Ad-blocker feature - impressions

  • Hello everyone,
    I wanted to open this new thread in order to grab the impressions of those of you who are (were) using or testing the new Ad-blocker / DNS based ad-blocker feature, that has been introduced lately.
    If you're using it, what are your impressions? Saw any good things? Did you had a bad experience using it?
    What was good? What was bad about it?
    What would you like to see added to it (ability to set it in more details, list customisation, etc)?
    If you have not used it yet, are you planning to?

  • @Virgil-Nicolae Used it for a week or so. Seemed to work fairly well. Went back to my pi-hole though because I needed to add an exception for something.

  • @Virgil-Nicolae As for me, I've just enabled it for testing purposes. My daily drive is, as for most, the piHole, on which I have a much larger option of customisation, check on the traffic, devices, etc.
    Would be nice to see some add-ons for this ad-blocker: some graphs, what has been blocked, etc.
    Would be nice to have the option to add exceptions/blacklist something manually.
    I wouldn't mind to have the lists controlled by the Ubiquity.

  • I was very pleasantly surprised that a new feature was added to a several years old device and it was the only reason why I wanted to install the new firmware ASAP

    So far it works very well!

    For long time I used AdGuard app on iPhone to block ads and trackers via DNS filtering. I had my own list of blocked domains that I compiled over time based on AdGuard’s activity log

    I ran this list through a script on my Raspberry Pi to see if domains are blocked or not by the router. About a third of domains were blocked, mostly ad related. This was enough for me to stop using AdGuard in the home network (it’s been quite unstable recently)

    If you’re using Pi-hole you’d certainly find Amplifi’s solution too basic but for the rest of users it’s a fantastic feature

  • Turned this feature on today and just loved it. Also noticed that ads are blocked on iPhone apps as well.

    Notified of this feature to a couple of my friends who are using the router.

  • It isn't really working here. It still shows google ads but if I click on them I get a "Can't reach this page" error.

    Also the youtube ads are still there.

  • @Maurits-Veldhuijzen-van-Zanten Youbube ads are (almost) always going to be there. It's simply because the way they are "served" and when using a DNS type Ads blocking.

  • Any instructions on how to use? Turned it on via browser interface, do I need to change DHCP DNS settings which are currently using 1111.

  • @Richard-Carter I also use that dns and I can't see where to add this option.

  • Not all ads are blocked, only those that can be blocked with DNS (e.g. doubleclick, scorecardresearch, etc). Ads inside apps (e.g. youtube) are nearly impossible to block. I've been using it, but seems pretty lax based on my testing.

  • @Virgil-Nicolae I noticed that it blocks sites that are shown in google results as advertisements and also that one wishes to visit through sites like etc

    E.G., upon searching for the keyword “jeans” in google, you will get few Ads in the result. When you click on anyone of them, AmpliFi’s Ad-blockers won’t let me go to sites that show up as Advertisement.

    Can the AmpliFi AdBlock team look into it ?

    @UI-Brett cc’d here.

  • @Richard-Carter I turned it on via the browser, and it works perfectly as designed.

    When you are connected to your WiFi network, go to the site AmpliFi.lan , then turn the “Ad Blocker” option on.

  • @Writeumar I had the exact same experience (ads in Google search results) and it annoyed me so much that I eventually disabled it. A lot of times I want to go to the ad/site that shows up in Google search results, so this was a deal breaker for me.

  • @bshaheen maybe you can consider what I do ... each time I get blocked by the Ad-Blocker, I switch to cellular network. I understand that this won’t work on PC etc.

    You have a right to totally reject what I do, and I’d completely understand and respect that.

    For me, the Ad-blocker is serving around 95% of what it is supposed to serve.

  • @Writeumar and @bshaheen that's exactly what a DNS-based adblocker is supposed to do. You can still go to the website and search for whatever you are looking, but the Google link will be blocked (they use the link to track you and your purchase preferences).

  • @Gabriel-Ferreira Yes, I understand that and see how some people would like having it enabled. For me, it's simply more an annoyance than anything. The way it works with search results is that it does NOT prevent the ad, just prevents me from going to the ad. I can ignore search ads on my own, but if I click on a link, I want to go to that link, period. The router preventing me from going somewhere that I want to go is too restricting and annoying, so it is disabled for me.

  • @bshaheen again, as expected. If you don't want to see the text with the link you either need to setup a proxy that filters the content (which can be pretty complicated), or use a browser extension for cosmetic filtering (uBlock, AdBlock, etc). I guarantee you the DNS based filtering is enough to at least block huge and obnoxious banners on most sites (even though the message of failure to load them might still appear).

    The way to workaround that would be including either a whitelist or a blacklist.

  • @Gabriel-Ferreira No offense, but you're telling me how to solve a problem I never said I had or existed. I never said I didn't want to see the ad. What I said was that enabling the DNS ad blocker prevented me from accessing a link/site that I click on and want to go to. What purpose is an ad blocker if I still see the ad, but can't access it if I want to? Doesn't seem to really serve a purpose to me. Therefore, I've disabled it since it annoys me. Others may feel entirely different and find it useful. For them it works, which is perfectly fine and acceptable. For me it doesn't serve a useful purpose. With it disabled, I see the ad, just like I do with it enabled, but I am not restricted or blocked from accessing a link I want to visit. If I don't want to visit the link I won't click on it, so the only thing different is that it restricts me from visiting sites I DO want to visit, which is annoying and had led me to disable the feature. This is just my experience and opinion. To each their own.

    The bottom line, for me, is that the DNS "ad blocker" does not block the ad. It blocks access to the site the ad links to. If I want to access a site/link, I want to have that ability unrestricted. I don't need/want my router controlling what sites I can and cannot visit.

  • @bshaheen the purpose is to prevent/reduce tracking, in some cases speed up browsing by reducing downloads of some ads and tracking code, reduce JavaScript code executing.

    Have your never searched for something just to be bombarded with ads for that everywhere? Shouldn't happen after enabling it.

    If what you're looking is cosmetic filtering, than it really won't do the job.

    In my network, ~44% of the DNS requests are blocked. Most of them are Google ads/tracking (15%), Microsoft (5%) and Akamai/ScorecardResearch (2%).

  • @Maurits-Veldhuijzen-van-Zanten Hello, if I recall correctly YouTube ads are imbedded and cant be blocked unless you purchase YouTube premium.

Log in to reply