[INVALID] rapid take up of ALL available memory (4GB)

[piran]

This occurs after visiting a particular site and then opting
to authorise NoScript v2.5.7 ...so as to allow JavaScript.

Only happens in Pale Moon v15.2-x64 . Does not
happen with Firefox 16.0.1 (x32) and NoScript v2.5.8.

I am uncomfortable openly identifying the site as it is
a technical site and the unwitting assertion that its
own code is somehow malignant really does not seem
fair. I have tried for a PM but this forum inhibits me.

It's taken me quite some effort to get to this point
of filing this bug report, having to take down various
filters and security measures JUST to locate otherwise
blocked IPs:-| Finally cleared all the hurdles and now
I find I cannot remit a private URL. Please advise.

[Moonchild]

It sounds to me like an issue with NoScript in combination with the particular site - Have you tried using the latest version of NoScript (the same one used on Firefox)?

[piran]

Note that I originally filed this bug report in the Pale Moon x64
section and that the thread was switched here by the forum.

[piran]

How many times have I to work at submitting a post on this forum?

[piran]

Where have the missing two posts gone?

[piran]

I seem to be wasting my time, good night.

[lyceus]

Note that I originally filed this bug report in the Pale Moon x64
section and that the thread was switched here by the forum.

Actually you need to clam down, support is given but we do it for free so please don't expect that this is a help desk 24/7 since all people here volunteer at their free time. ok?

You was moved here since is a trouble with the plug-in and not some related with Palemoon x64.

You need to start Palemoon with none add-on available (press Shift when you start the browser) and check if your faulty website works as you want.

If that works then is a trouble with the plugin, remember that Firefox do not issue any official x64 binary yet. So often plug-ins are broken in 64 bits and you need to notify to the plugin maker since is a bug in their side. You can test also with the 32 bits version of Palemoon, either the standard or portable version and check if in that version the plugin works as you want.

Also check the plugin container process, since you blocks script any other plug-in (flash, pdf, activex) may eat your RAM.

[piran]

Actually you need to clam down, support is given but we do it for free so please don't expect that this is a help desk 24/7 since all people here volunteer at their free time. ok?

Actually *YOU* need to get off your high horse. I haven't asked for SUPPORT.
I'm trying to file this bug report despite the difficulties you present.
I have no expectation of any help desk and I did not ask for 24/7 help.
I am volunteering my own free time.
And stop using italics mode.
OK?

You was moved here since is a trouble with the plug-in and not some related with Palemoon x64.

I assume you mean my original post. I placed in the forum
that I thought was best suited to the bug...
It is a Pale Moon x64 bug... YOU haven't even looked at it
yet you over ride what I have tried to report, that is why
I stated that the post had been moved from the proper
forum to another one.

You need to start Palemoon with none add-on available (press Shift when you start the browser) and check if your faulty website works as you want.

Actually there's that high horse again, get off it, OK?
You've erroneously assumed my ignorance that I did not do this.
It's not *MY* faulty web site, it's somebody elses - mine work.
Somebody else's allegedly 'faulty' (your accusation not mine) web
site still makes Pale Moon x64 rapidly take up all the remaining
available memory until the PALEMOON.EXE process is +4GB which
then renders my workstation unusable.

If that works then is a trouble with the plugin, remember that Firefox do not issue any official x64 binary yet. So often plug-ins are broken in 64 bits and you need to notify to the plugin maker since is a bug in their side.

High horse again. Common sense rules. Assume inhouse problem FIRST,
start blaming everyone else NEXT. It's Pale Moon x64 that's broken.
No, I *DON'T* need to notify the plugin maker since they have no bug.
Yes, I do need to (TRY) to notify the browser maintainers...

You can test also with the 32 bits version of Palemoon, either the standard or portable version and check if in that version the plugin works as you want.

Yes I could but I could care less about the 32bit version so I won't.
I use the 64bit version and it's broken when visiting a particular site.
No, the plugin version is still working as I want.
It's the browser that is not.
OK?

Also check the plugin container process, since you blocks script any other plug-in (flash, pdf, activex) may eat your RAM.

No check necessary. Starting Pale Moon x64 with a shift
precludes other scripts remember? In any case I do *NOT*
allow the use of flash, pdf or activex not they are not a
problem. It's Pale Moon x64 that has the problem.

1*) When you've got off your high horse you need to fix
YOUR spamming host... it's listed in spamcannibal.
That's proving problematic here. No, I don't need to
reduce my security levels, you need to fix your stuff.

2*) When you've got off your high horse you need to fix
your host's reverse DNS as it is NOT set and that gives
security minded people issues because their servers
cannot complete a reverse lookup... like mine:-| But
there again that's what spamming hosts do and yours
is both. You need to fix it or do what I do, run your
own server yourself inhouse.

3*) I will need a polite apology from you, the moderator,
for your unnecessary outburst before we can quietly
continue to voluntarily and freely fix all your stuff.

*1) *2) *3) require proper decent & polite responses

[Moonchild]

... Right, well, if the first thing you do is complain about "wasting your time" when posting a few posts in rapid succession without a response, then attack a moderator for explaining you cannot expect immediate responses on this forum, and why the discussion was moved to a different board, then I'm not going to be very inclined to provide any assistance with your issue (which is not a bug report). I will say this:

• This is the correct board, considering it is not a Pale Moon x64 core problem, but occurs only with a specific set of actions when using a specific add-on on a specific site.
• I suggested you use the later version of NoScript, as used in your Firefox setup. I don't say this without reason.
• Without further details about which URL this occurs on, specific steps to reproduce, and other very relevant information, even if it was a bug report for Pale Moon, there is no way anything can be done with the report.

Demanding apologies and being otherwise as unpleasant as you have been will net you nothing from me or anyone else frequenting this board. Don't talk about high horses when you are on an even higher one, yourself.

[piran]

Agreed. Inclination is most certainly lacking.
The issue is with Pale Moon x64.
I had already matched the NoScript versions and
found Pale Moon x64 similarly faulty. Shift launching
your browser ie generic mode - similarly faulty. Your
problem (not my problem BTW) persists natively to
Pale Moon x64. I haven't demanded apologies, a
requirement is a requirement and a demand is a
demand. You have my ready and voluntary
permission to delete this entire thread. I will now
politely and quietly leave you both to your forum.
Good day ...very politely and most respectfully.

[Moonchild]

No matter how often you throw in "politely" and "respectfully", you're still not giving any of us the information required to be able to look into this problem you are having (it obviously is your issue, not mine), and calling the browser faulty.
It is much more likely that your memory issue arises from your working environment - as any out-of-bounds memory use in the browser core would certainly have been reported before. Think of internet security suites sandboxing the browser, antivirus interfering, or maybe even something as trivial as a network driver wreaking havoc.

Also, just as politely, I point out that you are indeed demanding apologies, are pulling in all sorts of completely unrelated things into this discussion (like the fact that the forum is hosted on a shared webhosting server, ergo rdns isn't possible and yes, it is indeed possible that the IP has been used by spammers in the past, sometime), and even blame me, quite directly, for not meeting "your strict security situation requirements"? If it's that much of an issue and you don't want to have any margin for error, then you shouldn't even be using a non-mainstream browser. In fact, in that case you should be using Mozilla Firefox ESR for corporate users.

Now, if you are still in need of assistance and want to make a proper support request, feel free to do so. If you'd rather continue with vague accusations and personal attacks on moderators, then you can go elsewhere.

[lyceus]

Actually *YOU* need to get off your high horse.

Actually you come with a question and then bash me with "big horses". So you want help or not, or just come here to critic my work and show off your arrogance?

FYI, I used italics since you seems to be too arrogant to come here asking for instant help in Sunday night. So why you are here in the start? For notify a bug in the program or for bite everybody that comes to help? I'm not God to know you level of "expertise", and a post filled of complains and little clues, made you look more than a AVERAGE JOE user than the expert that you claim to be. I won't apologize to you since you was who attack me in the first instance, I'm not your slave, if you are used that everybody says to you "Yes, my Lord" your horse is dead here.

And you know, you are BANNED. WITH BOLD AS YOU CAN SEE IT!

[megaman]

Was there anything that we could test, at least, anything would have been helpful to solving his problem.

This is besides the options given to him prior the banning.

[lyceus]

Was there anything that we could test, at least, anything would have been helpful to solving his problem.

This is besides the options given to him prior the banning.

I deal often with Average Joe Users, as you know often I left some message of help until the Heavy Army comes at the rescue (Moonchild and you). But this guy wanted to bite me for release all his frustration, and I won't apologize for give the first aid help to someone that wanted an answer *now and here* like I was his slave.

[Moonchild]

Was there anything that we could test, at least, anything would have been helpful to solving his problem.

No, that's the problem. He was being vague about it, never came forward to actually give all the details needed to even look at it, let alone come up with a possible cause (and consequently solution). At the same time immediately pointing at Pale Moon x64 being the culprit without anything to verify.

Considering this invalid, case closed.