4 ms·
Might as well disable JS. It's also an attack vector.
by baxuz 5y ago
Might as well disable JS. It's also an attack vector.
- rwmj 5y agoI do that too, only enabling it on sites that need it. Finer-grained controls would be nice though. (I miss uMatrix ...)
- aidanlister 5y ago“How do you know if someone has disabled JavaScript? Don’t worry” the joke goes … “they’ll tell you”. There’s always someone in a browser tech thread that has to proclaim their security high ground to the unwashed masses. In my opinion, these comments do not add value to the discussion and should avoided.
- baxuz 5y agoAbsolutely agreed. If we're going to be hyperbolic, the web itself is an attack vector. Better stay disconnected.
- debugnik 5y agoThey were prompted to mention it by another user, though. Maybe the comments that don't add any value are "might as well disable JS." Specially since, I think, many of us would do it if it weren't so inconvenient. I wish websites could only run JS if they're "installed" PWA style.
- chrismorgan 5y agoI’m still happily using uMatrix.
- silon42 5y agoYes. I'm not against ads, but if uMatrix stops working to block JS, I'll have to install uBlock for blocking ads (already do on mobile).
- Arnavion 5y agoYou have that finer-grained control with uBO. You just have to write the rules by hand instead of uM's table UI. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26284124 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26284124
- eikenberry 5y agoI switched from uMatrix to medium-mode uBO. Sort of a middle ground between what uMatrix was and default uBO mode (known as easy-mode). They offer other options as well. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Blocking-mode https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Blocking-mode