever be anything to rely upon, especially in the age of AI; a dog chasing a car it will never catch. User habits and practices are IMHO, much more useful and effective.

In my opinion, you just have to choose between:

1. Always being "unique" (including your fingerprint), constantly changing browsers, settings, and emails.
2. Being "stable" and blending in with the "crowd", like not using a VPN and just using Windows.

What I'm trying to say is that both approaches have their pros and cons, and everyone has to decide how to proceed based on their own threat model.

@GW72 wrote in https://codeberg.org/celenity/Phoenix/issues/316#issuecomment-17382386: > I also have used SponsorBlock, alongside uBO, but stilll see ads. If uBO can block all ads, I sincerely request you to share what works for you to accomplish that (links to scripts or actual config elements) as I'd much prefer to solely use uBO. I find when the ads start, once play is pressed, if I refresh the screen, the ads do not come back, but that seemed to stop working for me a while back. I can't say for sure, but I think there are a lot of different things/settings that could be blocking the ads: maybe it's certain filters, or the channels I watch just don't have ads, or something else entirely, I really can't say for sure. Sorry. > I also use FreeTube, but any app built on Rust has its own possibility for problems related to telemetry exposure that is not necessarily clearly disclosed. In any case, this thread is with concern to users of phoenix's YouTube config; alternatives are really not the focus here. I'm not sure what you're getting at, but if you're saying that FreeTube is built in Rust (Tauri), that's not the case. FreeTube is built on Electron: Vue + JS. Correct me if I'm missing the context. > As for anti-fingerprinting, while I have not checked lately, in the past year or so, my browser set-up was quite unique regardless of efforts taken, based on available fingerprinting analyses freely found online. I'm not convinced anti-fingerprinting efforts will ever be anything to rely upon, especially in the age of AI; a dog chasing a car it will never catch. User habits and practices are IMHO, much more useful and effective. In my opinion, you just have to choose between: 1. Always being "unique" (including your fingerprint), constantly changing browsers, settings, and emails. 2. Being "stable" and blending in with the "crowd", like not using a VPN and just using Windows. What I'm trying to say is that both approaches have their pros and cons, and everyone has to decide how to proceed based on their own threat model.

GW72 commented 2026年06月13日 19:26:07 +02:00

@koru that's a shame. I have been tweaking uBO for a long long time and have never been able to use it to be rid of the ads. But thanks for replying in any case.

And you are correct, it is built on Electron, not Rust (my bad). But Electron is actually worse than Rust.

This is getting way off topic, but I can't resist. (And keep in mind, I use FreeTube, but basically it is a "fingers-crossed" scenario).

ELECTRON: To GROK --> Q - What are the privacy/security concerns for apps built on Electron?

A - (partial results)

Key Security Concerns

Outdated Dependencies and Patching Lag:
 Apps often lag behind Electron/Chromium releases. Even non-EOL versions may miss critical patches.
 Result: Users run vulnerable Chromium instances unaware. Multiple Electron apps multiply "hidden browsers" on a system.⁠Discuss.privacyguides
 
 Edge case: Zero-days or in-the-wild exploits (e.g., CVE-2023-4863) affect apps before patches propagate.
XSS Leading to RCE:
 Web vulnerabilities like XSS have amplified impact. If nodeIntegration: true (default in older versions), injected JS can execute child_process, fs, etc.
 Even without it, IPC (inter-process communication) misconfigurations or context isolation failures enable escalation.
 
 Examples: Debug mode enabled, unsafe webview usage, or loading untrusted remote content.
Sandboxing and Isolation Deficiencies:
 Default or poor configs (e.g., contextIsolation: false, no sandbox) weaken boundaries.
 Renderer processes can access powerful APIs if not hardened.⁠Electronjs
Other Common Misconfigurations (from audits):
 Exposed IPC channels.
 Insecure content loading (HTTP instead of HTTPS).
 Debug tools or dev tools accessible in production.
 Insecure data storage or certificate handling.⁠

Privacy Concerns

Data Access: With Node.js access, apps can read arbitrary files, monitor processes, or exfiltrate data more easily than web apps. Trackers or analytics embedded in the app bypass browser extensions like uBlock Origin.
Telemetry and Third-Party Code: Electron itself doesn't inherently track (no Google telemetry without API keys), but app developers can add it. Loading remote content exposes users to external tracking.⁠Stack Overflow
Local Storage and Permissions: Apps often request broad OS permissions. Untrusted or malicious content can access cameras, mics, clipboard, etc., if handlers aren't restricted.
Update Mechanisms: Apps may phone home for updates, potentially leaking usage data. Insecure update channels risk supply-chain attacks.⁠

@koru that's a shame. I have been tweaking uBO for a long long time and have never been able to use it to be rid of the ads. But thanks for replying in any case. And you are correct, it is built on Electron, not Rust (my bad). But Electron is actually worse than Rust. This is getting way off topic, but I can't resist. (And keep in mind, I use FreeTube, but basically it is a "fingers-crossed" scenario). ELECTRON: To GROK --> Q - **What are the privacy/security concerns for apps built on Electron?** A - (partial results) Key Security Concerns Outdated Dependencies and Patching Lag: Apps often lag behind Electron/Chromium releases. Even non-EOL versions may miss critical patches. Result: Users run vulnerable Chromium instances unaware. Multiple Electron apps multiply "hidden browsers" on a system.⁠Discuss.privacyguides Edge case: Zero-days or in-the-wild exploits (e.g., CVE-2023-4863) affect apps before patches propagate. XSS Leading to RCE: Web vulnerabilities like XSS have amplified impact. If nodeIntegration: true (default in older versions), injected JS can execute child_process, fs, etc. Even without it, IPC (inter-process communication) misconfigurations or context isolation failures enable escalation. Examples: Debug mode enabled, unsafe webview usage, or loading untrusted remote content. Sandboxing and Isolation Deficiencies: Default or poor configs (e.g., contextIsolation: false, no sandbox) weaken boundaries. Renderer processes can access powerful APIs if not hardened.⁠Electronjs Other Common Misconfigurations (from audits): Exposed IPC channels. Insecure content loading (HTTP instead of HTTPS). Debug tools or dev tools accessible in production. Insecure data storage or certificate handling.⁠ Privacy Concerns Data Access: With Node.js access, apps can read arbitrary files, monitor processes, or exfiltrate data more easily than web apps. Trackers or analytics embedded in the app bypass browser extensions like uBlock Origin. Telemetry and Third-Party Code: Electron itself doesn't inherently track (no Google telemetry without API keys), but app developers can add it. Loading remote content exposes users to external tracking.⁠Stack Overflow Local Storage and Permissions: Apps often request broad OS permissions. Untrusted or malicious content can access cameras, mics, clipboard, etc., if handlers aren't restricted. Update Mechanisms: Apps may phone home for updates, potentially leaking usage data. Insecure update channels risk supply-chain attacks.⁠

celenity commented 2026年06月16日 06:27:00 +02:00

Unfortunately, I don't know of a way to install extensions on a per-profile basis, so I'm not sure we'd be able to install these out of the box.

But, it may be worth documenting some recommended add-ons for cases like this (though I agree with @koru that it's preferable to keep add-ons to a minimum, as they increase attack surface, can aid fingerprinting, and can harm performance).

---

And yeah, from a privacy and security perspective, I'd definitely avoid Electron. Electron has some pretty major security issues, such as a lack of proper sandboxing. Electron also provides little to no control for end-users (despite just being a fork of Chromium at its core...). Honestly, Electron's flaws are a big part of what motivated me to create Phoenix's specialized configs in the first place - to provide a better way to use apps/services instead of the official/Electron apps.

Unfortunately, I don't know of a way to install extensions on a per-profile basis, so I'm not sure we'd be able to install these out of the box. But, it may be worth documenting some recommended add-ons for cases like this *(though I agree with @koru that it's preferable to keep add-ons to a minimum, as they increase attack surface, can aid fingerprinting, and can harm performance)*. ___ And yeah, from a privacy and security perspective, I'd definitely avoid Electron. Electron [has some pretty major security issues, such as a lack of proper sandboxing](https://github.com/secureblue/secureblue/issues/193#issuecomment-1953323680). Electron also provides little to no control for end-users (despite just being a fork of Chromium at its core...). Honestly, Electron's flaws are a big part of what motivated me to create Phoenix's specialized configs in the first place - to provide a better way to use apps/services instead of the official/Electron apps.

koru commented 2026年06月16日 08:37:48 +02:00

@celenity wrote in #316 (comment):

And yeah, from a privacy and security perspective, I'd definitely avoid Electron. Electron has some pretty major security issues, such as a lack of proper sandboxing. Electron also provides little to no control for end-users (despite just being a fork of Chromium at its core...). Honestly, Electron's flaws are a big part of what motivated me to create Phoenix's specialized configs in the first place - to provide a better way to use apps/services instead of the official/Electron apps.

Off-top, but there is Firefox-based Discord client - datcord. Anyway it's better to use Servo if someone wanna build web cross-platform app.

@celenity wrote in https://codeberg.org/celenity/Phoenix/issues/316#issuecomment-17557547: > And yeah, from a privacy and security perspective, I'd definitely avoid Electron. Electron [has some pretty major security issues, such as a lack of proper sandboxing](https://github.com/secureblue/secureblue/issues/193#issuecomment-1953323680). Electron also provides little to no control for end-users (despite just being a fork of Chromium at its core...). Honestly, Electron's flaws are a big part of what motivated me to create Phoenix's specialized configs in the first place - to provide a better way to use apps/services instead of the official/Electron apps. Off-top, but there is Firefox-based Discord client - [datcord](https://github.com/gamingdoom/datcord). Anyway it's better to use Servo if someone wanna build web cross-platform app.

celenity commented 2026年06月16日 22:33:32 +02:00

@koru wrote in #316 (comment):

Off-top, but there is Firefox-based Discord client - datcord.

Yeah, I've heard of that before - but the problem with that approach is because they're using their own custom build of Firefox/Gecko, they also have to keep up with ex. security updates. It looks like Datcord's last release was back in February, which is quite alarming... it means they're missing hundreds of security fixes (no exaggeration on that number, I have an idea of the number based on IronFox) :/.

Also not sure if they support ex. installing add-ons (like we do on our specialized configs), so, in general, I think it's preferable to just use Phoenix's Discord specialized config over a client like Datcord.

@koru wrote in https://codeberg.org/celenity/Phoenix/issues/316#issuecomment-17560922: > Off-top, but there is Firefox-based Discord client - [datcord](https://github.com/gamingdoom/datcord). Yeah, I've heard of that before - but the problem with that approach is because they're using their own custom build of Firefox/Gecko, they also have to keep up with ex. security updates. It looks like Datcord's last release was back in February, which is quite alarming... it means they're missing *hundreds* of security fixes *(no exaggeration on that number, I have an idea of the number based on IronFox)* :/. Also not sure if they support ex. installing add-ons *(like we do on our specialized configs)*, so, in general, I think it's preferable to just use Phoenix's Discord specialized config over a client like Datcord.

4ns0n commented 2026年07月02日 19:29:31 +02:00

I propose for the pure enjoyment of ALL Youtube Cofig users to include as an automatically available add-on in the YouTube config, alongside UBO, either of 1. AdBlocker for YouTube Adblock-for-youtube or 2. LiteTube: Fix YouTube Lag & Adblock Detection LiteTube.

uBO does not block embedded YouTube ads, but both of these do. Simply zero ads, and uBO shows additional blocking on the badge.

uBO does reliably block all embedded YouTube ads, and is quick to update if anything breaks. If it isn't doing that, then it's either a bug you should reported to them, or something isn't configured correctly on your end. AdBlocker for YouTube is a redundant extension, so I'd double check if it's actually doing anything.

As for LiteTube, it only has 2000 downloads and it's Github is a 404 page, so I'd be weary of it, and advise you to just use uBO and SponsorBlock.

> I propose for the pure enjoyment of ALL Youtube Cofig users to include as an automatically available add-on in the YouTube config, alongside UBO, either of 1. **AdBlocker for YouTube** [Adblock-for-youtube](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/adblock-for-youtube/) or 2. **LiteTube: Fix YouTube Lag & Adblock Detection** [LiteTube](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/litetube-adfree/). > > uBO does not block embedded YouTube ads, but both of these do. Simply zero ads, and uBO shows additional blocking on the badge. uBO does reliably block all embedded YouTube ads, and is quick to update if anything breaks. If it isn't doing that, then it's either a bug you should reported to them, or something isn't configured correctly on your end. AdBlocker for YouTube is a redundant extension, so I'd double check if it's actually doing anything. As for LiteTube, it only has 2000 downloads and [it's Github is a 404 page](https://github.com/LiteTube/LiteTube-Fix-YouTube-Lag-Adblock-Detection), so I'd be weary of it, and advise you to just use uBO and SponsorBlock.