[RESOLVED] NoScript and AdBlock problem

[NikAmi]

I don't know if anyone else is seeing this problem, but I can't use Google search properly when both AdBlock Plus and NoScript are enabled simultaneously. I have disabled all my extensions one by one and found some sort of conflict between ABP and NS because when they are enabled separately, all the Google content works fine including the dynamic content loading. When enabled together, Google search dynamic content fails to load. The current text is faded, probably due to some sort of transparency masking added before the new content is shown, and then the page just sits there with faded content. I have tried disabling almost all protection on NS including making every site trusted and the behavior remains. I also set Adblock to be disabled on google.com but the problem remained. Anyone got a solution?

[Tom T.]

https://ssl.scroogle.org. Google search results without the adds, cookies, or scripting.

I'll bet it works -- let us know.

ETA: I realize that doesn't fix the underlying issue. I don't use ABP, so the question is whether anyone else can reproduce the issue. If so, then yes, the conflict needs to be diagnosed.

[Alan Baxter]

I'm not sure what you mean by "Google search dynamic content". It all seems to work for me:
- Google instant results are being displayed.
- If I hover over the large double arrow to the right of each search result, I see a thumbnail of the linked web page.

The only extensions I have installed are AdBlock Plus and NoScript.
Fx 8.0 on Windows XP SP3
NoScript 2.2.2rc2 with its default settings and whitelist
AdBlock Plus 1.3.10 with the current EasyList and EasyPrivacy subscriptions

[NikAmi]

Is nobody else having this problem. Also, just in case it helps, I am running FF 8.

[Guest]

Is nobody else having this problem. Also, just in case it helps, I am running FF 8.

I would test this with a totally fresh profile (backing up your current one of course), and then installing *only* the ABP and NS extensions. Export your current NS whitelist first (which also contains your untrusted sites as well). Update your ABP list to the most current available. First test it without importing your NS whitelist, and then test after importing your NS whitelist (as stated above, this will import your untrusted list as well). This would be my first troubleshooting step. Let me know the results...

[Tom T.]

Is nobody else having this problem. Also, just in case it helps, I am running FF 8.

I would test this with a totally fresh profile (backing up your current one of course), and then installing *only* the ABP and NS extensions. Export your current NS whitelist first (which also contains your untrusted sites as well). Update your ABP list to the most current available. First test it without importing your NS whitelist, and then test after importing your NS whitelist (as stated above, this will import your untrusted list as well). This would be my first troubleshooting step. Let me know the results...

Good diagnostics, but might as well first try with *only* NS, then with *only* ABP, then with both. The fresh profile indeed might make a difference. The existing profile may have a corruption somewhere.

Also see General Troubleshooting Instructions,

3) The extensions database is corrupted. Exit Firefox, delete the files mentioned here in this linked article, restart Firefox. Uncorrupted versions of the files will be automatically regenerated. Corrupt_extension_files

@ NikAmi: Your browser version *is* displayed, thanks, just as every web site you visit can see it. What also might help is which version of NoScript are you using? We cannot see that.

Also please try the latest development build. Thanks.

[cqnsall 443,716,]

Good diagnostics, but might as well first try with *only* NS, then with *only* ABP, then with both. The fresh profile indeed might make a difference. The existing profile may have a corruption somewhere.

Agreed, I should have mentioned to try each separately as the first step, before continuing on to my latter instructions. Thanks.

I know this doesn't help any, but for the record I am not experiencing this particular problem whatsoever running both the latest version of ABP and NS V2.2.1

[Guest]

^^^^ Somehow put the captcha in as my username. Duh!

[Tom T.]

I know this doesn't help any, but for the record I am not experiencing this particular problem whatsoever running both the latest version of ABP and NS V2.2.1

Yes, that helps, thanks. If others don't experience the issue, extension conflicts or misconfigurations become more likely, as in this topic. (not trying to embarrass the user; we all make mistakes. I know i surely do. )

^^^^ Somehow put the captcha in as my username. Duh!

I just figured it was a random choice, which was cool. Try searching this forum for all posts by "guest" LOL.

Some blogs and forums ask that anonymous posters choose "something" that we can call you by, because if a thread has six people posting under the name, "Guest", it's hard to know who's saying what, and to indicate to whom you're replying (other than by quoting.)

No worries!

[guest99r]

Is nobody else having this problem. Also, just in case it helps, I am running FF 8.

Hi! I have had the same thing occur on google for a long time.

I rarely temp enable google for anything, so it's not been a problem. When I do temp enable it on google page, I get what I call the white screen of death. I can see thru the white on the google page, but can't do anything and have to revoke to continue to use firefox.

After reading your op, I disabled Adblocker plus and then temp enabled google, which still resulted in the white screen, and then I temp enabled google analytics and no more white screen of death and google search worked fine.

I have 3 addons, noscript, adblockerplus and wot.

I'm glad you wrote about this occurring to you as now I see would just need to disable abp in the future

Take care!

[Tom T.]

... and then I temp enabled google analytics and no more white screen of death and google search worked fine... .

That shouldn't matter. With google-analytics.com either default-denied or deliberately placed in the Untrusted list, NoScript will by default run a Surrogate Script that satisfies the page's requirement to run the G-A script, while not sending any of your sensitive personal data to Google. So enabling G-A shouldn't change anything.

I suppose I could install ABP on Fx 8.01 and see if it's reproducible...

[Tom T.]

Sorry, I come out the same as Alan Baxter.

Firefox 8.01
NoScript 2.2.2rc4
RequestPolicy 0.5.23
Added ABP 1.3.10 with Easy List subscription; left all the defaults.

Google works fine. Search works fine. Links work fine.

Actually, I could never get an ABP "block" tab, because the combination of NS and RequestPolicy, both configured very tightly and with a very short whitelist, keeps ads from showing up anyway. Probably why I never felt the need to install ABP. Not knocking it; just no need.

Most ads are served by scripting these days. NoScript's default-deny policy stops those, unless you allow them. RequestPolicy stops a lot of image requests from the page to the advertiser.

I went to a page that I know serves ads via Google AdSense (google-syndication.com) and Amazon. Of course, no ads. So TA'd both Google and Amazon scripts, and also allowed all RP requests. Then, the ads appear - which ABP *did not* block, nor even show a "block" tab.

So I can't contribute any more to the original problem, but can certainly make it go away for everybody:

1) Try RequestPolicy. Its developer and NoScript developer Giorgio Maone both agree that each complements the other.

2) No matter how much you *trust* a site, the first rule of allowing is kind of like Occam's Razor, or the Principle of Least Privilege: Only allow what's needed to enable the functions that you need at that page. No more. Example: I use Yahoo mail. I don't whitelist Yahoo. Only mail.yahoo.com and mail.yimg.com. Yahooapis.com is TA'd as needed, which is rarely. Same with RP permissions. Then you don't get many ads in the first place, so disabling ABP isn't bothersome.

This means blocking all script and cookies at Google. Is the auto-complete worth the hassle and the invasions of privacy (their auto-detecting my location, despite Firefox geolocation being disabled)?

3) If there's still a problem, solve it all by using https://ssl.scroogle.org, as recommended in the first place. All the results of Google searches, none of the garbage.

For those who want to stick with their present set-up and still experience problems, please do the complete Standard Diagnostic, and advise the results.

I hope this helps. And I think I'll disable ABP until next needed for diagnostics.
Cheers all.

[NikAmi]

I would just like to thank everyone for their input even though it seems like the bottom half of the thread is way off topic. I created a new profile and it seems to be working fine now so there must have been something janky in the old one, which is a bit odd considering I am working with a fairly fresh install of Windows (only about a month or two old) so there wouldn't be much time or software updates to accrue profile problems. Anyways, hopefully this problem doesn't creep up again, but if it does, I know where to come.

[Tom T.]

.... I created a new profile and it seems to be working fine now so there must have been something janky in the old one,

The fresh profile indeed might make a difference. The existing profile may have a corruption somewhere.

If all else fails, follow the suggested diagnostics....

... which is a bit odd considering I am working with a fairly fresh install of Windows (only about a month or two old) so there wouldn't be much time or software updates to accrue profile problems.

Updates can certainly bring problems, but anything can corrupt at any time. We're talking about billions of teensy electromagnetic charges on billions of individual spots. Hard disks have error-correction built into them, but once in a while, (sunstorm? electric surge? random background "noise" from the universe? alien beings? leprechauns? ) a 1 becomes a 0 or whatever. It happens. Including a corruption during the Windows install.

Anyway, that's why the first diagnostic suggested was to create a clean profile, a short version of the Standard Diagnostic, which is called that because it's, well, "standard".

even though it seems like the bottom half of the thread is way off topic.

Partly because no one on the support team was able to reproduce the problem, and the guest who said they did gave an answer that was not consistent with NS operation, for the reason listed. So it got into other areas, to provide other solutions for those who experienced this mysterious issue.

I would just like to thank everyone for their input

Thanks for reporting back. Will mark as Resolved, and you're more than welcome.