Page 6 of 11

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Mon, 14 May 2018, 18:49
by ketmar
>My understanding of uM's cookie block behaviour is that it allows a cookie to be
>set, but then doesn't allow it to communicate.

exactly. it accepts all cookies, but sends only those you allowed it to send.

Re: Stability issues, with NoScript or the like?

Posted: Mon, 14 May 2018, 19:25
by LAR Grizzly
Thehandyman1957 wrote:Believe it or not, that is one of the main issues I had with Noscript. Even after uninstalling it.


After uninstalling NoScript, you need to clean out entries left in your prefs.js file. NoScript leaves an enormous amount of code behind after uninstallation. I switched over to uBO, once I edited out the NoScript nasties left behind in my prefs.js file. All this was done after I made a backup of my profile.

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Mon, 14 May 2018, 19:27
by coffeebreak
helloimustbegoing wrote:I went back just now and figured out how to get it working. I have to change the color to gray in the third column under 3rd-party scripts and 3rd-party frames. I guess this is better since it is at least still blocking some scripts.
coffeebreak wrote:BTW, With which email provider do you have these problems?

Microsoft Live

OK, I just created an Outlook email account (since "Live" is no longer available).
Hopefully what I've written will apply the same to both.

I set uBO to block third-party scripts/frames globally via dynamic filtering.
To log in and access the account, it was necessary to "noop" (turn grey) office365.com and gfx.ms on live.com (in the third column). In addition, to make Contacts work properly in Outlook beta, it was needed to noop office.com.

("Nooping" turns off dynamic filtering selectively where you choose, but allows static adblocking rules (from lists) to still work. It's not literally the same as a rule to allow scripts, but as a practical matter it has that effect (unless a rule from your lists interferes).)

Here's how I got there...

  1. Navigated to log in here: https://outlook.live.com/owa/.
    The page was blank.
    Clicked the uBO toolbar button to open the popup, to see which domains were trying (unsuccessfully) to connect
    (signified by the presence of "minus sign(s)" in the third-column box next to a listed domain).
    "Nooped" office365.com in the third column (turned it grey).
    Refreshed the page, saw that it worked, clicked the padlock to make the rule permanent.
    live1.png

  2. On the above page, clicked "Sign in".
    This opened a page whose url started with: https://login.live.com/login.srf?... and this page was blank.
    Opened the uBO popup.
    "Nooped" gfx.ms in the third column.
    Refreshed the page, saw that it worked, made it permanent.
    Successfully logged in.
    live2.png

  3. Now logged in (by default, it was to Outlook beta) , opened Contacts ("People").
    Creating new contacts didn't work in the beta. Message on Contacts page said: "This doesn't look right"
    Opened the uBO popup.
    "Nooped" office.com in the third column.
    Refreshed the page, saw that Contacts now worked, made the rule permanent.
    live3-contacts.png


If you'd like, you can manually add the following rules: Dashboard/Rules tab.
And restore your global 3rd-party block on scripts/frames.

Code: Select all

login.live.com gfx.ms * noop
outlook.live.com office365.com * noop
outlook.live.com office.com * noop


I'll just mention as a footnote, that I was able to login with NoScript too - the fiddling was a tad different, but it did work.

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Mon, 14 May 2018, 22:19
by helloimustbegoing
Thanks coffeebreak, I'll check it out later when I have more time.

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Tue, 15 May 2018, 01:33
by Fedor2
I keep use noscript in three different profiles with reenabled blocklist and had the warning only one time. And going use noscript further, it blocks many other things beside scripts which i also use.
There is has to be a setting in the profile where the warning is accepted with override, though i have not found it yet.

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Thu, 17 May 2018, 04:41
by Artemis3
uMatrix is an interesting alternative, I downloaded v1.0.0 from AMO and it appears to be working fine.

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Thu, 17 May 2018, 09:23
by Isengrim
Artemis3 wrote:uMatrix is an interesting alternative, I downloaded v1.0.0 from AMO and it appears to be working fine.

Off-topic:
I have 1.1.4 installed, IIRC it's the latest version that will work with Pale Moon.

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Thu, 17 May 2018, 17:29
by JoeyG
Actually, this is about NoScript, UBlock Origin, and Webextensions.

(1) In Basilisk, I have NoScript 5.1.8.5 and UBlock Origin 1.16.6. I tried to install NoScript 10.1.8.1. It "installed", and the correct version number showed in the add-ons panel. As far as I was able to tell, though it didn't work: When I clicked the button (actually, on my setup I had a text button that said NoScript 10.1.8.1), but when I clicked it, nothing at all happened. I know that NoScript 10.1.8.1 uses Webextensions, so I guess that's the problem.

(2) In PM (27.9.1x64 and unstable portable v.27.9.1a1x64 from 2018-05-03), I have NoScript 5.1.8.5 and UBlock Origin 1.16.4. I tried to install UBlock Origin 1.16.6, but was told "PaleMoon doesn't support Webextensions", which I knew.

(3) I've also read this "Experimental support for WebExtensions (in gecko-target mode). Please note that some Mozilla-specific WebExtension APIs are not yet available." (https://www.basilisk-browser.org/features.shtml)

So if I have this right, UBlock Origin 1.16.6 uses Webextensions and works with Basilisk, but NoScript 10.1.8.1 doesn't.

Is UBlock Origin 1.16.6 "in gecko-target mode", but NoScript 10.1.8.1 isn't?

Could someone please try to explain to me (in simple terms) what "gecko-target mode" means?

Thanks.

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Thu, 17 May 2018, 17:55
by LAR Grizzly
JoeyG wrote:(2) In PM (27.9.1x64 and unstable portable v.27.9.1a1x64 from 2018-05-03), I have NoScript 5.1.8.5 and UBlock Origin 1.16.4. I tried to install UBlock Origin 1.16.6, but was told "PaleMoon doesn't support Webextensions", which I knew.


For PM, you need to install firefox-legacy-1.16.4. It hasn't been updated to v1.16.6 yet.

Scroll down until you see the "Legacy" version (uBlock0.firefox-legacy.xpi).

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/releases/

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Thu, 17 May 2018, 18:13
by JoeyG
LAR Grizzly wrote:
JoeyG wrote:(2) In PM (27.9.1x64 and unstable portable v.27.9.1a1x64 from 2018-05-03), I have NoScript 5.1.8.5 and UBlock Origin 1.16.4. I tried to install UBlock Origin 1.16.6, but was told "PaleMoon doesn't support Webextensions", which I knew.


For PM, you need to install firefox-legacy-1.16.4. It hasn't been updated to v1.16.6 yet.

Scroll down until you see the "Legacy" version (uBlock0.firefox-legacy.xpi).

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/releases/
Thanks, I forgot to mention that I have the "legacy" version.

Actually, my question was about "gecko-target mode". Thanks again.

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Thu, 17 May 2018, 18:25
by LAR Grizzly
JoeyG wrote: Thanks, I forgot to mention that I have the "legacy" version. Actually, my question was about "gecko-target mode". Thanks again.


No problem. I noticed that you tried to install v1.16.6 which is a webextension. I assumed that you didn't know about the legacy versions. My mistake. :oops: Sorry, I can't help you with the other questions. Someone will be along shortly...

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Thu, 17 May 2018, 19:02
by JoeyG
LAR Grizzly wrote:No problem. I noticed that you tried to install v1.16.6 which is a webextension. I assumed that you didn't know about the legacy versions. My mistake. :oops: Sorry, I can't help you with the other questions. Someone will be along shortly...
Again, thank you for taking the time to respond.

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Fri, 18 May 2018, 14:40
by Skaendo
Changes/fixes:

We changed the language strings for softblocked items so people will cry less when we do our job.


So now you are just outright insulting your users?

I was willing to stick with Pale Moon through blacklisting a add-on that I use and have never had any issues with, but since you decided to just insult people like a little child you have taken yourself to a new low and I will be finding a new browser. Waterfox looks nice.

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Fri, 18 May 2018, 17:04
by adesh
LAR Grizzly wrote:So if I have this right, UBlock Origin 1.16.6 uses Webextensions and works with Basilisk, but NoScript 10.1.8.1 doesn't.

Because they are two different extensions and most probably are using different functionality provided by WebExpenstions API. It should also be noted that, due to limitations of WebExtentions, NoScript was given special treatment (don't ask me what) by Mozilla.

You pointed to Basilisk features page , but probably didn't read this:
Experimental support for WebExtensions (in gecko-target mode). Please note that some Mozilla-specific WebExtension APIs are not yet available.

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Fri, 18 May 2018, 17:15
by Thehandyman1957
Skaendo wrote:
Changes/fixes:

We changed the language strings for softblocked items so people will cry less when we do our job.


So now you are just outright insulting your users?

I was willing to stick with Pale Moon through blacklisting a add-on that I use and have never had any issues with, but since you decided to just insult people like a little child you have taken yourself to a new low and I will be finding a new browser. Waterfox looks nice.


You do realize that this person was banned from the forum for this type of communication right? :wtf:
Perhaps that tells a whole lot more about the developers than you understand. But maybe you
just wanted an excuse to leave anyway. Good luck. :coffee:

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Fri, 18 May 2018, 19:05
by Skaendo
Thehandyman1957 wrote:You do realize that this person was banned from the forum for this type of communication right? :wtf:
Perhaps that tells a whole lot more about the developers than you understand. But maybe you
just wanted an excuse to leave anyway. Good luck. :coffee:


What are you talking about? The person whom I quoted? You mean the changelog?

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Fri, 18 May 2018, 19:38
by JoeyG
adesh wrote:
LAR Grizzly wrote:So if I have this right, UBlock Origin 1.16.6 uses Webextensions and works with Basilisk, but NoScript 10.1.8.1 doesn't.
Actually, I was the person who wrote that sentence, not LAR Grizzly.

Thanks for your feedback.
adesh wrote:... You pointed to Basilisk features page , but probably didn't read this:
Experimental support for WebExtensions (in gecko-target mode). Please note that some Mozilla-specific WebExtension APIs are not yet available.
I read it, and that's what caused me to ask my question: Could someone please try to explain in simple terms what "gecko-target mode" is?

Again, thanks for the feedback.

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Fri, 18 May 2018, 23:34
by Lunix
This is the first entry in the change log for Palemoon 27.9.2. Now can we end this discussion?

We changed the language strings for softblocked items so people will cry less when we do our job.

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Sat, 19 May 2018, 00:28
by Thehandyman1957
Skaendo wrote:
Thehandyman1957 wrote:You do realize that this person was banned from the forum for this type of communication right? :wtf:
Perhaps that tells a whole lot more about the developers than you understand. But maybe you
just wanted an excuse to leave anyway. Good luck. :coffee:


What are you talking about? The person whom I quoted? You mean the changelog?


Yea, sorry. Missed that. just ignore me. :crazy: It just sounded like something the other guy might say. ;)

Re: Want to talk about NoScript? Post here.

Posted: Sat, 19 May 2018, 01:49
by Moonchild
Skaendo wrote:So now you are just outright insulting your users?

Only the ones who decide to take offense to the truth. :twisted: