Pale Moon forum

Do NOT listen to him.

His choice.

Nightbird wrote: ↑

2020-01-02, 00:08

For experienced users only.

I'd use a different term than "experienced users" there. And no, it wouldn't be a particularly flattering term.

Also reminder that by insisting on using NoScript when there's equivalent functionality by eMatrix available, you forfeit any support from the developers. It has been highlighted multiple times, even on this mega thread - that NoScript breaks the browser in unpredictable ways and it is impossible to debug problems once a profile has been affected by it.

Moonchild wrote: ↑

2020-01-01, 21:02

Sorry, no, the warning is there and will remain there [...] As you say, it's merely cosmetic [...]

I'm so sorry if you think cosmetics are unimportant for the daily usage of a computer. But that's a completely different subject.

Nightbird wrote: ↑

2020-01-02, 00:08

You will get no warning if you disable the add-on security level.

Thank you very much for actually trying to help.
That setting was (and remained) on Low.

New Tobin Paradigm wrote: ↑

2020-01-02, 00:12

Do NOT listen to him.

Oh Matt, I'm a good listener, you know, but ultimately I only do what I want after pondering the choices. Which here have been mostly "don't do that".
I don't like being told what to do and what not to, more so on an imperative tone - when one asks for an advice it's polite to offer a useful one if possible.

moonbat wrote: ↑

2020-01-02, 02:24

there's equivalent functionality by eMatrix available

In time I've tried many so-called replacements but my mind just can't accept their convoluted settings and weird appearance, so I decided to stick to what I've known for years. It is my choice (as Nightbird kindly pointed out above). If some site won't work I know better than come crying to the boards.

But the issue here was merely the display of a warning that has already been acknowledged, regardless of which add-on triggered it.
And somehow it got fixed, maybe through another cosmetic add-on, so I'm now happy and trouble-free.

Thank you all for your time.

Drugwash wrote: ↑

2020-01-23, 09:44

I'm so sorry if you think cosmetics are unimportant for the daily usage of a computer.

Completely besides the point and the displayed warning has a clear purpose, so even if it's merely cosmetic is must remain there.
What I'm saying with the "it's only cosmetic" remark is that it doesn't impact anything but the display of the item, so don't make such a fuss over it.

Drugwash wrote: ↑

2020-01-23, 09:44

In time I've tried many so-called replacements but my mind just can't accept their convoluted settings and weird appearance

It's actually quite straightforward - the panel shows all 1st and 3rd party hosts referenced on the given page, and the count of items from them under each category (cookies,css,image,script,XHR,frames,other) - and by default nothing is allowed just like in NoScript. You can configure individual permissions per site, or globally, and at a glance the panel shows you how many items of each category are coming from each host and whether they're allowed or blocked based on red or green.

Done a search, not creating a new thread, and posting here instead.

Now that I have removed NoScript and decided to convert to the Church of eMatrix soon-ish, how do I remove all traces of NoScript without starting a new profile?*

*I deeply value my current session, my UserStyle colour preferences, and all my bookmarks

If I can just copy+paste my session, history, extensions, and bookmarks, a new profile would work just fine.

The bare minimum is clearing cache and cookies and restarting. Otherwise, I think it leaves some prefs behind in about:config, but I don't recall what they are, and they don't negatively impact the browser.

I wish to solve the issue of certain website not letting me log in, and I hoped that would help. If you are sure about that, guess deleting cookiache will be sufficient (albeit not helping my problem).

Isengrim wrote: ↑

2020-05-01, 03:32

The bare minimum is clearing cache and cookies and restarting. Otherwise, I think it leaves some prefs behind in about:config, but I don't recall what they are, and they don't negatively impact the browser.

^ The prefs would include the name "noscript" in the pref.

it seems to me that making a copy of your profile (in case issues arise) and then removing all specific prefs that include a reference to "noscript" might be a way to go.

KlarkKentThe3rd wrote: ↑

2020-05-01, 05:06

I wish to solve the issue of certain website not letting me log in, and I hoped that would help. If you are sure about that, guess deleting cookiache will be sufficient (albeit not helping my problem).

What is the website that you're unable to login to? And how do you know that noscript residual is causing the problem?

See what happens first deleting browser cache and all of the specific website cookies for that site with the login issue.

Cookies for the specific website can be removed by going to the website and then by clicking on the "Verified by" icon in the address bar (far left-side of bar) and going to "More information..." > "View cookies"....

I also switched to nMatrix, NoScript often but not everytime caused a freeze with high graphics usage in radeontop on failarmy.com and other sites.
With nMatrix no problem, but I don't like the new concept, I prefer the old one when I allow a domain it is allowed on all other domain.

Have you considered using uBlock Origin and setting it to "Advanced User"?

Gets you a user Interface per site to work with as such: The left column settings are "Global" (all sites). Setting any request in the left column to "allow" (green color) would be "Global" in nature.

Pallid Planetoid wrote: ↑

2020-05-01, 05:15

Cookies for the specific website can be removed by going to the website and then by clicking on the "Verified by" icon in the address bar (far left-side of bar) and going to "More information..." > "View cookies"....

That was super useful, did not know that at all. It's like learning Tab switches the active window, 11 years ago. Or randomly figuring out Shift+Tab switches them backwards.

My login problem seems to be a major bug that won't be fixed for some time. The site is Citibank, and I can use another browser if I ever need it. Pale Moon will have this error for now, doesn't seem like anything is going to change.

^ The Citibank issue is caused by Citibank (not Pale Moon). This has been an ongoing issue for some time now --- and is not related to noscript in any way btw (or any other add-on for that matter). (note: This same issue exists in a fresh profile with no add-ons)

Here is one of many topics on this Re: Pale Moon 28.8.2.1 breaks Citi.com login (topic would be better titled "Citibank breaks Pale Moon")-- I've pointed the link to a (Feb 08, 2020) post I contributed to the topic on what I do to make it as simple as possible to keep using Pale Moon and still switch to another browser to login to Citibank (using an add-on as described in my post).

Take a look at the topic overall for more info (there are many other topics on this subject as well that can be found doing a search for "citibank" ).

^ Follow-up to last post above.

There actually is a "fix" so to speak so the Citibank login will actually work in Pale Moon(more like a "workaround" Pale Moon settings option actually) which is discussed in the topic linked above starting here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=23774&start=40#p185186.

Here is the next comments on this approach posted by Moonchild that is informative on this "workaround" and what it means (that was introduced to the topic further up the page): viewtopic.php?f=3&t=23774&start=40#p185187.

I personally just keep using my add-on (mentioned above) to get to a working Citibank login as opposed to changing this setting which appears to me to be globally allowing "insecure requests" by considering them as "secure" (considering this setting is "global" -- I'm personally a bit reluctant to use it -- so feel more comfortable just sticking with the routine of using the "Open With Edge, IE, Chrome, and More" add-on to login to Citibank)

Edited to strike-out comments above --My conclusions were incorrect regarding the pref setting discussed. Thankfully -- Moonchild has provided clarification on this on the next page. Upon second thought I've personally decided to reconsidered my position regarding this pref setting and am currently setting it to "true".