4 ms·
OP is simply asking for a compromise, a better solution that yours. Instead of avoiding JS altogether, don’t give it access to things it should never have acces
by harikb 7y ago
OP is simply asking for a compromise, a better solution that yours. Instead of avoiding JS altogether, don’t give it access to things it should never have access / no business mucking around
- TeMPOraL 7y agoThere's a tension here, though. Having access to things like this is the whole point of having JS in the first place. The web is just full of assholes, so you experience the abuse as often - or even more often - than the proper use of JS. Not sure how to approach it. JS whitelist is a stopgap solution, but not a particularly convenient one, and it doesn't always work.