StevenBlack/hosts

Prefer upstream for almost everyone. This fork is effectively a stale mirror with no added functionality, so adoption only makes sense if you specifically need this repository snapshot.

Prefer this fork only if the extra category mixes are the main requirement. If you want the most current, actively maintained hosts aggregation, upstream is the safer choice.

Choose the upstream project unless you specifically need a frozen legacy fork or want to continue a custom 2018-era branch; this fork is materially behind and should be treated as stale.

Prefer this fork only if you specifically want its older, more expansive category-based blocking setup. For most adopters, upstream is the better choice because it is much newer and actively maintained.

Prefer upstream unless you specifically want an older, unchanged snapshot. This fork adds no visible functionality and is far behind the active project, so it is a poor choice for users who want current block coverage.

Choose this fork only if its older custom variant structure is the point; otherwise upstream is the better default because it is actively maintained and much newer. This fork is for customization and legacy stability, not for staying current.

Prefer upstream unless you explicitly want this fork's older, more customized recipe set. For most adopters, the staleness outweighs the added variants.

Prefer upstream unless you specifically want this fork’s older pinned state and its extra stats/graph workflow; otherwise the maintenance gap is too large for a security/blocklist project.