NoScripts

All:

I am really missing the functionality in NoScript which went away a 
while back in an "upgrade".  I've read about the efforts of the 
developer, etc.

Unfortunately, the status quo is unacceptable -- I am getting all kinds 
of junk I don't want which is consuming my limited data allocation on my 
satellite connection.

1.  Are there some settings hidden somewhere that I can tweak to make it 
more aggressive like it used to be?

2.  If not, recommendations on an alternative Firefox add-on?

Thanks,

Jim

wb4gcs@amsat.org



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

0
Jim
3/26/2018 11:27:34 PM
mozilla.support.firefox 24318 articles. 8 followers. Post Follow

15 Replies
130 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 21

On 3/26/18 7:27 PM, Jim Sanford wrote:
> All:
>
> I am really missing the functionality in NoScript which went away a 
> while back in an "upgrade".  I've read about the efforts of the 
> developer, etc.
>
> Unfortunately, the status quo is unacceptable -- I am getting all 
> kinds of junk I don't want which is consuming my limited data 
> allocation on my satellite connection.
>
> 1.  Are there some settings hidden somewhere that I can tweak to make 
> it more aggressive like it used to be?
>
> 2.  If not, recommendations on an alternative Firefox add-on?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jim
>

Try version 10.1.7.5 released 3/26/2018

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/noscript/

There is also a support site at 
https://forums.informaction.com/viewforum.php?f=3

-- 
Best name ever! Cadet Bone Spurs
NRA = Newly Recruited Activists
National Popular Vote <http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/>
Ubuntu 16.04LTS - Unity Desktop

0
WaltS48
3/27/2018 2:38:35 AM
In message 
<mailman.213.1522111516.17195.support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org>, Jim 
Sanford <wb4gcs@wb4gcs.org> writes:
>All:
>
>I am really missing the functionality in NoScript which went away a 
>while back in an "upgrade".� I've read about the efforts of the 
>developer, etc.
>
>Unfortunately, the status quo is unacceptable -- I am getting all kinds 
>of junk I don't want which is consuming my limited data allocation on 
>my satellite connection.
>
>1.� Are there some settings hidden somewhere that I can tweak to make 
>it more aggressive like it used to be?
>
>2.� If not, recommendations on an alternative Firefox add-on?

Well, not really a Firefox add-on - in fact not such at all - but a good 
HOSTS file will stop a lot of junk. (Or its equivalent if you're not on 
Windows.)
>
>Thanks,
>
>Jim
>
>wb4gcs@amsat.org
>
>
>
>---
>This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
(You _can_ turn that bit off - tray, menu, settings, untick AVG sig.)
-- 
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I've been known to pull my pyjama top over my head and run around like a
footballer, but with the sweet, sweet bonus of swinging knockers.
- Sarah Millican, RT 2015/1/10-16
0
J
3/27/2018 3:24:56 AM
I used an earlier incarnation of NoScript on a earlier incarnation of Firef=
ox to good results. However, with the latest Ffx and NoScript 10, it became=
 such a hassle that I deleted NS. There were so many important (for me) sit=
es that NS caused so many problems with that it wasn't worth the trouble, s=
o I ditched it. There is a newer version out, I see, so that I might try it=
 again. Ffx is my most common browser on my Win 7 box, and the idea of limi=
ting Javascripts is a good one, but it has to be done well, which NS 10, at=
 least originally, was not.
0
slyphnoyde
3/27/2018 11:13:17 AM
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk>:

> Well, not really a Firefox add-on - in fact not such at all - but a good 
> HOSTS file will stop a lot of junk. (Or its equivalent if you're not on 
> Windows.)

Linux distros and MacOS have a hosts (lower case) file in the /etc
folder.

<https://www.howtogeek.com/howto/27350/beginner-geek-how-to-edit-your-hosts-file/>


Yrrah
0
Yrrah
3/27/2018 12:46:14 PM
Jim Sanford <wb4gcs@wb4gcs.org>:

> 1.  Are there some settings hidden somewhere that I can tweak to make it 
> more aggressive like it used to be?

Take a closer look at and configure the settings.

> 2.  If not, recommendations on an alternative Firefox add-on?

uBlock Origin, perhaps not an alternative but certainly an excellent
complementary add-on.
"uBlock Origin is (...) a wide-spectrum blocker (...). The default
behavior of uBlock Origin when newly installed is to block ads,
trackers and malware sites -- through EasyList, EasyPrivacy, Peter
Lowe’s ad/tracking/malware servers, various lists of malware sites,
and uBlock Origin's own filter lists."
Home:
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock
FFx add-ons:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ublock-origin/

The somewhat more complex "advanced brother of uBlock Origin" uMatrix
is also recommended by some tech writers (I haven't used it):
https://www.ghacks.net/2017/11/28/a-umatrix-guide-for-firefox/
and
https://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/umatrix-guide.html
etc.
Home:
https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix
FFx add-ons:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/umatrix/

And a HOSTS/hosts file.
http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm
(also in uBO's lists)
or/and
https://github.com/StevenBlack/hosts/


Yrrah
0
Yrrah
3/27/2018 1:10:13 PM
--001a113ed22cda36df056866111e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Tried the new version. Unfortunately I cannot set it to enable a lot of
sites I need, so I had to delete it.

Hopefully a future version will resemble the old one which was way easier
so set?


Gabriela
QA Mozilla Hispano Team Responsible
http://www.mozilla-hispano.org





On 27 March 2018 at 08:13, <slyphnoyde@gmail.com> wrote:

> I used an earlier incarnation of NoScript on a earlier incarnation of
> Firefox to good results. However, with the latest Ffx and NoScript 10, it
> became such a hassle that I deleted NS. There were so many important (for
> me) sites that NS caused so many problems with that it wasn't worth the
> trouble, so I ditched it. There is a newer version out, I see, so that I
> might try it again. Ffx is my most common browser on my Win 7 box, and the
> idea of limiting Javascripts is a good one, but it has to be done well,
> which NS 10, at least originally, was not.
> _______________________________________________
> support-firefox mailing list
> support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-firefox
> To unsubscribe, send an email to support-firefox-request@lists.
> mozilla.org?subject=unsubscribe
>

--001a113ed22cda36df056866111e
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:verdana,=
sans-serif;font-size:small">Tried the new version. Unfortunately I cannot s=
et it to enable a lot of sites I need, so I had to delete it.</div><div cla=
ss=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:smal=
l"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:verdana,sans=
-serif;font-size:small">Hopefully a future version will resemble the old on=
e which was way easier so set?<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br clea=
r=3D"all"><div><div class=3D"gmail_signature" data-smartmail=3D"gmail_signa=
ture"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div dir=3D"ltr"><span style=3D"font-family:com=
ic sans ms,sans-serif"><span style=3D"font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>G=
abriela<br>QA Mozilla Hispano Team Responsible</span><br><a href=3D"http://=
www.mozilla-hispano.org" target=3D"_blank">http://www.mozilla-hispano.org</=
a><br></span><br><br><br><br></div></div></div></div></div>
<br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On 27 March 2018 at 08:13,  <span dir=3D"ltr=
">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:slyphnoyde@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">slyphnoyde@=
gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I used a=
n earlier incarnation of NoScript on a earlier incarnation of Firefox to go=
od results. However, with the latest Ffx and NoScript 10, it became such a =
hassle that I deleted NS. There were so many important (for me) sites that =
NS caused so many problems with that it wasn&#39;t worth the trouble, so I =
ditched it. There is a newer version out, I see, so that I might try it aga=
in. Ffx is my most common browser on my Win 7 box, and the idea of limiting=
 Javascripts is a good one, but it has to be done well, which NS 10, at lea=
st originally, was not.<br>
<div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5">______________________________<wbr>=
_________________<br>
support-firefox mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org">support-firefox@lists.=
mozilla.<wbr>org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-firefox" rel=3D"noref=
errer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.mozilla.org/<wbr>listinfo/support-fi=
refox</a><br>
To unsubscribe, send an email to <a href=3D"http://support-firefox-request@=
lists.mozilla.org?subject=3Dunsubscribe" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blan=
k">support-firefox-request@lists.<wbr>mozilla.org?subject=3D<wbr>unsubscrib=
e</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>

--001a113ed22cda36df056866111e--
0
Gabriela
3/27/2018 2:53:58 PM
--001a113ed22cda36df056866111e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Tried the new version. Unfortunately I cannot set it to enable a lot of
sites I need, so I had to delete it.

Hopefully a future version will resemble the old one which was way easier
so set?


Gabriela
QA Mozilla Hispano Team Responsible
http://www.mozilla-hispano.org





On 27 March 2018 at 08:13, <slyphnoyde@gmail.com> wrote:

> I used an earlier incarnation of NoScript on a earlier incarnation of
> Firefox to good results. However, with the latest Ffx and NoScript 10, it
> became such a hassle that I deleted NS. There were so many important (for
> me) sites that NS caused so many problems with that it wasn't worth the
> trouble, so I ditched it. There is a newer version out, I see, so that I
> might try it again. Ffx is my most common browser on my Win 7 box, and the
> idea of limiting Javascripts is a good one, but it has to be done well,
> which NS 10, at least originally, was not.
> _______________________________________________
> support-firefox mailing list
> support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-firefox
> To unsubscribe, send an email to support-firefox-request@lists.
> mozilla.org?subject=unsubscribe
>

--001a113ed22cda36df056866111e
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:verdana,=
sans-serif;font-size:small">Tried the new version. Unfortunately I cannot s=
et it to enable a lot of sites I need, so I had to delete it.</div><div cla=
ss=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:smal=
l"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:verdana,sans=
-serif;font-size:small">Hopefully a future version will resemble the old on=
e which was way easier so set?<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br clea=
r=3D"all"><div><div class=3D"gmail_signature" data-smartmail=3D"gmail_signa=
ture"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div dir=3D"ltr"><span style=3D"font-family:com=
ic sans ms,sans-serif"><span style=3D"font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>G=
abriela<br>QA Mozilla Hispano Team Responsible</span><br><a href=3D"http://=
www.mozilla-hispano.org" target=3D"_blank">http://www.mozilla-hispano.org</=
a><br></span><br><br><br><br></div></div></div></div></div>
<br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On 27 March 2018 at 08:13,  <span dir=3D"ltr=
">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:slyphnoyde@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">slyphnoyde@=
gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I used a=
n earlier incarnation of NoScript on a earlier incarnation of Firefox to go=
od results. However, with the latest Ffx and NoScript 10, it became such a =
hassle that I deleted NS. There were so many important (for me) sites that =
NS caused so many problems with that it wasn&#39;t worth the trouble, so I =
ditched it. There is a newer version out, I see, so that I might try it aga=
in. Ffx is my most common browser on my Win 7 box, and the idea of limiting=
 Javascripts is a good one, but it has to be done well, which NS 10, at lea=
st originally, was not.<br>
<div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5">______________________________<wbr>=
_________________<br>
support-firefox mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org">support-firefox@lists.=
mozilla.<wbr>org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-firefox" rel=3D"noref=
errer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.mozilla.org/<wbr>listinfo/support-fi=
refox</a><br>
To unsubscribe, send an email to <a href=3D"http://support-firefox-request@=
lists.mozilla.org?subject=3Dunsubscribe" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blan=
k">support-firefox-request@lists.<wbr>mozilla.org?subject=3D<wbr>unsubscrib=
e</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>

--001a113ed22cda36df056866111e--
0
Gabriela
3/27/2018 2:53:58 PM
On 03/26/2018 04:27 PM, Jim Sanford wrote:

> I am really missing the functionality in NoScript which went away a 
> while back in an "upgrade". 
>
  Which functionality do you feel is missing?
  The initial upgrade to v10 was disappointing, true. The developer has
made excellent progress addressing those issues. I find the current
version quite adequate for my purposes.

-- 
James Moe
jmm-list at sohnen-moe dot com
Think.
0
James
3/27/2018 5:34:22 PM
Yrrah wrote:
> Jim Sanford <wb4gcs@wb4gcs.org>:
> 
>> 1.  Are there some settings hidden somewhere that I can tweak to make it
>> more aggressive like it used to be?
> 
> Take a closer look at and configure the settings.
> 
>> 2.  If not, recommendations on an alternative Firefox add-on?
> 
> uBlock Origin, perhaps not an alternative but certainly an excellent
> complementary add-on.
> "uBlock Origin is (...) a wide-spectrum blocker (...). The default
> behavior of uBlock Origin when newly installed is to block ads,
> trackers and malware sites -- through EasyList, EasyPrivacy, Peter
> Lowe’s ad/tracking/malware servers, various lists of malware sites,
> and uBlock Origin's own filter lists."
> Home:
> https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock
> FFx add-ons:
> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ublock-origin/
> 
> The somewhat more complex "advanced brother of uBlock Origin" uMatrix
> is also recommended by some tech writers (I haven't used it):
> https://www.ghacks.net/2017/11/28/a-umatrix-guide-for-firefox/
> and
> https://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/umatrix-guide.html
> etc.
> Home:
> https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix
> FFx add-ons:
> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/umatrix/
> 
> And a HOSTS/hosts file.
> http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm
> (also in uBO's lists)
> or/and
> https://github.com/StevenBlack/hosts/
> 
> 
> Yrrah
> 
I thought uMatrix was an adjunct to uBlock Origin, not a substitute?

0
EE
3/27/2018 6:21:50 PM
Dne 27/03/2018 v 20:21 EE napsal(a):

>>
> I thought uMatrix was an adjunct to uBlock Origin, not a substitute?

In my understanding,
uBlock origin is more like AdBlock Plus,
while uMatrix* more like NoScript.

But the functionality and design approach
of respective addons do not fully overlap.

* Umatrix is the only one I do not have experience with

-- 
Poutnik


0
Poutnik
3/27/2018 7:50:12 PM
Thanks to all who replied.

What functionality am I missing?  Great question!

1.  By default, blocks all java script sites not previously permanently 
allowed.

2.  Tells me in real time it is blocking.

3.  Allows me to right click and get a list of what is being blocked.  
For each, allows me to temporarily allow, permanently allow, ignore 
(continue blocking) or permanently block.

4.  The result is I got a lot less than I get now.  Too many pages now 
automatically download videos, which I don't want and whose data expense 
I don't want.  I used to not get videos at all, unless I explicitly 
allowed several sites, and I was OK with that.

5.  In the current version, I can't see any evidence of any blocking, 
and I haven't been able to figure out how to block. User interface 
completely changed for the worse with no instructions.

6.  I have messed around in settings, to no avail.

Thanks,

Jim



On 3/27/2018 1:34 PM, James Moe via support-firefox wrote:
> On 03/26/2018 04:27 PM, Jim Sanford wrote:
>
>> I am really missing the functionality in NoScript which went away a
>> while back in an "upgrade".
>>
>    Which functionality do you feel is missing?
>    The initial upgrade to v10 was disappointing, true. The developer has
> made excellent progress addressing those issues. I find the current
> version quite adequate for my purposes.
>


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

0
Jim
3/27/2018 11:15:21 PM
Dne 28/03/2018 v 01:15 Jim Sanford napsal(a):
> Thanks to all who replied.
> 
> What functionality am I missing?  Great question!
> 
> 1.  By default, blocks all java script sites not previously permanently
> allowed.
> 
> 2.  Tells me in real time it is blocking.
> 
> 3.  Allows me to right click and get a list of what is being blocked. 
> For each, allows me to temporarily allow, permanently allow, ignore
> (continue blocking) or permanently block.
> 
> 4.  The result is I got a lot less than I get now.  Too many pages now
> automatically download videos, which I don't want and whose data expense
> I don't want.  I used to not get videos at all, unless I explicitly
> allowed several sites, and I was OK with that.
> 
> 5.  In the current version, I can't see any evidence of any blocking,
> and I haven't been able to figure out how to block. User interface
> completely changed for the worse with no instructions.
> 
> 6.  I have messed around in settings, to no avail.
> 

I think the FF support forum is the wrong grave to cry on,
as NoScript is not a part of FF.

Better is to find answers or discuss problems on NoScript support forum.
https://forums.informaction.com/viewforum.php?f=3

Generally, authors of advanced addons,
trying to port all the functionality to the webextension API addons,
reportedly struggle with inferior abilities exposed by the API.

Also with unsettled API development and documentation,
leading to lack of clarity if and when would be
a functionality essential to the addon ever possible.

The typical example is Tab Mix Plus addon.
There exists webextension API beta version,
but reportedly very crippled, merely waiting
what API updates eventually offer.

-- 
Poutnik


0
Poutnik
3/28/2018 6:26:52 AM
Am 27.03.2018 um 01:27 schrieb Jim Sanford:

> I am getting all kinds of junk I don't want which is consuming my
> limited data allocation on my satellite connection.
More a question than an answer, because I'd be glad to hear some
clarification on things I've read about new API at an unquotable source.

So here's the FUD:

Whereas old API provided means for add-ons to intercept http
connections, so that they could really stop firefox from downloading
content to be blocked, new API doesn't provide such means.  Javascript
as well as ads blocking only happens in the rendering engine, now.

Again, I don't know if that is true.  It is in line with your
observation on increased traffic, though.

Waldin
0
Waldin
3/28/2018 1:58:34 PM
On 03/27/2018 04:15 PM, Jim Sanford wrote:

> 1.  By default, blocks all java script sites not previously permanently 
> allowed.
> 
> 2.  Tells me in real time it is blocking.
> 
> 3.  Allows me to right click and get a list of what is being blocked.  
> For each, allows me to temporarily allow, permanently allow, ignore 
> (continue blocking) or permanently block.
> 
  All this exists in the current version.
  While there is no RMB option, NS shows the status of all sites in its
flyout. I find it more informative than the earlier versions; I can
easily see at a glance what is and is not being blocked.
  Do you have the default set to allow all rather than to block all?

>
> 6.  I have messed around in settings, to no avail.
>
  What are your current settings for Default and Untrusted?

-- 
James Moe
jmm-list at sohnen-moe dot com
Think.
0
James
3/28/2018 8:31:37 PM
In message 
<mailman.6.1522245607.6718.support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org>, Waldin 
<nospam.waldin@yopmail.com> writes:
>Am 27.03.2018 um 01:27 schrieb Jim Sanford:
>
>> I am getting all kinds of junk I don't want which is consuming my
>> limited data allocation on my satellite connection.
>More a question than an answer, because I'd be glad to hear some
>clarification on things I've read about new API at an unquotable source.
>
>So here's the FUD:
>
>Whereas old API provided means for add-ons to intercept http
>connections, so that they could really stop firefox from downloading
>content to be blocked, new API doesn't provide such means.  Javascript
>as well as ads blocking only happens in the rendering engine, now.
>
>Again, I don't know if that is true.  It is in line with your
>observation on increased traffic, though.
>
>Waldin

Where there's a limited data allocation, I'd definitely go for a hosts 
file - if you like, in addition to all the other methods being 
discussed; a hosts file will ensure that any request for material from a 
blocked site, even if it gets through your noscript or similar, will not 
actually leave the computer. Since most ad.s (and quite a lot of 
scripts, too) come from a fairly small number of sites, it's not too 
hard to maintain a reasonable hosts file (especially if you use that 
thing that allows wildcards in host files, the name of which always 
escapes me).
-- 
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

" ... but ... on the sub-ether radio, [it said] you're dead!"
"Yeah, that's right, I just haven't stopped moving yet." (link episode)
0
J
3/29/2018 11:10:55 PM
Reply: