Can some one tell me what this means

General discussion about the NoScript extension for Firefox
Post Reply
eradic8
Senior Member
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 11:43 am

Can some one tell me what this means

Post by eradic8 » Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:43 pm

I have started getting this message on hotfile sever page whenever I try to download a file "undetermined index: recaptcha_challenge_field in /hotfile/www/root/download.php on line 94" I noticed noscript had blocked recaptcha, is it safe to allow it or temporarily allow it, or should I keep it blocked? I don't know what it means so I'm hoping someone can tell me, and tell me whether it is safe to allow recaptcha in noscript.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.4) Gecko/20091016 Firefox/3.5.4 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729)

User avatar
Giorgio Maone
Site Admin
Posts: 8771
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:22 pm
Location: Palermo - Italy
Contact:

Re: Can some one tell me what this means

Post by Giorgio Maone » Mon Nov 02, 2009 2:34 pm

Yes, recaptcha is safe to allow.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4) Gecko/20091016 Firefox/3.5.4 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729)

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

Re: Can some one tell me what this means

Post by therube » Mon Nov 02, 2009 2:57 pm

URL that generates that?

Guess that answers that.
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; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4) Gecko/20091017 SeaMonkey/2.0

eradic8
Senior Member
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 11:43 am

Re: Can some one tell me what this means

Post by eradic8 » Tue Nov 03, 2009 1:38 pm

Giorgio Maone wrote:Yes, recaptcha is safe to allow.


Thanks
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.4) Gecko/20091016 Firefox/3.5.4 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729)

eradic8
Senior Member
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 11:43 am

Re: Can some one tell me what this means

Post by eradic8 » Tue Nov 03, 2009 1:39 pm

therube wrote:
URL that generates that?

Guess that answers that.


Sorry I don't understand what you mean
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.4) Gecko/20091016 Firefox/3.5.4 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729)

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

Re: Can some one tell me what this means

Post by therube » Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:13 pm

It means, by the time I posed the question, "URL that generates that?", you were already answered, so there was then no point to my question ;-).
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; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4) Gecko/20091017 SeaMonkey/2.0

User avatar
SeanM
Junior Member
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 1:42 pm
Location: Upstate, New York USA
Contact:

Re: Can some one tell me what this means

Post by SeanM » Sat Nov 14, 2009 5:53 pm

I had been narrowly allowing "recaptcha", either by a "temporary" or a narrow "xyz.recaptcha.net" at a few sites. I am pleased that "recaptcha.net" is considered safe. There are a other common "service" (for lack of a better term) sites popping up (no pun intended), such as "addthis.com" (usually in the narrower form "xn.addthis.com"). McAfee's "SiteAdvisor" and WOT ("Web-of-Trust") each clear "addthis.com".

Is it prudent to accept the McAfee and/or WOT recommendations when setting permission(s) in NoScript ? The alternative might be constantly "going to the well" for an NS recommendation.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.1) Gecko/20090715 Firefox/3.5.1

Tom T.
Field Marshal
Posts: 3620
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:58 am

Re: Can some one tell me what this means

Post by Tom T. » Fri Nov 27, 2009 12:39 am

SeanM wrote:I had been narrowly allowing "recaptcha", either by a "temporary" or a narrow "xyz.recaptcha.net" at a few sites. I am pleased that "recaptcha.net" is considered safe.

http://recaptcha.net/aboutus.html
reCAPTCHA started as a project of the School of Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon University

It's a very worthwhile project. In addition to preventing spambots from posting, every time you solve a recaptcha, you are helping to transcribe books onto the Internet, whereas OCRs (Optical Character Readers) still can't match the accuracy of humans.

FWIW, they also offer their service to individual users, so that you can post your email address without the spambots harvesting it.
http://mailhide.recaptcha.net/
You enter your email address and they give you your own private code to copy/paste and save in any text document. When you wish to post your email address, you copy and paste the code into the site. No programming knowledge is required. Users who want to email you will click the link provided, then will have to solve the two recaptchas before being able to see your full email address.

Note: This works only at sites that allow users to post HTML code. Most sites that allow instant posting, like this one, don't allow HTML for safety purposes, and use the safer BBCode instead. But at forums like this one, you can be PMd anyway, so it's not so necessary. HTML is more likely to be allowed at sites where posts are moderated, i. e., reviewed by moderators for undesirable content before being published.

SeanM wrote: There are a other common "service" (for lack of a better term) sites popping up (no pun intended), such as "addthis.com" (usually in the narrower form "xn.addthis.com"). McAfee's "SiteAdvisor" and WOT ("Web-of-Trust") each clear "addthis.com".

Is it prudent to accept the McAfee and/or WOT recommendations when setting permission(s) in NoScript ? The alternative might be constantly "going to the well" for an NS recommendation.

Please see viewtopic.php?p=13565#p13565 for some thoughts on that issue.

Addthis is a sharing tool. http://www.addthis.com/features Whether you want to do that is up to you, but it would hardly seem necessary to allow it to make a site work.
There is also some privacy lost -- see their privacy policy. And from their site:

check out a short list of organizations below that use AddThis to promote sharing, including The White House, FBI and British Monarchy.

That's enough to scare me off, but then, I scare easily when it comes to privacy. ;)
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091102 Firefox/3.5.5

Post Reply