6 ms·
Be it for malicious intent "malicious" according to who? Somehow this article makes me think those trying to do things like this are on the pro-DRM side, which
by userbinator 1y ago
Be it for malicious intent
"malicious" according to who? Somehow this article makes me think those trying to do things like this are on the pro-DRM side, which I absolutely abhor. The slow and forceful insertion of JS where it's not needed means users will increasingly need to inject and modify JS to retain control of their experience.
- sneakerblack 1y agoI think this was posted because the of the recent Npm malware fiasco. The malware monkey-patched native JS functions to replace strings that matched crypto addresses in certain the fetch, and XMLHttpRequest functions: https://www.aikido.dev/blog/npm-debug-and-chalk-packages-compromised https://www.aikido.dev/blog/npm-debug-and-chalk-packages-com... Considering there's no way to check whether a function is monkey-patched, this just tells me the JavaScript ecosystem was not designed with malicious actors in mind
- pwdisswordfishz 1y agoIt wasn't, but that is not why.