barbaz wrote:lakrsrool wrote:So you feel that NoScript misses some levels of security that µMatrix would cover?
Short answer: in a way, yes. Basically the only way in which they overlap is script blocking, but aside that they cover completely different scopes, thus work well side-by-side. See my other post for more details.
I didn't even know that µMatrix was even available on Firefox actually (the last I knew it was only available on Chrome). As I said, I have been using it on Chrome (just because NoScript is not available there) and of course I was also using µBlock as well on Chrome (use Chrome rarely, but wanted the security when I do).
I've always preferred µBlock over ABP in Chrome, µBlock just seems to work a lot better in Chrome than ABP does. But again when I had added both of these add-ons to Chrome it seems to me that both µMatrix or µBlock were not available for Firefox at that time.
Now that I've found out that they are available on Firefox I've added both to my Firefox browser (the browser I prefer).
So do you know when these add-ons become available on Firefox?
Just doing a little testing, I'm inclined to consider using both NoScript and µMatrix together for now and maybe permanently. But I have to say I still like how ABP works in Firefox in tandem with the "Element Hiding Helper" for APB (and I also have the APB Popup add-on for good measure) as opposed to how µBlock is working so far which is not blocking in the manner I'd prefer. I'm thinking along with the Disconnect add-on I already use which creates mostly overlap between all of my APB add-ons plus Disconnect compared to µBlock I'm inclined to just stay with the former add-ons as opposed to using µBlock in Firefox. I've notice that µBlock is essentially blocking the same as what Disconnect has already been blocking for me and between the two I like the way Disconnect tracks blocking. (Chome is a different story however, for one thing the Disconnect add-on, which I like, is not available in Chrome and neither is the APB "Element Hiding helper" or the ABP "Popup" add-on, so for Chrome I like using µBlock)
One thing I'm wondering about however is how much NoScript is actually needed with µMatrix installed on Firefox. I know you've mentioned that other than "script blocking" these two add-ons "cover completely different scopes". That said, click
HERE :uMatrix & uBlock to Replace NoScript for a commentary on this topic.
It would appear based on the commentary I've linked above that µMatrix provides most if not all that NoScript provides in security or would you say that some aspects of NoScript have been overlooked in that commentary that is not included in µMatrix?
I'm curious how ascendancy works and happens to be specifically handled between NoScript and µMatrix when using them together in regards to an identical script or site, i.e. in the case where NoScript is blocking a specific script or site but µMatrix is not blocking that same script or site and visa versa then what exactly is the outcome. I'm assuming that if a specific script or site is blocked by either of the two add-ons then that specific script or site will be blocked regardless if either NoScript or µMatrix might be allowing that same specific script or site.
Is this how you see it? In other words the scenario is that there is an "either" and not "both" outcome regarding "blocking", but on the other hand "both" and not "either" regarding "allowing" so to speak. To put it in Boolean terms "blocking" would be based on an "OR" operator (only one or the other required) and on the other hand "allowing" would be based on an "AND" operator (both required).
Again, am I interpreting this correctly as to
how these two two add-ons (NoScript and µMatrix) would be working together?
OFF-TOPIC FYI: I've mentioned how I favor the Firefox browser, well I'm not sure how long that will last if Mozilla sticks with their plans. We're you aware of this:
1) As of
Firefox 40, any add-ons that have not been signed by Mozilla generate a warning. You can still continue using the add-ons however.
2) As of
Firefox 41 you will not get a warning and any unsigned add-ons will be blocked. There is supposed to be a (hidden) preference to still allow these add-ons, presumably in the "About:config" for Firefox (the setting they currently have now actually).
3) As of
Firefox 42, any unsigned add-ons cannot be used in the standard release (and beta) builds of Firefox. Full stop.
I'm thinking I may not want to upgrade beyond either 40 or 41 and certainly not upgrade to 42. And of course if this is the case I'm probably going to have to consider using something else for my primary browser. I'm already getting warnings for two of my add-ons (and neither is going to be getting signed by Mozilla as both are not listed directly in Mozilla as available Firefox add-ons one of which unfortunately I can't replace).
been added.