InformAction Forums

Guest wrote:I APOLOGIZE TO EVERYBODY FOR THIS 100 PAGE LONG POST!

Please use sentence case. If you need to emphasise something, use bold or italics; there's no need to shout.

even take it beyond tor,or tor project!

I don't see how you plan to go beyond Tor in terms of anonymity. Do you understand Tor?

A server within the browser is no use for this, because the point of the external server is to have a different IP address. Unless your ISP has issued you with two addresses, running a server will make no difference.

Guest wrote: if Giorgio wrote that software patch for hosts.
then,only hosts(NOT THE OS) could read (* and +) .

Er...'hosts' is a file, not a process. What do you mean by 'hosts could read...'?

The DNS service in the operating system reads the hosts file and interprets it. Giorgio was perfectly correct to say that he would have to patch or replace the DNS subsystem for every supported operating system, and I quite agree that he shouldn't take the time to do it.

Guest wrote: abp Element Hiding Helper.(i know about it)
sigh,abp again.
it only hides the problems.it does not block them.

ABP will block (prevent download of) elements that are imported into the page. If they're actually part of the page, then they get hidden, which is as much as any addon could do. What more do you want?

Guest wrote: 4.)PDF Viewer,that's the one i was thinking of.(i just didn't want to say the name.)
i had used it before on other people's pcs,& it's not bad.
however,i seriously can not stand PDFs!!!
i believe they are the tools of the devil that are meant to torture us!!!
have you ever dealt with anything more frustrating than printing out a pdf form,& sending it!?

Yes. Lots of things are more frustrating. I find printing PDF documents to be generally fast, painless, and predictable.

I do, however, recommend that you dump Adobe Acrobat Reader.

Happy holidays!

@Tom: Shall I move this to NS Development?

Thrawn wrote:@Tom: Shall I move this to NS Development?

See PM.

hello again Thrawn.
i didn't think anyone would answer until jan. 3rd.
thank you very much for working so hard around the holidays!!!
1.)no,no i wasn't shouting.i "was" emphasizing the importance of what i was saying.
2.)yes,i know how TOR works!
like i said,"tor/tor project use external/physical servers."
Giorgio,have you ever thought of,adopting your simulated server that runs within a browser to do the same???
so,the million dollar question is,"can Giorgio do the same regardless on which "computer/private server this simulated server that runs within a browser is located!???"
it's a simple question of,"is it possible?"
besides,this is a question better suited for Hackademix,but Giorgio is not interested.
3.)'hosts could only read'?"
exactly what it sounds like.that,the (* & +) can only be recognized inside hosts.(C:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc\hosts)
again,to be 110% clear:how do you make this *doubleclick* partial match appear exactly the same as marketing.2clickindustries.moc,ad-g.2click.moc,& so on inside hosts???
again,this is a question better suited for Hackademix,but Giorgio is not interested.
as far as different OSes...like i said,"i can only speak for different Windows OSes,because hosts works identically on all of them."
4.)correct me if i'm wrong!?
didn't the earlier versions of ABP Element Hiding Helper only hide,but not block elements?
did that change,or am i wrong???
either way,for the billionth time in a row,"i'm not interested in abp!!!"
5.)i'm sorry,but i couldn't possibly disagree with you more!
dealing with PDFs is in the top 5 worst computer things ever!!!
Adobe Acrobat Reader...LOL,you are kidding,wright!?
i would never install that slow,bloated,buggy monstrosity!
6.)no,there's no need to move this to Development.
none of this is going to happen.
well...just,hide the "About NoScript."

hello Tom.
thank you very much for working so hard around the holidays!!!
like i said,"there's no need to move this to Development."
while this has evolved way beyond my original post.it's not going to happen!!!
besides,i won't be able to post there without signing up.
if you want me to shut up,just say so.
if necessary,i can,& will!!!

Guest wrote:like i said,"there's no need to move this to Development."

It should have been posted in Development in the first place, because you were making numerous RFEs.

"Support" allows guest posting as a courtesy to those who have a problem or question about using NoScript, and are unlikely to post again after their issue is solved. It is assumed that anyone interested enough to suggest changes, enhancements, etc. is committed enough to register.

while this has evolved way beyond my original post.it's not going to happen!!!

And how exactly will you prevent that?
It just did, actually.

if you want me to shut up,just say so.
if necessary,i can,& will!!!

Please do. Giorgio has said all that he is going to say, and there is nothing to be gained by reiterating the same arguments.
By the way, I find .pdf as easy to use as Thrawn does. I don't know what is your problem with them, but this is not a .pdf discussion forum anyway.

Happy New Year,
Tom

I'll respond to the part that is 100% wrong, and not to the rest, which is irrelevant.

nobody wrote:.you do understand that PDFs require additional software/plugins/"latest" ff version!?

Get Foxit Reader. I personally prefer version 2.0 because of the inherent lack of support for javascript and other executables, but it's your call. The browser will auto-detect it. Mark it as default, except that it sounds as if you don't have another pdf reader, in which case, it's automatically the default.

Then click this link: http://noscript.net/abe/abe_rules.pdf.

It opened almost immediately for me, not only on Fx 17, but on Fx 3.6.28 and Fx 2.0.0.20.
So much for needing "latest" ff version!"

Then come back and tell us how terribly difficult that was.

You wanted more info on ABE rules. They are in a .pdf, which is a universal format on the Web, in e-mail, the US Internal Revenue Service, many business forms, etc. You don't like .pdf. Fine. End of story.

Thread is locked.

If you have future RFEs, questions, etc. that have not already been addressed here, please open a new topic for each, posting only *one* RFE, problem, question, or complaint.

Tom T. wrote:Get Foxit Reader. I personally prefer version 2.0 because of the inherent lack of support for javascript and other executables, but it's your call. The browser will auto-detect it. Mark it as default, except that it sounds as if you don't have another pdf reader, in which case, it's automatically the default.

I also would like to suggest PDF.js as its very good, light and functionality is near identical to actual PDF and all you need to allow is the PDF.js core file access in FX, no restart and not the actual site. I find it very quick and light for the occasional PDF read inside the browser. I would give it a go as its not so overloaded or bloated like a typical extension.

GµårÐïåñ wrote:I also would like to suggest PDF.js as its very good, light and functionality is near identical to actual PDF and all you need to allow is the PDF.js core file access in FX, no restart and not the actual site. I find it very quick and light for the occasional PDF read inside the browser. I would give it a go as its not so overloaded or bloated like a typical extension.

OP made it quite plain that s/he wants nothing to do with .pdfs, period.

Since you brought it up, IIRC the add-on won't work as a stand-alone reader for pdfs on your local machine, and I think Giorgio said you'd have to integrate or launch some of Fx's components to make it do that, which sort of defeats the purpose. I can't find the conversation, here or at Hackademix. If true, you still need a separate pdf reader anyway, and might as well let Fx access that one.

Someone very well-versed in security saw some problems with the concept of the pdf.js.