Noscript development build 2.1.3rc4 bug with Ad Muncher

[zyrtec]

Hi,

This is my very first time posting here and I decided to do it because I am using the latest Noscript development build 2.1.3rc4 on Mozilla Firefox 6.0.2 running on Windows 7 Pro SP-1.

The problem I am having is related to Ad Muncher. I am running the paid version of this software on my PC mainly to block ads. However, they updated the Ad Muncher version to beta 4.93 build 32869 and I updated to
that version thereafter. I also updated Noscript to version 2.1.3 rc4.

Now, I am noticing that by default, Nocript blocks Ad Muncher.com and some advertisements that used to be blocked by Ad Muncher (some Flash ads at www.yahoo.com, for example) are no longer blocked.
I notified Ad Muncher developers about the situation and they suggested me to disable Noscript.

I would not like to disable Noscript because it provides a layer of protection for Firefox against malicious sites that exploit vulnerabilities on the browser and I wouldn't like to disable Ad Muncher either because it helps me block all those annoying Flash ads on the web and I'm paying for it.

Hence, my question would be: Could you do something to fix this incompatibility between Ad Muncher and Noscript?

Thanks in advance for your help and replies.

Regards.

[Giorgio Maone]

What's the most recent NoScript version which works for you?

[zyrtec]

Hi,

Thanks so much for your prompt response to my inquiry.

In regards to your question about which version of Noscript would work for me, I couldn't tell because I always run the latest development build (a.k.a. BETA). Thus, I don't know for sure if the non-BETA version would work for me.

By the way, why is Admuncher.com domain being blocked by the latest Noscript development buld? Any particular reason why?

Thanks.

[Giorgio Maone]

By the way, why is Admuncher.com domain being blocked by the latest Noscript development buld? Any particular reason why?

Latest dev build doesn't add any specific restriction. On the other hand, by default NoScript blocks every domain except those you whitelist.

[zyrtec]

Hi again, and thanks for your response.

I did solve the problem of Ad Muncher not blocking Flash based advertisements at www.yahoo.com.

I just added www.admuncher.com to the whitelisted sites on Firefox Noscript and now Ad Muncher is effectively blocking all the ads at Yahoo and other sites.

I noticed that in older Noscript builds www.admuncher.com was never blocked by NS by default whereas now it is blocked.

Thanks.

[Giorgio Maone]

I noticed that in older Noscript builds http://www.admuncher.com was never blocked by NS by default whereas now it is blocked.

Might it be that older Admuncher versions didn't require that domain to be allowed?

[Tom T.]

It's a spam username, Giorgio. That is the trade name of an anti-allergy medicine, C e t **iri ** zine.
User is making a lot of posts (7 so far) that appear legit, but aren't real, just to do SEO of the drug.

I intend to delete them all and ban the user, unless you object.

@ OP: If you're serious, choose a non-spam username.

[Giorgio Maone]

@Tom:
user is legitimate, and posts with this nickname across a number of security-related forums.

Furthermore, since we don't allow effective backlinks and I doubt anyone will buy a drug because someone uses its name as a nickname on a forum, I don't believe keeping it will do any harm or any unwarranted advantage to the drug.

Please unban and, if you moved his posts to the deleted posts list, restore them.

Thanks.

[Tom T.]

@Tom:
user is legitimate, and posts with this nickname across a number of security-related forums.

Furthermore, since we don't allow effective backlinks and I doubt anyone will buy a drug because someone uses its name as a nickname on a forum, I don't believe keeping it will do any harm or any unwarranted advantage to the drug.

Please unban and, if you moved his posts to the deleted posts list, restore them.

Thanks.

Thanks for the info. Will do both.

I was thinking of the current trend of enhancing search-engine results based on mere occurrence of a text word or phrase, not just actual links.

I would still be more comfortable with a username other than a trademarked brand name -- can't imagine another reason for choosing one -- but perhaps I am overly cautious. Anyway, I did save them in the deleted list, in case this was your preference. Thanks again.

ETA: @ OP: There may be one or two missing, as they may have been posted on a guest account, or for some other reason. If so, please re-post. There will be no issues. Thanks.