Blokada's UI is without peer and so it makes for a very good "just works" for the majority (in fact, from what I know, it is the most downloaded DNS-based content blocker on Android by far).
Forgive the questions, but you seem to be a good person to ask.. How does Blokada actually work? Its FAQ claims it:
> prevents apps and browsers installed on your device from sending your private data (known as tracking fingerprints) to the Internet.
Is it doing some kind of packet inspection?
As a secondary layer of blocking I use DNS66 which intercepts DNS requests and fails them for blacklisted domains, by installing itself as a virtual VPN - essentially a cooked /etc/hosts for Android.
> prevents apps and browsers installed on your device from sending your private data (known as tracking fingerprints) to the Internet.
For now, Blokada's utility is limited to DNS-based content blocking. It cannot and does not prevent most forms of fingerprinting.
> Is it doing some kind of packet inspection?
Yes, only DNS packet inspection, but even for the only thing it does, it is clumsy: It leaks DNS requests; that is, Blokada does not trap all DNS traffic on port 53, and it does not handle DNS queries sent over TCP. DNS66 has these same issues, too.
> As a secondary layer of blocking I use DNS66 which intercepts DNS requests and fails them for blacklisted domains, by installing itself as a virtual VPN - essentially a cooked /etc/hosts for Android.
Blokada uses the same trick (I mean, core parts of Blokada 4 code-base does bear similarities with DNS66 which preceded it... Blokada 5 however was re-written in Rust).
> Would Blokada work alongside that?
No, it cannot. But: Apps that support "DNS proxying" (like Nebulo [0]) can. It is quite an involved setup. I'd simply use Nebulo over DNS66, as it is not only more capable but also encrypts DNS traffic unlike Blokada 4 or DNS66.
> ...but you seem to be a good person to ask..
A disclosure, rather something to keep in mind: I have been accused of spreading fud by the Blokada lead developer and using it to "market" a "competitor" app I co-develop. In my defense, it wasn't / isn't fud what I spread, unless fud === uncomfortable truth.
Pretty sure Firefox did no such thing, instead IIRC the developer (gorhill) of both addons (uMatrix and uBO) realized that uMatrix was pretty much redundant given the options available in uBO and thus archived uMatrix.
Google has no incentive to support effective ad blocking on platforms they control (Android and Chrome). This has made us reluctant to develop for or invest time on these platforms – the platform owner would be working against what we would be trying to achieve.
What? Apple is even worse. There was a big cry when Google wanted to nuter adblockers API but Apple have done exactly the same thing. You fell into a pr stunt. Apple doesn't care for privacy. Just look at how they scan you pictures..
No, other cloud providers scan all the pictures you upload. Apple does a careful private set intersection (partially on the client, partially on the server) on all the pictures you upload to collect strictly less data than other cloud providers.
Are you referring to the "content blocker" API? Because that basically forces plug-ins to supply a list of blocked domains. Just like Google's upcoming changes. Neither allow you to run your own engine for blocking like what uBlock Origin does.
