
AdGuard Pro for iOS will be discontinued due to Apple's policy - crispinb
https://adguard.com/en/blog/adguard-pro-discontinued/
======
LeoPanthera
You can hack one of these together yourself. Buy a VPS. Install pi-hole on it.
Set it up as a VPN server.[1]

Install OpenVPN Connect on your iPhone and connect to your new server and bam,
you have an awesome VPN and ad-blocking combo.

[1]: [https://github.com/pi-hole/pi-hole/wiki/Pi-hole---OpenVPN-
se...](https://github.com/pi-hole/pi-hole/wiki/Pi-hole---OpenVPN-server)

~~~
rorosaurus
This is probably the way to go, you just have to worry about data limits and
overages, plus the extra latency. Probably not the biggest deal for mobile,
though.

~~~
ddtaylor
This is a good workaround to a problem that shouldn't exist. I feel it's
important to clarify this is certainly not more secure than using a client-
side solution that doesn't involve duplicating bandwidth.

(Full disclosure I make an iOS app that is also likely going to be affected by
these rules, so I am triggered)

------
tedunangst
> Moreover, it is advertised nowhere that it can [block ads].

Apples policy may be burdensome and unwelcome, but I'm not sure a product
called "Adguard Pro" can't be said to advertise ad blocking functionality...

~~~
delinka
> Your app uses a VPN profile or root certificate ...

> [...] it is advertised nowhere that it can [use a VPN profile or root
> certificate]

Seems to be the issue isn't "blocking ads" but "you can't do it in $THIS way"
with Apple misunderstanding that the app doesn't do $THIS, it actually does
$THAT (using NEPacketTunnelProvider.)

~~~
eridius
NEPacketTunnelProvider is the API to implement a VPN, so they are in fact
doing it $THIS way.

~~~
delinka
Please explain how using this API is "[using] a VPN profile or root
certificate."

~~~
eridius
Hi delinka. I believe that's just bad wording and that the real issue is using
the VPN APIs to implement something other than a VPN.

------
hprotagonist
So far, I have been very pleased with 1Blocker X:
[https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/1blocker-x/id1365531024?mt=8](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/1blocker-x/id1365531024?mt=8)
and its predecessor.

~~~
LeoPanthera
I haven't bought 1Blocker X, but I bought the previous version, and I had
endless problems, mostly with it breaking websites, and failing to block
obvious ads. 1Blocker X came out as a paid upgrade while the previous version
was still broken, so I refused to use it.

I got the free version of AdGuard, which just creates a plain Safari content
filter from DNSBL lists you specify yourself, and it works great. Very happy.

------
jedisct1
Meanwhile Apple is cool with the Verizon VPN [1], because it also blocks ads
in applications, but server-side, and that makes a huge difference (?).

Or rather, because this is Verizon.

[1] [https://techcrunch.com/2018/07/28/verizons-new-safe-wi-fi-
is...](https://techcrunch.com/2018/07/28/verizons-new-safe-wi-fi-is-a-vpn-
that-blocks-ad-tracking-for-3-99-a-month/)

~~~
eridius
Verizon's VPN is an actual VPN. The fact that the VPN can be configured to
block ads doesn't really matter very much, since, as you point out, that
happens server-side, not on the device.

The Apple policy here is you can't use the VPN APIs to implement a content
blocker. Or more generally, you're not supposed to use the VPN APIs to
implement something other than a VPN, although they seem to be ok with some
limited exceptions such as Charles Proxy. If the VPN itself offers other
features, that falls outside the purview of Apple's policies.

~~~
ameshkov
According to Malwarebytes (they got banned too), server-side or client-side
does not matter:
[https://twitter.com/thomasareed/status/1021095129279541249](https://twitter.com/thomasareed/status/1021095129279541249)

~~~
eridius
I mean, I'm just speculating here, but that tweet makes it sound like they
asked if they could add a real VPN specifically for the purposes of ad-
blocking rather than for the purposes of being a VPN. And that is obviously
just an attempt at an end-run around Apple's policies.

I realize the line is fuzzy here between "using a VPN to do ad-blocking" and
"adding an optional ad-blocking feature to a VPN", but they are different
concepts. Verizon's VPN appears to be a real VPN that simply has an optional
ad-blocking feature. Perhaps the optional nature of the ad-blocking is
important? I don't know.

------
phobosdeimos
One of the best things about Android is how easy it is to not make Google
money. From ad blockers and alternative app stores to downright piracy.

If Google could do it all over again they would emulate iOS with their walled
garden. I am sure of it.

------
tedivm
I switched from IOS to Android a month ago, and one of my favorite things
about it is that I can use the Brave web browser (with built in ad block,
tracker block, and HTTPS Everywhere) and it's been amazing. My browser
experience on mobile is complete different- no more videos or audio ads taking
over and stopping my music, significantly less data being used, and of course
it means I don't see ridiculous ads. On top of that because Android actually
lets you pick what apps you launch things with it works with all my other apps
as well, without the need for some "vpn hack".

~~~
twiceaday
What you are describing is much easier on iOS. The default web browser
natively supports extensions, including ad blockers. The AdGuard vpn hack had
the benefit of blocking ads in all apps at the cost of being so invasive.

~~~
prolikewh0a
Firefox has extensions available by default on Android. I use Ublock Origin &
HTTPS everywhere. I wouldn't call it the "default browser", but
it's...Firefox. I wouldn't exactly call it hard either since you just browse
to the normal Firefox extension page and click the install button.

Google does do everything in its power to prevent me from using Firefox
though.

------
lamlam
I'm a bit confused as to why adguard is being targeted here, but things like
Disconnect.me which also use a "fake" VPN are not. Can anyone shine some light
on this?

------
whym
I wonder what it might affect other apps developed by (one of) the developers
in cases like this. Do they ban apps or people? Should the developers worry
about increased scrutiny to their other apps?

------
crispinb
TLDR: iOS is a compulsory ad delivery platform.

~~~
chipotle_coyote
I think it's _way_ more complicated than this sort of snark makes it out to
be.

Apple allows content blocking in Mobile Safari. There are some limits to the
APIs they've provided, and one can quibble about how complete they are, but
Apple has literally made an ad-blocking API.

AdGuard Pro's "local VPN" trick was basically a way to be able to block not
only ads in Safari, but ads _everywhere,_ including applications that are
connecting to ad networks. And I'm pretty sure this is what Apple is
ultimately trying to stop here.

You can argue that ads are just absolute evil everywhere and that the
distinction between in-app ads and web ads is arbitrary. And, I guess, maybe?
Maybe we should have the absolute right, as the device owner, to say to app
developers, "Hey, if you were stupid enough to make this app free and try to
get money from it by showing me ads, tough cookies for you."

But, as the device owner, you _also_ have the absolute right to, well, choose
what apps you run, in a way that really isn't true for web sites. I mean, yes,
you have the choice of which web sites you visit, but in practice it's way
harder to say "if you don't like web sites with horrible, intrusive ads, just
don't visit them" than it is to say "if you don't like ad-supported apps,
don't download them." And while this is absolutely a subjective perception
that may apply only to me and no one else, it would feel just a little bit
sleazy to me to use an ad-supported app for free while blocking the ads. If I
like the app, I'll pay to make the ads go away if that's an option; if the ads
can't be turned off and they're too intrusive, I'll simply stop using the app.

~~~
mirimir
As "the device owner, [I] also have the absolute right" to control what the
device does, what traffic it accepts, and what it rejects. And as much as I
like Apple's stance on privacy and security, I hate its refusal to honor
owners' rights. So I'd never use their stuff.

~~~
s73v3r_
Then don't use apps that are ad supported? That sounds like the way to make
sure that you're controlling what traffic it's using. Not denying apps that
you're using revenue.

~~~
mirimir
It's complicated, because these are closed ecosystems. So sometimes there
aren't many options.

I do gather that app security and isolation are better in iOS than in Android.
And that dropping AdGuard Pro is actually evidence for that.

------
Pirolita
As far as I know, Firefox for iOS can also block ads and trackers.

