NoScript??

File: sd.png (52KB, 368x969px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 368x969px

how the fuck are supposed to know which ones to block?

>>60849902
yea

Autism has no limits

Not every site needs you to approve 9 million scripts for it to work.

I only use it so that news sites don't automatically play videos.

>>60849909
Anything that has facebook or "ad" in it is a hard NO, for one.

Who uses noscript when umatrix exists.

>>60849902
>approve 4cdn.org once
>hard

I use uMatrix now though

File: 287f8d8bc7084da8aeea2856abf924c8.jpg (19KB, 200x281px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 200x281px

>blocks your XSS
>stops CIA niggers from tracking you
>allowing scripts to run on your browser without explicit approval

Seriously hope you guys don't run JavaScript by default

bet OP hasn't blocked ekansovi.com yet

enjoy being data mined

>>60849958
>putting a key derivation function in a list of hash functions

It's so shit

It just gets in my way

>>60849909
if you are not a retard you know what websites do and are

>>60849949
ublock does that for you

>>60849909
Fucking all of them, that's disgusting.

I work for a large company and if someone is using noscript they just get a page telling them to fuck off, we aren't going to invest money into creating two versions of our website to appease a handful of turbo autists who still live in the 90s.

>>60849902
No, I use uMatrix instead.

I'm using noscript+request policy
Is there something umatrix can do and noscript can't?

do people actually take the time to go into the control panel of Windows 10 to configure the settings??

like wtf wouldn't that take hours? don't be so autistic lol xD who cares about "spyware" or "bloatware" anyway lmao loser. that's almost as autistic as those turbonerds that install that windows-alternative called "linux"

LibreJS exists.

>>60851980
let you onto a website without breaking everything

>>60849902
>manually
God i wish that was me

>>60849902
>Do people unironically use this and actually take the time to manually approve each script on every site they visit?
Yes.

I only visit probably 5 sites regularly. Everything works fine. For a new site, I usually only need to temporary allow the "main" domain and cdn and maybe something from a cloud service (amazon/cloudfront). 80% of the time that is enough.

If it requires more then the question is...do I care enough about seeing the content. And do I trust the site. Of course there are other things I can do like use archive.is or temp allow all.

I personally don't like using a web browser without a script blocker like NoScript (or like others have suggested uMatrix). But if you are a "casual" then you probably want to avoid script blockers until you decide they are worth your time to learn how to use them.

What can NoScript even do that much, much more convenient adblocker like uBlock Origin can't?

File: 1481843464660.jpg (8KB, 250x201px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 250x201px

>2017
>noscript

>>60851980
Have an interface that isn't shit and not dump you on a donation beg screen after every minor update.

no we use umatrix

>>60849949

>Who uses noscript when umatrix exists.

This! Who the fuck uses NoScript these days ????

>>60849909
Depends on how much you enjoy ads.

>>60849902
Yes. Security is worth my time thank you.

>>60849909
You get used to it after using it for awhile. Worst case scenario you can try unblocking things one at a time and if you've fucked up, block the whole site and try again.

t. used NoScript for like 5 years now.

>>60852765
Not worth it then, thx.

>>60852827
>This! Who the fuck uses NoScript these days ????
A lot of people. Nothing wrong with Gorhill's product(s). But NoScript is still extremely popular compared to uMatrix.

>>60852765
>donation beg screen after every minor update.
You can disable that in your options. Or install uMatrix if disabling it pisses you off.

>>60852911

Is this some retarded american thing ? I haven't come across anyone here in the Swedish tech-sphere who still uses NoScript, it's all uBlock Origin/uMatrix.

File: ns.png (16KB, 515x146px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 515x146px

>>60852943
>Is this some retarded american thing ?
Maybe.

Most people don't use an adblocker or script blocker. Although adblocking is a lot more popular now. So much so that Chrome will do it by default soon.

But Gorhills software is still relatively unknown among casual users who use ad/script blockers. Outside of the massive shilling (and "uMeme" trolling) on /g/ most use ABP and NoScript. I think those who dropped ABP for uBlock did so because they hated the "Acceptable" ads checkbox. There hasn't been anything similar with NS to sent the turbo-nerds running to uMatrix.

pls post your uMatrix whitelist

>>60849902
Yes

Just installed UMatrix instead of NoScript.
How do I use this now?

>>60849909
All of them faggot.

You need a whopping 2 or 3 of them to make the site work, the rest are advertising shit and tracking.

The fucking botnet is real you casual, you're looking at it.

Yes. Blacklisting DOES NOT WORK.

Well okay it helps but whitelisting is the only way to get real security.

>>60849909
If you see a website like that, stop using the website.
That's the main purpose of noscript- to show you exactly what sites you should avoid. Cross domain scripting is a fucking cancer.

>>60850050
>defending MD5

>>60852943
>>60853010
uMatrix doesn't exist for Firefox.
That's why I use NoScript and uBlock Origin

>>60853485
>defending SHA-1

>>60853521
>defending SHA-256

File: uwotm8.png (165KB, 1313x1040px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 1313x1040px

>>60853501

>>60853501
>uMatrix doesn't exist for Firefox.
sage

File: KrdhV.jpg (29KB, 300x544px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 300x544px

>>60853525
>>60853525
>>60853521
>>60853485
>>60850050
>>60849958
Fucking pedos, the lot of you are scum.

>>60853501
>uMatrix doesn't exist for Firefox.
kys fucking greaser

>>60853537
>>60853572
Huh. Nice to know.
When was it released?

>>60853685
a very long time ago

is there any extension that blocks selected inline scripts? for example there are two scripts, one that loads images and another that blocks the site if you use an adblocker and you just want to block the second one

>>60853685
over a year ago

>>60853713
Take a hint: Pages that use adblock detection simply don't want you.
Stop giving them hits.

>>60853685
two decades ago

>>60853748
this was just an example and you didn't help at all

>>60853763
wow i didn't realize

>>60853773
Well, how would you want to differentiate between inline scripts?
Positions of scripts in HTML can change at any time and the scripts themselves may change as well.

>>60852943
Va inte så jävla naive, din megatölp.

>>60853888
vet du ens vad naiv betyder?

>>60853912
>Avnänder inte NoScript
>Inte naive
Välj one.

>>60853860
by a combination of pattern matching and wildcards within each script

there will be parts of each script that are consistent and unique

>>60853935
blev du tappad som bäbis eller? han använder uMatrix som alla andra som har det minsta kolla på vad som händer i världen.

>>60853963
Skämt på dig, jag är inte svensk, jag använder Google Translator.

>>60853981
och det gör dig mindre efterbliven hur, exakt?

I use ublock origin, umatrix and noscript. Am i doing it wrong?

>>60854637
y

How umatrix is better than noscript really? I dont get it.

>>60854637
yes, umatrix and noscript does the same shit it's retarded to use both.

>>60854698
umatrix has better interface and more control than noscript

just compared the two screenshots in this thread.

How do I use uMatrix comapred to NoScript?
In NS I just had to click Forbid X or temporarily allow Y or even allow Z for sites like 4chinz.
What are all these options in uMatrix?

>>60849902
I use noscript because umatrix is too fidly.

>>60849902
>tfw no noscript on chrome

>>60854707
What if i dont give a fuck about interface and got used to noscript already?

>>60854715
This. Its very confusing compared to noscript.

>>60853501
>uMatrix doesn't exist for Firefox.
Lol retard. gorhill has even gone on record saying it works best on Firefox.

>>60854698
Its interface doesn't suck ass.
Its modern code, not spaghetti code from the 90s.
Not made by a jew.

>>60849909
Only enable scripts if you NEED to. If shit works fine without them y do it?

>>60854736
>admitting to using chrom

File: umatrix.png (38KB, 537x527px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 537x527px

>>60854715
>>60854746
>>60854738
no it's not. umatrix is easier because you dont have to click a million times to get a website working.
just click the top part of a URL to allow all links, cookies and scripts from that site.
you can also click "ALL" in the top left to allow all URLs then deny specific ones like facebook if you want.
to save your settings for this site click the LOCK icon.
most of the time you just have to enable scripts from some CDN to get shit working.

What is the overall opinion on Ghostery? Really bad not good or what? It's worked great for me so far.

>>60854815
dont trust it. there was some bullshit some time ago with it.

>>60854806
Still pretty confusing. Noscript requires less clicks if you know what youre doing.

>>60854866
no it doesnt and you dont have to allow everything from a URL with umatrix.

>>60849909
block everything until the website breaks then backtrack until you have the least amount of scripts needed.

>>60854866
>Noscript requires less clicks if you know what youre doing
No, it doesn't

>>60854806
Thanks for detailed infographics.
Notice how there is red, pink, light green and green?
What are those in between?
Also if the domain name like gstatic is red but some of its elements are pink or even green, what does it do then?

>>60854798
I had to, firefox is broken on my toaster.

File: IMG_0532.png (808KB, 1005x1024px) Image search: [Google]

808KB, 1005x1024px

>>60849902
>take the time to manually approve each script on every site they visit
Of course nobody approves every script. Why would you do that?

>>60854806
>>60854898
Also is it good by default?
Meaning I don't have to go through any of this?

>>60849902
People usually has a small list of sites they always visit, they can whitelist those that need it from there. The rest don't deserve it.

>>60854878
>>60854871
>noscript
>right click
>allow 4chan
umatrix?

>>60854922
>left click umatrix button
>click all

>>60854871
I prefer it because I broke 4chan with umatrix but just allowing 4chan.org and 4cdn.org and none of the ad and ekansovi stuff let 4chan work perfecty with noscript.

>>60854969
Hmm, then theyre on par. Ill read more about umatirx but so far not worthy to switch to desu.

sometimes, when I don't feel like getting a visit

>>60854898
green = allowed
light green = allowed via parent URL or your separate whitelist
red = specifically blocked by blacklist or you manually (and wont be enabled if you allow all 3rd party links.)
light red = blocked 3rd party URL by default or via parent URL, (will turn light green if you allow with "ALL" button.)

purple is just the root URL and doesnt really do anything that i know of.

>>60854907
yes, all 3rd party sites are blocked by default unless they're in a whitelist you subscribed to, and you can subscribe to more blacklists in the settings.

>>60854922
root URL is already allowed by default so you dont have to click anything.
also i think you forgot 4chan uses a CDN domain and you need to allow google to get captcha.

>click 4cdn
>click google

or just click ALL which makes it less clicks than outdated and depricated NoScript

umatrix shines when you're on a new site with tons of 3rd party URLs and you dont know which one you need to enable to show the content you want, you can just press ALL.

it's also better because you can select to block cookies, css, frames, xhr and scripts individually per URL.

>>60854984
you're retarded then.

look at the screenshot of umatrix above, works perfectly fine.

Very new to this topic, sorry for the basic question.

Why should I or would I block the XHR? It calls some scripts or what? Sorry once again.

>>60855096
yes.

https://www.google.com/search?q=xhr

>>60855021
>or just click ALL
Who the fuck does that?

>>60855112
I already did that, although I didn't read in depth.

I guess you block the .js and the xhr so even if you're blocking one, it also won't call it. Am I right?

>>60855030
It worked but the captcha is messed up and hard to complete now.

Phoneposters deserve all the privilege escalation they get from XSS vulnerabilities, and so do brainlets

>>60854806
Can you make a small tutorial for retards in pastebin or here?

>>60855115
depends on the website you're on.
i already explained one scenario where it makes sense.

>>60855161
try both google url or get 4chanX and force old captcha

>>60855145
>so even if you're blocking one, it also won't call it.
how is it supposed to call when it's blocked?

>>60855229
>i already explained one scenario where it makes sense.
It only makes sense for retards that dont value their security. Also you can click "allow all" in noscript too.

Tor browser uses noscript instead of umatrix.

uHidefags btfo.

>>60855229
>how is it supposed to call when it's blocked?
I don't know, I'm very new. That's what I reached when you told me "yes"

>>60855254
ok here's one that makes sense

>you know and trust all 3rd party URLs and there might be one or two you dont want (like facebook/twitter) so you press ALLOW ALL and then manually block that one URL

>>60855228
just allow the URLs that has "CDN" in them and refresh in between to see if the content you want shows up.
if now, allow ALL and refresh, then manually block URLs one by one and refresh between to see which URL has your content.
then you can try disabling that URL and only enable Scripts or Frame for that if you dont want them tracking you with cookies etc.

>>60855262
shut up pedo!

>>60854920
i have a big ass list. i'm always doing independent research at new sites

>>60855304
>if not*, allow ALL
fix'd

also dont forget to click the LOCK icon to save settings.

>>60855398


how to I globally allow youtube videos embedded on all sites i visit?

Do I use noScript or noScript lite?

>>60855687

* youtube.com frame allow
* content.googleapis.com * allow
* ggpht.com * allow
* googlevideo.com * allow
* www.googleapis.com * allow
* youtube-nocookie.com * allow
* ytimg.com * allow

testing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ej5Z8f8-DcQ

>>60856090
>youtube.com frame allow
and
>googlevideo.com * allow
is all you need.

also why would anyone use noscript when uMatrix exists?

>>60856090
something like that

first * = applies on all websites.
second part is the url you want to allow/block.
third part is * = allow everything, or just what you want (like frame in this case).
last part is if you want to allow or block it.

open "my rules" in umatrix settings and edit temp rules, paste the shit, save then press Commit.

>>60856159
thanks for clarification

>uBlock origin blocks board banners
Why?

>brainlets that can't figure out how uMatrix works by just playing around with it for a few minutes like I did
>brainlets asking for a tutorial on how to use it

you have no idea how much this pisses me off. this is what happens when subhuman non-white nigger cattle is not only allowed, but encouraged to use the internet.

>>60856202
>>>/pol/

File: file.png (154KB, 1018x229px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 1018x229px

>>60856191
wat

>>60856225
Well he's not wrong

>>60856225
>not browsing all your favorite boards at the same time in multiple tabs

or can you niggers not figure out how to use multiple tabs in your web browser?

>>60856237
I mean the other banner that links you to some other board on /a/

>>60856243
there's plenty of white retards in the world aswell, and probably more on this site.

>>60856256
keep your offtopic shitposting contained to the designated pooping boards

>>60856262
It doesn't by default, but I have them blocked just because it's clutter I don't need to see.

>>60856287
It does, I even tried reverting to default settings.

>>60856299
That's odd... My girlfriend uses uBlock and she sees them.

>>60856317
You don't use adblock?

>>60856323
>"acceptable" pay-to-play ad allowance by default
Hell fucking no.

>>60849909
It's written in the name you retard, try installing common sense 2017.

>>60856345
Meant uBlock

What do I use for https?
https everywhere or Smart HTTPS?

File: Clipboard 1.png (18KB, 513x512px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 513x512px

Wrote a shitty python script that takes a noscript config file, some hosts and adblocker filters and generates a new config file with everything in the filters blacklisted in the new config. Makes things easier when whitelisting domains and cannot be sure which one is a dodgy ad/malware domain.

Wish noscript had a ublock-like filter subscription system. There is no such a thing afaik.

>>60856159
You can disallow googlevideos if you install html video everywhere.

>>60856497
umatrix...

>>60849909
>have it block everything
>enable the least suspicious stuff until the website work
>done
It can be a hassle, but once you have configured it for the sites you use you don't even notice it.

File: Clipboard 2.png (36KB, 559x766px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 559x766px

>>60856515
I am happy with noscript and know how to use it, don't want to switch to an entirely new addon because there is no filter subscription system. Might expand my script and make it a thing though, being able to use hosts and adblock filters at the same is a nice thing. Don't know if umatrix enforces syntax rules etc.

>>60852943
Jag använder NoScript, finns det nån anledning att byta?

>>60856564
umatrix has hosts and rules sub-lists.
what do you mean enforce syntax rules?

just read above for basic shit on how to use umatrix, it's easy as fuck and takes just a few minutes to get the hang of it for an average tard, less if you're tech savvy.

it's far superior to noscript as you have more control than noscript.

>>60856602
läs tråden ditt jävla mongo

>>60856612
>what do you mean enforce syntax rules?
I mean does it support multiple filter types? (hosts, adblock filters etc.) Just like ublock.

>>60856623
Det främsta argumentet för uMatrix verkar vara
>"mina klick"

>>60856274
>implying /g/ is not a designated pooping board

>>60856669
nej, det är mer kontrol och har listor du kan subba till som blockar mer skit.
det kan även vara mindre klick beroende på hur anal du är och hur du använder alternativen som finns.

>>60856664
yes.

>>60856759
Men NoScript blockar ju allt som du inte väljer att inte blocka, så varför ska man behöva blocklistor?
Mindre klick bryr jag mig föga om då jag redan har vitlistat det jag behöver på sidor jag använder ofta. Annars har sidor som är värda att använda ofta 2-3 saker att tillåta eller mindre, om man måste använda någon annan sida med många så kan man temporärt tillåta allt.

>>60856883
>>60856759
>>60856669
>>60856623
>>60856602
oogabooga >> /int/

>>60856883
om du går in på en sida och den har en miljon 3e part URLer och du inte orkar tillåta en efter en för att hitta rätt så sidan funkar som den ska så är det bara att klicka på "tillåt alla" så tillåter den allt som inte är i en blocklista

dom kan även blocka vissa delar eller subdomäner på sidor som innehåller skräp utan att den blockar andra delar av sidan, eller bara tillåta iframes från nån sida (typ embeddad youtube) utan att du behöver tillåta cookies från youtube.

>>60856908
Sorry mate.
>>60856602
I use NoScript, is there any reason to change?
>>60856669
The main argument for uMatrix seems to be
>"muh clicks"
>>60856883
But NoScript blocks everything you do not choose to block, so why do you need block lists?
Smaller clicks do not care if I have already got what I need on pages I use often. Otherwise, pages that are worth using often 2-3 things to allow or less, if you have to use another page with many, you can temporarily allow everything.

>>60856958
Det kan ju vara bra antar jag.

>>60849902
IMO no site should require 3rd party scripts for basic functionality. Sure, this "breaks" most sites in the sense that the overpaid webdev's faggotry doesn't work, but they often remain in a good-enough functional state to use without loading scripts from a dozen different source.

>>60849902
After a week or so all the sites you browse regularly are set up

>>60849909
Educated guesses

>>60849902
Yes. I am not autistic by the way. My brother is but I am not. My brother uses Google Chrome and listens to Hollywood Undead videos while playing Minecraft on the other monitor. Me? I browse /g/, play Minecraft, Fallout 4, Skyrim, program in Java to develop spigot plugins, program in c# to make games and occasionalyl write stories. My brother? Who knows what else he does. I like using NoScript because it does so much that regular adblock does not do. NoScript fucks everything that is malicious in the asshole. I can't quite conceive why people don't use NoScript. I think it is very primitive not to. Like seriously: would you browse the internet running every singe javascript if you knew what they could do to you? It's like some people really want to get hacked. That's why I use an up-to-date operating system: Windows 10 Pro. I am a very smart guy, unlike you guys.

>>60857159
>That's why I use an up-to-date operating system: Windows 10 Pro.

Gotta admit, you had me going up until this.

I've been using it for at least seven years now, it's as natural as breathing to me.

File: 1493895508111.png (499KB, 449x642px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 449x642px

It's been a staple for years for me as well. I even have ublock and the anti adblock shit setup but noscript just can't be replaced. I recall seeing you could replicate most of noscript functionality via ublock or at least to a degree but that seemed pointless. I'd rather just blanket ban everything and approve as I go. Feels more able to adapt to the ever changing internet/market.

umatrix is a fine replacement