F5F Stay Refreshed Power Users Networks Search for various pihole identifiers

Search for various pihole identifiers

Search for various pihole identifiers

I
ItzAwesomeness
Junior Member
15
08-26-2023, 12:52 AM
#1
It seems the two figures reflect different data sources. The client list shows a higher count, while the main page displays a lower number. This discrepancy could be due to varying data collection methods or timeframes.
I
ItzAwesomeness
08-26-2023, 12:52 AM #1

It seems the two figures reflect different data sources. The client list shows a higher count, while the main page displays a lower number. This discrepancy could be due to varying data collection methods or timeframes.

S
SevensGamer
Member
154
08-26-2023, 04:33 AM
#2
I don't use PiHole anymore, but if it resembles AdGuard Home, the dashboard stats reflect the last 24 hours, while the query log covers from first-time view to current query. On that device's columns, you'll see cumulative data spanning from 23 February to 4 March.
S
SevensGamer
08-26-2023, 04:33 AM #2

I don't use PiHole anymore, but if it resembles AdGuard Home, the dashboard stats reflect the last 24 hours, while the query log covers from first-time view to current query. On that device's columns, you'll see cumulative data spanning from 23 February to 4 March.

R
Rounyx
Posting Freak
838
08-27-2023, 08:09 AM
#3
Falcon is right about the data being cumulative, while the dashboard uses a 24-hour rolling window. I think the IP address is likely 192.168.86.1 (or similar), probably your router.
R
Rounyx
08-27-2023, 08:09 AM #3

Falcon is right about the data being cumulative, while the dashboard uses a 24-hour rolling window. I think the IP address is likely 192.168.86.1 (or similar), probably your router.

F
FunnyGuy123
Junior Member
32
09-17-2023, 07:35 AM
#4
Only 49000 blocked. In my view, if you truly care about browsing, that percentage of blocks—though it covers 60-70% of your network—is quite low. From an advertising standpoint, I don’t like it and it actually discourages purchases from those companies, but it keeps the web functioning. So I’d suggest allowing more ads to help fund the sites you use daily and nightly. If you refuse to support them through ads, consider making donations. If that’s not possible, permit some legitimate advertisers while avoiding malicious ones. Otherwise, you’re draining server costs without contributing back. Try blocking domains like gstatic fontawesome imasdk.google and similar sites that aren’t meant for ads but don’t enhance your browsing. If you’re unfamiliar with a domain list, check Privacy Badger—it’s created by the EFF and reveals which sites attempt to load content. On some news pages I unknowingly saw my add-on disabled, and I noticed over 60 domains loading. That’s impressive! It exposes all the unwanted elements—trackers, scripts, etc.—and you can block them all, adding them to pi-hole. If you’re letting through 25,000 domains (most likely just repeats), you might only need around 1,000 and can identify what else you don’t require. Then examine the ad domains within the sites you visit and permit just those, ensuring each site is supported only when it loads. You don’t need to see the ads; they should load first. Using reader modes in Firefox, Chrome, or Safari will strip away the design while still allowing ads to run, saving money without sacrificing access.
F
FunnyGuy123
09-17-2023, 07:35 AM #4

Only 49000 blocked. In my view, if you truly care about browsing, that percentage of blocks—though it covers 60-70% of your network—is quite low. From an advertising standpoint, I don’t like it and it actually discourages purchases from those companies, but it keeps the web functioning. So I’d suggest allowing more ads to help fund the sites you use daily and nightly. If you refuse to support them through ads, consider making donations. If that’s not possible, permit some legitimate advertisers while avoiding malicious ones. Otherwise, you’re draining server costs without contributing back. Try blocking domains like gstatic fontawesome imasdk.google and similar sites that aren’t meant for ads but don’t enhance your browsing. If you’re unfamiliar with a domain list, check Privacy Badger—it’s created by the EFF and reveals which sites attempt to load content. On some news pages I unknowingly saw my add-on disabled, and I noticed over 60 domains loading. That’s impressive! It exposes all the unwanted elements—trackers, scripts, etc.—and you can block them all, adding them to pi-hole. If you’re letting through 25,000 domains (most likely just repeats), you might only need around 1,000 and can identify what else you don’t require. Then examine the ad domains within the sites you visit and permit just those, ensuring each site is supported only when it loads. You don’t need to see the ads; they should load first. Using reader modes in Firefox, Chrome, or Safari will strip away the design while still allowing ads to run, saving money without sacrificing access.