[Feature request] Add whitelisted mode

[elyahw]

It would be very useful if the app had a whitelisted mode. Only the included addresses would be allowed, otherwise everything else is blocked.

Instead of blocking hundreds of thousands of domains, one could add a few hundred main ones he uses and have peace of mind. This whitelist would then grow with time. I found whitelisting the most effective kind of blocking.

[realbiz21]

@elyahw this is already possible.

Modify the additional hosts file, and at the bottom, place a "*"

[elyahw]

Thanks. The only problem now is that what if I have some 20k websites to whitelist?

Is not it possible to put them in a list somewhere other than here?

[slcw]

To whitelist a host just go to "Configure Additional Hosts" and add the host with a preceding "!". For example...

!google.com
!nextdns.io
!amazon.com

You can also use wildcards in whitelist entries. For example...

!*.google.com

This will whitelist all hosts of the Google domain, but not google.com itself. So, if you want to whitelist google.com in addition to all sub-hosts, you need both entries. For example...

!google.com
!*.google.com

[twu2]

+1

The current whitelist mode need to edit additionalHosts.txt, can't update just like blacklist.
It will be great if we can toggle the blacklist/whitelist mode in the filter settting, then it could be auto-refresh like blacklist hosts file.

[ThatAnnoyingVegan]

Yes, please.

[elyahw]

You can also use wildcards in whitelist entries. For example...

!*.google.com

This will whitelist all hosts of the Google domain, but not google.com itself. So, if you want to whitelist google.com in addition to all sub-hosts, you need both entries. For example...

!google.com !*.google.com

Thanks @slcw.

The whitelisting is actually redundant. It is never triggered and it does not override any other rules. The piece in the AdditionalHosts.txt which says:

# PRIORITIES in case of conflicting entries
# 1. Explicit entries without wildcards
# 2. Wildcard entries prioritized along the sequence in this file
# 3. Downloaded blocklist

Is incorrect. Rules 1 and 3 would mean that explicitly whitelisted entries, e.g. !google.com in the additional list should override other lists, but this does not happen and it is ignored completely. It is redundant. if google.com is included in the "downloaded blocklist", and whitelisted here, then it will still be blocked.

So the filter has no whitelisted mode at all.. There is no need to include any whitelisted entry, e.g. !*.google.com as you suggested because all unblocked entries are whitelisted by default..

[IngoZenz]

I do not understand this request. It works as designed as you described in the first part of your message. I also do not plan to add suport for whitelist filter lists. It would get messy with the priorities of conflicting entries. It is already complicated today.