Has anyone reviewed Host Permissions?

Talk about internet security, computer security, personal security, your social security number...
Post Reply
User avatar
Thrawn
Senior Member
Posts: 3106
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2012 3:46 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Has anyone reviewed Host Permissions?

Post by Thrawn » Wed May 30, 2012 1:14 am

I saw mention of the Host Permissions addon recently at GHacks, and the idea looks very interesting: control images+redirects+frames+plugins+scripts on a per-site basis. Kind of a mixture of some NoScript, RequestPolicy, and built-in Firefox permissions.

However, it has been stuck in Experimental status on AMO for a while. Has anyone examined/tried it?

There are similar extensions by the same author for Bookmark Permissions and Tab Permissions. Haven't looked into them.
======
Thrawn
------------
Religion is not the opium of the masses. Daily life is the opium of the masses.

True religion, which dares to acknowledge death and challenge the way we live, is an attempt to wake up.
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/12.0

dhouwn
Bug Buster
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:51 pm

Re: Has anyone reviewed Host Permissions?

Post by dhouwn » Wed May 30, 2012 2:33 pm

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/13.0

User avatar
therube
Ambassador
Posts: 7521
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 4:17 pm
Location: Maryland USA

Re: Has anyone reviewed Host Permissions?

Post by therube » Thu May 31, 2012 4:42 am

Similarly, Tahoe Data Manager.
It's part & parcel of SeaMonkey, & as it is really wouldn't recommend it.
Eh, but being an extension (for FF users) suppose it can't hurt to try out.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110420 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 Pinball NoScript FlashGot AdblockPlus
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120527 Firefox/14.0a2 SeaMonkey/2.11a2

User avatar
Thrawn
Senior Member
Posts: 3106
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2012 3:46 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Has anyone reviewed Host Permissions?

Post by Thrawn » Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:36 am

Just an update on this: I use Tab Permissions and Host Permissions these days, just for image-blocking. You could possibly use them to achieve site-specific permissions, but in a somewhat clunky and non-intuitive way, because default-deny is only available using Tab Permissions, which is tab-based rather than domain-based. And then to whitelist a site, you set it in Host Permissions, which overrides Tab Permissions, *if* the whitelisted site is the first one loaded in that tab. Confusing until you get used to it.

Still, if anyone wants to experiment, it might be interesting to combine them with NoScript's 'Allow top-level sites by default' option, and then use Tab/Host Permissions to manage the top-level site.
======
Thrawn
------------
Religion is not the opium of the masses. Daily life is the opium of the masses.

True religion, which dares to acknowledge death and challenge the way we live, is an attempt to wake up.
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/15.0.1

User avatar
Thrawn
Senior Member
Posts: 3106
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2012 3:46 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Has anyone reviewed Host Permissions?

Post by Thrawn » Wed Oct 10, 2012 1:34 am

Those who are interested in 'allow globally for this tab' (therube?) may want to try installing Tab Permissions, leaving it with default settings (allow all), then when you want to globally allow, first set Tab Permissions to block scripts by default. I think it only applies to newly-opened tabs, though.

As mentioned previously, you could also try blocking scripts by default in Tab Permissions, but allowing top-level sites by default in NoScript, then manage top-level sites on a per-tab basis instead of a per-domain basis. You can still whitelist domains using Host Permissions.
======
Thrawn
------------
Religion is not the opium of the masses. Daily life is the opium of the masses.

True religion, which dares to acknowledge death and challenge the way we live, is an attempt to wake up.
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/15.0.1

Post Reply