New noscript interface

[barbaz]

Until merged, please see: https://forums.informaction.com/viewtop ... =7&t=23589

Threads merged. Thanks richbuff

[JeanGardy]

I am a little lost, as well. If I went to a site and had everything as untrusted, most websites would be predictably broken. I'm noticing that I have almost full functionality despite having every domain marked as untrusted, and this is happening on lots of sites. Obvious stuff like clicking a "link" and having it pull me to the bottom of the page where the comments section is working, despite every domain being marked as untrusted.

This is odd, yes?

[Azijn]

Reading the blog post really helped me have an "Aha" moment.
https://hackademix.net/2017/11/21/top-i ... t-quantum/

Basically, the dropdown menu shows you what urls have which permissions on the site you've got open:

From left to right.
Default = default setting, typically blocks scripts *
Trusted=allow all scripts from this source *
Non-Trusted= allow nothing from this source *
Custom=Make a special setting for this particular page
Padlock= Green:only allowed from https-sources, Red: allowed from both http and https sources

*PAY ATTENTION, IF YOU CHANGE SOMETHING FOR THESE SETTING FROM THE DROPDOWN BY CLICKING ON IT, YOU'RE CHANGING WHAT THAT SETTING MEANS FOR ALL PAGES, NOT JUST THE URL YOU THINK YOU'RE CHANGING. <- this needs fixing, default should only be changeable from the settings menu.
For now, for the love of all that's good: you're better off not adjusting stuff, except for custom, and even that one, from the settings menu.

Now, the interface has made Temporary Permissions somewhat confusing. You can click either custom or trusted and then hit the clock button, and it will be temporary.... That's a lot of a hassle.

Also, the setting "Temporarily Allow All from top-level domain you're visiting" seems to have gone AWOL. Anyone seen this one?

This means that now if I visit a random site, by default all scripts are blocked, since the default is "don't allow" (this is the only sane setting for 'default'). However for almost all sites I just want to block third-party, rather than first-party scripts. I want the functionality of the page, and not the tracking.
That however does not mean that I want to permanently whitelist any site I visit! Even if I visit it more than once. Just for the session is good enough. Otherwise this will make the whitelist unwieldy, real quick.

[DLawson]

I would just like to know: Is this heavy UI change an intended redesign by Giorgio, or was it forced by Mozillas new plugin interface?

Statements elsewhere say that the effects of the Quantum roll-out blindsided many developers. My impression, filtered through my experience in software development, is that the current NoScript version was released in a hurry to get the core functionality (managing a whitelist and blocking everything else) out to users promptly. Releasing "almost finished" features would have only brought more complaints than the current situation.

I'm confident that future updates will restore the features we are all missing today. NoScript has been an amazing tool. I doubt that Giorgio suddenly lost all his quality sense.

If I understand the situation correctly, I am mostly annoyed at Mozilla for revoking support for the old architecture without a phase-in/overlap period.

[NoScriptian]

Hi i have new firefox and up to date Noscript and just what to know how it works on sites i visit.There used to be option on old version called ALLOW or temporry alow this page.Now on the new i cant see this option and i confused with it sorry on the newest version i see stuff under options and pictures of little red and green boxes like locks ? what do i do please ? as i am at lost sorry.Thank you.

Hi,

you need to click the small clock symbol on the right hand side of the Trusted icon.

[Guest]

I am a little lost, as well. If I went to a site and had everything as untrusted, most websites would be predictably broken. I'm noticing that I have almost full functionality despite having every domain marked as untrusted, and this is happening on lots of sites. Obvious stuff like clicking a "link" and having it pull me to the bottom of the page where the comments section is working, despite every domain being marked as untrusted.

This is odd, yes?

Have you checked if the "Scripts" box is unchecked in the "Custom" tab? I had the same issue until I found out that, in its current state, this would affect Default as well (my NoScript symbol was blank instead of its red one even though I had used Default). That said, make sure that all the boxes are unchecked in the Default settings (click on Default to bring them up). Solution at the moment it: don't mess with the Custom settings .

[Please Keep Private]

Sorry for not understanding things too well. I tried looking for answers with google. But is there any explanation for the numbers on the NoScript Icon, e.g.
It is showing a 3, and when I mouse over I see:
NoScript (3/55)
<script>: (3/51)
<font>:(0/3)

Can someone explain to me the significance/meaning of these numbers? Thanks.

[NoScriptian]

Sorry for not understanding things too well. I tried looking for answers with google. But is there any explanation for the numbers on the NoScript Icon, e.g.
It is showing a 3, and when I mouse over I see:
NoScript (3/55)
<script>: (3/51)
<font>:(0/3)

Can someone explain to me the significance/meaning of these numbers? Thanks.

My guess is the following:

NoScript = total of blocked items: (3/55) --> 3 of 55 items on your website are being blocked
<script> = # of scripts blocked/total # of scripts on that website (3/51) --> 3 scripts out of a total of 51 are being blocked
<font> # of fonts blocked/ total number of fonts on that website (0/3) --> zero fonts blocked of a total of 3 run

[Guest]

I appear to have three pop up windows. Two with voluptuous buttocked/breasted 3D cartoon women saying I need to be 18+ and the other one asking me to install an Antivirus for Firefox.

Feh.

[KieranWalker]

Not entirely sure where to post this given the forum is kind of exploding. This seems to be the most active thread.

NoScript is breaking several major sites no matter which blocking options I allow. For example: YouTube videos and thumbnails will not load at all, Google image search will not load at all, and Yahoo! Mail will mostly not load (I get maybe the top five e-mails in my inbox and nothing else). This happens no matter what--I can set both Trusted and Default to allow everything and those sites will still not work. The only thing that fixes it is turning on Allow Scripts Globally.

Blocking things besides scripts also doesn't seem to be working for Trusted sites (e.g. if I want YouTube videos to require me to click on them before they start playing).

[Plabby]

I do want to know how much of the new NoScript interface was forced by Mozilla.

I would like to know why extension developers were not brought on board early enough to update their extensions and avoid this catastrophe.

I would appreciate hearing more about the near future of the NoScript extension. I want to know if any functionality will be lost due to the changes in Firefox or the design of a new NoScript interface. I want to know if the interface I'm seeing now is what we will be using going forward.

If there is no "Temporarily allow all this page," if scripts are not being disabled by default, and if we have to allow scripts before switching to temporary permissions, then I'm no longer interested. Heck, if I can't even read the text in the script list, I'm not going to be able to use it.

I've uninstalled NoScript. This has a profound effect on my browsing. I'd prefer not to switch to another browser, but Mozilla is laying on the hate of late.

[barbaz]

@Plabby: https://hackademix.net/2017/11/21/top-i ... ment-38469

[wenric]

Before I continue I first want to say: I am lucky to have programs like NoScript made available to me. All of them together make me feel much safer when browsing. Not knowing anything about what it takes to create something like this, and I'm sure it's measured in years... I am very thankful you created it and hope people like you and those who support you will always be around.

I've struggled with what to say about this new version (10.1.1). I understand you had to do whatever is needed to make Noscript work with FF 57+

So, here are two things about NoScript (old and new) that I just can't wrap my mind around:

1. Why is there no user's guide? This is a complex program that needs a comprehensive tutorial. Maybe a formal YouTube page with multiple lessons that explain how to use NoScript. Not another empty YouTube video that someone else created, but an actual walk through that shows people how to use your program from beginner to advanced levels. Everyone deserves a thorough understanding of how your program works - how the individual parts tie together. To the best of my knowledge, nothing like this exists. It wouldn't surprise me if the number of NoScript users increased 10 fold after implementing a meaningful user's guide. I have to believe you created NoScript for the masses, not just those who know exactly what it does and need no help understanding how it works.

I can tell you from experience with many other products and services (not FF extensions): It is absolutely essential that a product is understood by interested parties. You have to move away from word of mouth and hit-n-miss learning for all of us out here that want to use NoScript. This forum is a good way to allow large numbers of people to share information and should continue to be used. However, the majority of people who are left with a forum to learn how a program works simply give up rather than sign up.

2. If this new version's UI was designed because there was simply no other way to implement it, then so be it. However, if this is the finished product, I simply don't understand your thinking. The way the prior version was laid out showing the different scripts and the options page with tabs was pretty good. I didn't understand what everything did, but I was able to test which scripts a page needed and white list them. It felt good knowing I was able to stop everything else that was only there to track me or worse, and not have to look at them again.
[One thing I always thought would be helpful was a separate white list for each site, which would show only the scripts on that site rather than all white listed scripts.]

The new program looks like you were forced to cram every choice onto one line, while being limited to only one page. I don't have any idea if I'm protected or not.

If I had any input, it would be to go back to the way the program was laid out and build upon that. I really hope this is just a stepping stone and the final product will be much more like what was left behind.

If number 2 is impossible, then please please please consider how important number 1 is... especially now.

Thanks for your consideration.

[barbaz]

1. Why is there no user's guide?

Giorgio hasn't had time yet. It's planned though - https://hackademix.net/2017/11/21/top-i ... t-quantum/

2. If this new version's UI was designed because there was simply no other way to implement it, then so be it. However, if this is the finished product,

It's not. I gather from https://hackademix.net/2017/11/21/noscr ... rebooting/ and https://hackademix.net/2017/11/21/top-i ... ment-38469 that suggestions are welcome.

If I had any input, it would be to go back to the way the program was laid out and build upon that.

Unfortunately the old UI is not technically possible in WebExtensions - https://hackademix.net/2017/11/21/top-i ... ment-38469

[Plabby]

@Plabby: https://hackademix.net/2017/11/21/top-i ... ment-38469

I'm glad he's aware and planning to address the issues. Nice he is taking guidance from respected members of the user base.