head to head · open source
uBlock vs badssl.com
uBlock has 69,033 GitHub stars, 4,427 forks, 15 open issues and last shipped yesterday. badssl.com has 3,056 stars, 205 forks, 210 open issues and last shipped 5 months ago. uBlock leads on adoption by 2,159% (69,033 vs 3,056 stars). uBlock is written in JavaScript under GPL-3.0; badssl.com is written in HTML under Apache-2.0. uBlock has attracted 6% as many forks as stars, badssl.com 7%. uBlock was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee.
Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.
← all 20902 open source comparisons
Side by side
| uBlock | badssl.com | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 69K | ★ 3.1K |
| License | GPL-3.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Written in | JavaScript | HTML |
| Last push | 2026-11-02 | 2026-06-01 |
| Forks | ⑂ 4.4K | ⑂ 205 |
| Self-hosting | Yes | Yes |
| Data ownership | Your server | Your server |
pick uBlock if
- You weight community size — 69K stars and counting
- You want the GPL-3.0 license terms
- Your stack matches JavaScript
- You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance
pick badssl.com if
- You want the badssl.com feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the Apache-2.0 license terms
- Your stack matches HTML
- You evaluated both and badssl.com fits your workflow better
About uBlock
[![Badge Commits]][Commit Rate] [![Badge Issues]][Issues] [![Badge Localization]][Crowdin] [![Badge License]][License] [![Badge NPM]][NPM] [![Badge Mozilla]][Mozilla] ![Badge Chrome] [![Badge Edge]][Edge] uBlock Origin (uBO) GitHub Releases Stable and development versions on Firefox, Chromium MV2, and Thunderbird. Must be placed manually into web browsers; the Chromium and Thunderbird versions usually won't auto update. Related: uBlock Origin Lite uBlock Origin (uBO) is a CPU and memory efficient [wide spectrum content blocker][Blocking] for Chromium and Firefox. It blocks ads, trackers, coin miners, popups…
read the full uBlock overview →
About badssl.com
Visit badssl.com for a list of test subdomains, including: self signed.badssl.com expired.badssl.com mixed.badssl.com rc4.badssl.com hsts.badssl.com Server Setup Stock Ubuntu VM, DNS A records for badssl.com. and .badssl.com. pointing to the VM. Testing and development 1. Follow the instructions to install Docker. 2. Clone into the badssl repo by running git clone && cd badssl.com . 3. In order to access the various badssl subdomains locally you will need to add them to your system hosts file. Run make list hosts and copy and paste the output into /etc/hosts . 4. Start Docker by running make serve . 5. You can…
read the full badssl.com overview →
More in Productivity & Utilities
Related comparisons
More Browsers & Extensions projects
Compare either of these against the rest of the Browsers & Extensions field.
Frequently asked questions
Is uBlock or badssl.com more popular?
uBlock has 69,033 GitHub stars and badssl.com has 3,056. uBlock has the larger community by that measure.
Are uBlock and badssl.com free?
Both are open source. uBlock is licensed under GPL-3.0 and badssl.com under Apache-2.0. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between uBlock and badssl.com?
uBlock is written in JavaScript and badssl.com in HTML. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.
Which should I choose, uBlock or badssl.com?
Choose uBlock if you want the larger community (69,033 stars) or its GPL-3.0 licence terms. Choose badssl.com if its feature set, stack or Apache-2.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.