UltimaDark - The Fastest Dark Mode Extension : firefox

[–] Mwa@lemm.ee 1 points 20 minutes ago

yoo this works with resist fingerprinting

[–] sanpo@sopuli.xyz 45 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Did anyone actually test how fast it is compared to Dark Reader?

Calling yourself "the fastest" is all nice and good, but some benchmarks would be nice.

[–] jangdonggun@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago

Yep, people have benchmarked:

Firefox without any Dark Mode addon = 27 points Speedometer
With Dark Reader = about 11 points
With UltimaDark = 25-26 points

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 29 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Ah it doesn't work on Android? A pity, that's where I need dark mode the most.

[–] Schorsch@feddit.org 17 points 2 weeks ago

Dark Reader works a charm on Android.

[–] rockhandle@lemm.ee 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

It works but it's config interface looks borked

Edit: NVM, it also breaks some sites

[–] Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago

I just tried it on a Firefox fork and it works fine.

Just go to the link in OP, then enable Desktop Mode in Firefox. That will let you install it.

[–] sag@lemm.ee -3 points 2 weeks ago

Didn't tried on android.

[–] JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world 23 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Pro tip: Firefox can do dark mode natively, if you're ready to accept some ugly websites.

Settings > Manage colors > then set your preferred hues and Override to Always.

It's blazing fast with zero white flash, and most sites are perfectly legible.

[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

While I'm glad they're trying this, it has the same problem as Brave, no configuration. Dark Reader lets you configure individual site profiles via a toggle of static/dynamic/etc to fix ones that don't work well. Without that, nothing will compare.

[–] Achyu@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Is there a way for the same on Firefox on Android, Fenix?

[–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Although it works well, this is so experimental, it makes lab rats look like seasoned professionals.

Looks good, but I wait until its proven and stable.

[–] sag@lemm.ee -4 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

It's been in development for 4 years.

[–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 11 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

That doesn't mean it's stable. From his own description:

This is still highly experimental so it can also ruin your internet experience

[–] sag@lemm.ee -1 points 2 weeks ago

Yea, I mean it will take eternity(not really) to become stable. xD

[–] jangdonggun@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago

Because of the fact that UltimaDark is going the hardest route, using a totally different API, unlike Dark Reader

[–] rbesfe@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 weeks ago

Dark Reader has been in development since 2014 and is much more polished

[–] Tejas@floss.social 8 points 2 weeks ago

@sag
Unfortunately, it is not available on #Firefox mobile.

[–] Bogasse@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 weeks ago

On my rather old FP3 it spares me a few seconds per page load and the result seems quite comparable to dark reader.

[–] mrvictory1@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Dark Reader is intensive, I will give this a shot. So far so good on FF mobile.

[–] sag@lemm.ee 4 points 2 weeks ago

Yea, It uses native features of Gecko engines that's why it's faster than Dark Reader.

[–] Bogasse@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

How did you install it on mobile? Do you need to use the nightly?

[–] mrvictory1@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Nope, you can install extensions to regular FF for a while on Android. Go to addons.mozilla.org and install like how you would do it on desktop. Request desktop site if extension claims to be incompatible.

[–] Bogasse@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago

Thanks! I was missing the desktop site trick 👍

[–] Quill7513 3 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Maybe I'm an idiot, but I can't find a source link. Is this open source? I was curious about finding information comparing it to darkreader

[–] sag@lemm.ee 7 points 2 weeks ago

Yes, https://github.com/ThomazPom/Moz-Ext-UltimaDark

[–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 2 points 2 weeks ago

Under "More information" > "Add-on Links" > "Homepage".

[–] xep@fedia.io 2 points 2 weeks ago

https://github.com/ThomazPom/Moz-Ext-UltimaDark

[–] karashta@fedia.io 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Anyone tried this with twitch? I just get a gray screen instead of video. Anyone else? Really like this extension otherwise

[–] dr_jekell@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Twitch already has a dark mode available in the settings.

[–] karashta@fedia.io 2 points 2 weeks ago

The issue is more that the extension doesn't seem to properly let sites bypass or something. I have to turn the extension off and refresh to get picture back.

[–] scorp@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago

thanks for the suggestion

[+] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip -10 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Don't use dark mode as it is bad for privacy

[–] derek@infosec.pub 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

How so?

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Websites can look at their own structure, and they can see the changes addons make to them, for example of a CSS property was changed or added.

Maybe there are ways around that, like with the use of a shadow DOM, but I'm not a web developer

[–] derek@infosec.pub 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

That's not true for all sites. If the page is static then it'll have no clue. If it's dynamic and running a client-side script to report this info back, and if that information is collected, then I can see how that might be a useful supplement for fingerprinting if the server owner is so inclined. At that point though I'm wondering why a security-conscious user is raw dogging the internet and allowing scripts to run in their browser without consent (NoScript saves browsers).

Even then it's unclear when/how altering the page to render it differently is commonly communicated back to the server, how much identifying information that talk-back is capable of conveying, and how we might mitigate those collections (wholesale abstinence and/or script control aside). What are the specific mechanisms of action we're concerned about? This isn't a faux challenge for the sake of hollow rhetoric. I'm ignorant, find the dialogue interesting, and am asking for help being less dumb. :)

I found some brief and useful discussion in this Privacy Guides thread. Seems like the concern is valid but minimal for all but the most strict/defensive postures.

Trying to validate this myself for Dark Reader without breaking out Wireshark and monitoring some big tech site while I toggle color modes (which I might do later if I think of it and find the time) I see Dark Reader is open source, an Open Collective member, and seems to engender little hand-wringing. The only public gripe I can find is this misguided Orion Browser feedback thread.

Thanks for the interesting diversion!

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 1 points 2 weeks ago

Trying to validate this myself for Dark Reader without breaking out Wireshark and monitoring some big tech site while I toggle color modes (which I might do later if I think of it and find the time)

You would also need to setup up a custom certificate authority to MITM the TLS traffic (a very blunt wording but to the point).
I think you should be fine using the network tab in the normal browser devtools, or the one in the browser toolbox as that latter one is supposed to show all traffic your browser makes.

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yes, this is absolutely just a possibility for a website to do it. Actually it's probably also quite complicated technically, but there are multiple services for recording precise user behaviour including all mouse movements on a website, so I would imagine there's something for this, too.

What are the specific mechanisms of action we're concerned about?

I was thinking about the website's code running some light checksum on all the resources it has downloaded and loaded into the browser, and if it differs then upload the diff. I think it should work to find groups of people with a similar browser setup, but maybe it would fine just as browser fingerprinting too.

[–] colderr@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What?

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 weeks ago

It makes you unique from a fingerprinting perspective.