4 ms·
"Gee coldpie, why do you use NoScript? All you're doing is breaking every website you visit!" Shoe's on the other foot now, hahaha! :)
by coldpie 12y ago
"Gee coldpie, why do you use NoScript? All you're doing is breaking every website you visit!"
Shoe's on the other foot now, hahaha!
:)
- jdjb 12y agoI use NoScript as well (and I wish more people would) but to be fair I doubt the users who were part of the botnet even noticed it at all. It's only github who would've benefited from these users running NoScript.
- coldpie 12y agoYeah, it was obviously a lighthearted comment, but the larger issue is that every web user is running someone else's untrusted code on every website they visit. Frankly I'm surprised these kinds of attacks aren't more common. NoScript helps mitigate this issue, and while it has lots of other incidental bonuses that a nerd like myself cares about, I freely admit it results in a worse end-user experience for almost everyone else.
- eli 12y agoThey could have done a similar attack with an <IMG> tag. Or do you block images too?
- therealidiot 12y agoSomething like Request Policy could cover this
- repsilat 12y agoErm, you don't? I suggest you read the Basilisk FAQ before you get into real trouble... http://ansible.uk/writing/c-b-faq.html http://ansible.uk/writing/c-b-faq.html
- teknologist 12y agoHaving no sites on the internet actually work finally paid off huh
- john_b 12y agoPersonally, the content I'm usually interested in when I visit a page is just the text and images. There are some exceptions, but that's what a whitelist is for. Even if you don't count the numerous security benefits, denying scripts by default has made my websurfing much more enjoyable.
- smutticus 12y agoIt's a great filter for nonsense. Usually sites that cause problems for NoScript are crap anyways. Not always, but often enough that I see it as a net benefit.