https://noscript.net/faq#qa8_10
says:
"Notice also that, independently from ABE, even if a certain script source is whitelisted in NoScript it won't run as a 3rd party script on pages whose origin is not whitelisted itself."
Can you restate this in normal-person English and perhaps give an example? Thanks!
[RESOLVED] documentation clarification
-
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2014 6:28 pm
[RESOLVED] documentation clarification
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:34.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/34.0
Re: documentation clarification
I don't think it's possible to say it in a simpler way, but here's an example:charrington wrote:Can you restate this in normal-person English and perhaps give an example?
Say you go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_page. You will notice that (by default) the NoScript menu offers you the possibility to Temp-Allow "wikipedia.org" and/or "wikimedia.org". If you only Temp-Allow wikimedia.org while keeping wikipedia.org forbidden, no scripts run because wikipedia.org isn't (Temp-)Allowed.
Does that clarify it?
*Always* check the changelogs BEFORE updating that important software!
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Avant TriCore) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/31.0.1650.63 Safari/537.36
-
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2014 6:28 pm
Re: documentation clarification
I only see message to temp-allow wilimedia.org, I assume because I have "temp-allow top-level sites" checked. But yes, that clarifies it. Thanks.barbaz wrote:I don't think it's possible to say it in a simpler way, but here's an example:charrington wrote:Can you restate this in normal-person English and perhaps give an example?
Say you go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_page. You will notice that (by default) the NoScript menu offers you the possibility to Temp-Allow "wikipedia.org" and/or "wikimedia.org". If you only Temp-Allow wikimedia.org while keeping wikipedia.org forbidden, no scripts run because wikipedia.org isn't (Temp-)Allowed.
Does that clarify it?
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:34.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/34.0
Re: [RESOLVED] documentation clarification
Yes, that is the reason. It's not exactly a recommended setting, because it means that you're allowing sites before you've actually had the chance to visit them and decide whether you trust them.charrington wrote:I assume because I have "temp-allow top-level sites" checked.
======
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.
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:34.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/34.0