You’re right - for the time being. But what I’m not willing to do, is give them the benefit of the doubt. They’re just waiting for all this backlash to blow over. Then they will start extending it to other components and eventually to the net, under some other name.
This was an utterly terrible idea to begin with and it’s still a terrible idea for Android apps as well. Apart from messing with ad blockers, this has the ironically “helpful” feature of allowing malware to be force loaded into your browser. If it ends up in Android, some popular app that uses it will get owned and then every user of the app will also end up getting owned as well.
Sadly with all this evil crap now days, they’ll bring it back in a few weeks or months, rename it to the "won’t somebody think of the children API"with a massive ad campaign saying anyone or any website not using the API are r*ping kids…
I feel like these two are additive. A script could present a vulnerability without being an ad (and thus be on the blocking list on adblock) could it not? So feel like to accept the least amount of scripts is the way to go. However i understand the annoyance because sometimes i just want to visit a page without going through every single one of the many scripts. What i have started doing is to use a different browser from my default one if this situation arises. This browser is only having adblock as addons so when a page does not work and i dont want to fiddle with the setting i just visit via the other browser. Not an ideal solution, i know, but i think its better than getting rid of NoScript.
I would love to hear better solutions though because i admit i am not an expert in anything.
Strictly speaking, no, since ublock origin can also disable JavaScript on pages if you toggle the option. So aside from the question of whether doing so is necessary, noscript’s script blocking functionality is entirely replaceable with ubo, which also has more advanced support for filterlists, etc that you’re probably aware of already
I still use noscript because I can use it to enable scripts individually. ubo only allows you to enable or disable scripts. I don’t know if it’s necessary, but I read that noscript makes fingerprinting harder since fingerprinting relies on scripts.
uBlock blocks fingerprinting scripts completely. You can also enable scripts individually with it and thus remove the need for NS, which does the same but less
No. That’s round 3. Round 2 is already announced - they are ‘restricting’ environment integrity to multimedia on Android webview. Of course, what they don’t say is that the feature is going to be developed and tested outside the view of the general public - since this doesn’t need to go through a public standardization like web specifications. Once they get that perfected, they will silently expand its scope outside webview and gradually into browsers with a new name. That’s round 3.
The main difference between the register article and this one is the register is optimistic that Google will stop. While as the comments in this chat clearly indicate alternative views.
I figured out I can send it to myself on Molly, and the metadata will be automatically removed, but surely there’s a better way to do this very basic thing?
Later, I’ll have access to my laptop that runs Linux, so I’ll see if it works there to do it in a more civilized manner.
privacyguides
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.