IS there any point to ad blocker

[sky-knight]

Ad Blocker is content control with specific and customizable targets (ads and cookies) and detailed reporting on its outcomes. Its whitelisting feature (given that not all identified ads are blocked) provides the benefit of reducing the number of broken sites.

The approach comes down to preference and the desired granularity of control, not proper network configuration. A network that uses Ad Blocker over Web Filter isn't misconfigured.

Yes it is, because the former cannot classify nearly as many sites. The whitelisting is equally easy too.

If you're going to use one module, you use Web Filter, if you want to use both... that's fine too, but don't be surprised when the latter is bored.

[Sam Graf]

Yes it is, because the former cannot classify nearly as many sites.

No it isn't, for precisely that reason. Web Filter treats everything the same; to it, everything is equal. If I want to exempt a site from ad filtering, I can't do that selectively. It's all or nothing. And Web Filter tells me nothing about cookies being blocked, or even if they are being blocked.

We are going to disagree on this. That fine.

[Martinvdm]

I agree with Sam. Ad blocking is different then filtering web categories.
Ad blocker could shine a lot more as it is now compared to adguard, pihole, Pfblockerng etc.
I think it should be working a lot better when using DNS BL as a blocking method.

[jclendineng]

Or use web filter and pihole as thats as granular as you can get