Page 1 of 2

abe,untrusted,& elements

Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:52 am
by nobody
hello Giorgio.
this is not really a bug report,but a features request.
1.)would it be possible for noscript to feed websites a false ip address?(mask the user's ip address.)
for example:the same way surrogates feed google search false/empty data.
how about showing websites/ads your ip address as 000.0.0.0???
2.)in abe,how come i can block data:image/png;base64, ,but i can't block  ???
for that matter,how come i can't block ...
same thing should apply to gif,jpg,bmp,& even data:image/svg+xml;base64, .
please,just add that functionality to abe.
3.)speaking of pictures...
while i know ns wasn't meant to be a picture blocker.it is!
3a.)is it possible for us to select our own picture replacements!?(any picture in any format from our hard-drives.)
this is useful for links under those pictures that are still needed.(otherwise,you are just pointlessly looking for
something you can't see.)
the abe rule should look something like this:
# TEST
Site http://www.example.com/a/pic.jpg=C:\Sub\picture.png
Deny
ofcourse,picture.png will replace pic.jpg within the webpage.
3b.)now,lets say i want to hide a link,and/or words.
for example:User avatar under somebody's avatar(not that i would,& the link/webpage would be blocked as well.),DCSIMG
under webtrends-live at mozilla.org/,or Loading under those annoying spinning gifs.
correct me if i'm wrong,but would the above abe rule be able to hide those links,and/or words???
i don't think picture size matters!?
after all webtrends-live picture is 1x1 pixels in size,but the DCSIMG has to be atleast 2x10 pixels.
if the above rule doesn't work,& i think it will in "this situation."
how about:
# TEST2
Site http://www.example.com/b/pic2.jpg_C:\Sub\Largepicture.png
Deny
please,add that functionality to abe/ns.
3c.)speaking of beacons/web bugs.
did you ever consider bringing that feature back?
privacy is part of security!!!
if not,how about automatically blocking any picture in any format that is 1x1 pixels in size from 1st,or 3rd party???
you would be surprised how many websites use their own in-house tracking(beacons/web bugs) ,& i'm tired of manually blocking them.
4.)could you please include wildcards ( * ) in abe!?
so,instead of:
sub1.example.com
sub2.example.com
sub3.example.com
it could be:
sub*.example.com
or
*.example.com
5.)is it possible to use the hosts file directly instead of untrusted?
provided one has a large list in C:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc\hosts
i'm really tired of cross referencing sites/js from the hosts' block list!
the only stuff that should go into noscript's untrusted list.would be site specific js.(clearly,those can't be blocked
through hosts.)
6.)speaking of hosts...
Giorgio,have you ever thought of doing an update patch for the hosts file?
before you say no,hear me out.
6a.)i know that the OS/hosts can not read (* ,or #) ,but maybe the hosts should!
so,instead of:

Code: Select all

marketing(dot)2clickindustries(dot)???;anon(dot)2click(dot)speedera(dot)''';ad-g(dot)2click(dot)''';
ad(dot)ae(dot)2click(dot)''';pagead-dclk(dot)l(dot)2click(dot)???;2click(dot)ne(dot)jp;2click(dot)co(dot)uk;
www3(dot)2click(dot)''';www(dot)2click(dot)''';2click(dot)us;2click(dot)gov;2click(dot)whatever.
???=com/'''=net
MAY RECAPTCHA ROT IN HELL!!!
it could be:
000.0.0.0 *doubleclick*
Note:no dots/dashes before,or after doubleclick,& doubleclick can be in the beginning/middle/end of any word.
6b.)for those legitimate websites who are foolish enough to stick their names into garbage/js,or ads.
for example:clicks.beap.bc.yahoo.com
how about:
000.0.0.0 +login.yahoo.com
000.0.0.0 +*.mail.yahoo.com
Note:the (+,& *) would allow all mail.yahoo.com server numbers.
the (+) would clearly bypass the 000.0.0.0 *yahoo*
legitimate pages are few,& far between.it's just easier to add them manually!
while the existing garbage/js,or ads,plus the new ones would be blocked.
you have to see the benefit in that!!!
the reason why it must be done in hosts,is because this would work for every browser.
instead of just ff with noscript.
Giorgio,please consider this!???
7.)about noscript...
Giorgio,i don't want to take away anything from your work/credits,or everyone who has helped!!!
however,i'm tired of dancing around it,& it accidentally opening.
we had all been there:
1.you clicked on the options,& the mouse jumps/jerks.
2.you clicked on the options,& started quickly to move away.
in both cases,the about noscript box had accidentally opened for the billionth time in a row.
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT,could you please put about noscript with a check-box in front of it into appearances?
8.)elements remover.
huh?what is this mess?
turn off,or block all js.then,hold the left mouse button down(don't accidentally open whatever you are clicking on) on an "absolutely positioned page element?" ,& hit the DELETE key.
yeah,that sounds very convenient.
especially,when i'm using a wireless mouse,& nowhere near a keyboard that i got unplugged anyway.(i use the on-screen keyboard from the start menu.)
Giorgio,how about this:
8a.)keep the js on.
8b.)lets use the "select" tool (cropped out rectangle) from paint.
8c.)use the right click button to crop out "any part" of the page,& let go.
8d.)you will see a new option in the right click menu.
Blocked
when you point to it.it will have 3 sub menus.
1.block.(obviously,whatever you had selected will disappear.)
2.collapse.(will make whatever you had selected collapse.then,turn into the restore(rectangle) ,& close (X) icons you see at the very top-right side of any browser.)
3.move,& collapse.(probably,in very distant/future updates.)
this one will have a circle(that you can click on,& drag it all over the page} in front of the restore(rectangle) ,& close (X) icons just like in number two.
this can be easily achieved by adopting,& improving upon the code used for embedding pictures/video into webpages.
then,use the code for that creepy little box(website feedback) that follows you around up,& down the page.
difference is,you will be able to move it around up,down,left,right,& leave it anywhere on the page.even in the middle.
all 3 options,& locations can be stored in untrusted.(or somewhere else.i don't really care.)
why save them?...because if you come back to that page,refresh it,or the same garbage appears on any subsequent page of that website.(for example:those annoying menus/links that appear at the top,& bottom of the page.)
they should be blocked!!!
just so we are clear:when i say blocked.i mean blocked.not hidden.
the same way when you hit the stop button,& the bottom of the page never loads.like that.
8e.)Giorgio,would it be possible to block only a part of something???
PLEASE,CONSIDER ALL OF THIS BEFORE YOU SAY NO???
i know i'm forgetting something,but this is more than enough.

@ Tom T.(anyone else.)
i know you like to over analyze every word,but i'm not going to argue with you for the next 10,or 20 pages about every little detail.(especially,considering how much i have here.)
so,i'm only going to say this:
1.i clearly remember some people saying,"it can't hurt to ask" for features requests.
don't suppose you remember one of those people,now would you? ;) :)
2.no,i'm not installing 100 different plug-ins to get some of that functionality.

Re: abe,untrusted,& elements

Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 3:50 am
by Thrawn
Guest wrote:hello Giorgio.
this is not really a bug report,but a features request.
1.)would it be possible for noscript to feed websites a false ip address?(mask the user's ip address.)
for example:the same way surrogates feed google search false/empty data.
how about showing websites/ads your ip address as 000.0.0.0???
This would probably break your network routing and mean that websites wouldn't be able to send the page back to you.
3.)speaking of pictures...
while i know ns wasn't meant to be a picture blocker.it is!
Why not just switch images off, then re-enable the sites that you want to allow? Ctrl+I brings up the Page Info dialog, with a Permissions tab, which should make it easy.
3c.)speaking of beacons/web bugs.
did you ever consider bringing that feature back?
http://forums.informaction.com/viewtopi ... 321#p33321
4.)could you please include wildcards ( * ) in abe!?
They already exist - asterisk represents 'all subdomains', while a leading dot means 'this domain and all subdomains'. You can even use regular expressions if you want.
5.)is it possible to use the hosts file directly instead of untrusted?
provided one has a large list in C:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc\hosts
i'm really tired of cross referencing sites/js from the hosts' block list!
the only stuff that should go into noscript's untrusted list.would be site specific js.(clearly,those can't be blocked
through hosts.)
Do you mean that you don't want sites that are blocked in your hosts file to appear in the menus at all? Or that they should be automatically marked as untrusted?

The former sounds like a bad idea (because you'd lose information about what the page is trying to use). The latter is interesting and maybe possible, though I doubt Giorgio has time.
6.)speaking of hosts...
Giorgio,have you ever thought of doing an update patch for the hosts file?
This sounds like a valuable idea, but not for a browser addon. It's way beyond the scope of what NoScript does. Maybe you could bring it up with the Ubuntu developers or something.
@ Tom T.(anyone else.)
i know you like to over analyze every word,but i'm not going to argue with you for the next 10,or 20 pages about every little detail.(especially,considering how much i have here.)
so,i'm only going to say this:
1.i clearly remember some people saying,"it can't hurt to ask" for features requests.
don't suppose you remember one of those people,now would you? ;) :)
It doesn't hurt to ask, and some of your ideas are interesting. As always, it's up to Giorgio.
2.no,i'm not installing 100 different plug-ins to get some of that functionality.
Out of curiosity, why not? It means that you get 100 different developers working for you.

Re: abe,untrusted,& elements

Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 4:30 am
by Tom T.
Guest wrote:1.)would it be possible for noscript to feed websites a false ip address?(mask the user's ip address.)
for example:the same way surrogates feed google search false/empty data.
how about showing websites/ads your ip address as 000.0.0.0???
Then that is where they will send the page. NoScript is not intended to be a proxy server. What you ask for requires an actual proxy service or TOR.
3.)speaking of pictures...
while i know ns wasn't meant to be a picture blocker.it is!
Firefox itself has image-blocking. Tools > Options > Content > Load Images Automatically > Exceptions. For greater selectivity, consider Adblock Plus.
5.)is it possible to use the hosts file directly instead of untrusted?
provided one has a large list in C:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc\hosts
i'm really tired of cross referencing sites/js from the hosts' block list!
the only stuff that should go into noscript's untrusted list.would be site specific js.(clearly,those can't be blocked
through hosts.)
SOME SITES YOU MIGHT NOT WANT TO ALLOW covers a large number of such sites, many of which are multiple-listed in Hosts files supplied by third parties (because of listing sub-domains, etc.).
6.)speaking of hosts...
Giorgio,have you ever thought of doing an update patch for the hosts file?
NoScript is not a Hosts service. There are many independent providers of same.
6b.)for those legitimate websites who are foolish enough to stick their names into garbage/js,or ads.
for example:clicks.beap.bc.yahoo.com
how about:
000.0.0.0 +login.yahoo.com
000.0.0.0 +*.mail.yahoo.com
Note:the (+,& *) would allow all mail.yahoo.com server numbers.
the (+) would clearly bypass the 000.0.0.0 *yahoo*
legitimate pages are few,& far between.it's just easier to add them manually!
while the existing garbage/js,or ads,plus the new ones would be blocked.
you have to see the benefit in that!!!
This is easy. I forbid www dot yahoo.com in NS, and whitelist only mail.yahoo.com and yimg.com. Login.yahoo.com is not required for logging in, at least to mail. This also leaves blocked by default finance.yahoo, news.yahoo, etc.
legitimate pages are few,& far between.it's just easier to add them manually!
Yes. Just leave everything else default-denied.
the reason why it must be done in hosts,is because this would work for every browser.
instead of just ff with noscript.
So, the developer of NoScript is to spend his time developing a Hosts file for IE, Chrome, etc. ?
@ Tom T.(anyone else.)
i know you like to over analyze every word,
Thank you for the kind words.
2.no,i'm not installing 100 different plug-ins to get some of that functionality.
I have maybe half a dozen add-ons that do everything I want. I'm against huge numbers of add-ons also.
I don't use AdBlockPlus, but it sounds like it would accomplish a lot of what you want with images.

Re: abe,untrusted,& elements

Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 9:50 am
by Guest
@ Thrawn.
hello.
1.)look at my answer to Tom T in # 1.
2.)i need the pictures,but not all of them.there's just no customability.
i'm not a noob.i know how to turn off pics in ff options,or block them.
again,"there's just no customability."
3.)yes,that looks sort of familiar,but i'm not going to reread that again.
beacons/web bugs were still blocked in ff8.
besides,that's why i said,"how about automatically blocking any picture in any format that is 1x1 pixels in size from 1st,or 3rd party???"
it's just easier to block all of them by size.
4.)no,wildcards ( * ) don't work in abe!!!
unless,i'm doing something wrong???
5.)yes,appear in noscript's untrusted menu as blocked.
no,that wouldn't break the websites any more,or less.
hosts overwrites ns.
if i have something blocked in hosts.then,allowing the same in ns would not work.
do you see why i said,"there needs to be a connection between hosts,& ns?"
6.)like i said,"it''s not supposed to be a browser addon/plugin,but an update patch for the hosts file itself."
i think you just missed/misunderstood that part.
Ubuntu???
i don't think they will have any interest in updating a hosts file for windows!
7.)exactly...up to Giorgio!
i just don't want to argue with Tom.
8.)way too messy.way too many compatibility/interference problems between all of them.
why bother with them?when ns can already do half of that!
why not just expand the ns features to do the rest!?

@ Tom T.
hello.
1.)not exactly what i was going for.then again,i couldn't care less how it's done!
being able to pull pages of the net to your pc,& feeding those websites/ads false/empty data are not the same thing.
like i said,"just mask the user's ip address."
did you forget,"Giorgio openly brags about coding a simulated server that runs within a browser?"
are you telling me,"Giorgio will never consider adjusting,or improving it in the very distant future???"
2.)look at my response to Thrawn in #2.
plus,abp?
you MVPS Judas. ;) :)
3.)SOME SITES YOU MIGHT NOT WANT TO ALLOW.
i'm fully aware of that,it's not what i meant by an UPDATE PATCH,& what about new stuff that's not in the hosts list!???
you had clearly misunderstood me.
4.)irrelevant,& i have the exact same setup.
https://login.yahoo.com/config/login_verify2?&.src=ym is required for yahoo mail.
unless,you already have the cookie(from a previous log in),or using http://m.yahoo.com/mail
remember,you are talking about white list vs UPDATED/PATCHED hosts.
they are not the same thing!

CONTINUED at # 6...
5.)not important here.
6.)face<palm.
again,you misunderstood!
the UPDATED/PATCHED hosts will work with "ALL BROWSERS!!!

how did you get the different hosts versions for each browser???
it's the exact opposite of what i was saying!!!
not sure why you think that,"there's a deadline/time limit???"
Giorgio can do this a million years from now.
it's not like i was asking him to do "all" of this by the next update!
7.)please,please,please don't take it personally!?
ironically enough, i was just trying to avoid "more" stuff like above.
8.)agreed!!!
look at my response to Thrawn in #8,& i had already covered abp.

Re: abe,untrusted,& elements

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:58 am
by Tom T.
being able to pull pages of the net to your pc,& feeding those websites/ads false/empty data are not the same thing.
Exactly. Feeding a data-mining script empty data is easy, but a site can't send a page anywhere except to the address that is provided to it.
If you mail a letter with an incorrect or non-existent address, it won't be delivered to the recipient.
like i said,"just mask the user's ip address."
Clearly you don't understand the HTTP(S) request system, so I don't want to argue with you, either.
(MVPS? Surely you jest. Count the MS-bashing posts by moi. ;) )

However, I will help you in one area:
4.)no,wildcards ( * ) don't work in abe!!!
unless,i'm doing something wrong???
Please see ABE Rules .pdf, section 1.3, "Resources". You probably want the glob expression, the one without the asterisk.

Code: Select all

.site.com or .subdomain.site.com
Yahoo mail: I always login through https://login.yahoo.com/config/login_verify2?&.src=ym, with login.yahoo.com blocked. No permanent cookies, ever.
I just logged out, cleared the session cookies, and logged back in again, without script from login.yahoo.
Allowing https//login.yahoo actually made the login worse, because then it wanted yahoo.com allowed, plus some blocked objects, etc.
Much simpler with the login script blocked. Has worked that way for me for a long time.

btw, separate threads for relatively unrelated requests would probably get more replies, and more comprehensive ones. For an unpaid volunteer, those are rather daunting things to plow through. :)

Re: abe,untrusted,& elements

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 11:51 am
by Guest
hello Tom.
1.)data-mining scripts are not important here.
i don't want to touch that creepy garbage with a 10 foot pole!!!
they were just an example.
1a.)
...a site can't send a page anywhere except to the address that is provided to it.
that's exactly what i meant in my very first post!
there has to be a way to get around that!
i don't care how,& the word "mask" may not had been the best/accurate description.
sorry!
i covered it pretty accurately before,"Giorgio openly brags about coding a simulated server that runs within a browser?"
are you telling me,"Giorgio will never consider adjusting,or improving it in the very distant future???"
that's just one way of doing it.i really "don't care how."
1b.)unfortunately,i do understand the HTTP(S) requests! :(
i actually got an unrelated problem with https.(don't ask.)
1c.)I HATE,HATE,HATE, MICROS...T more than you can ever imagine!!!
so,what!?you used to love MVPS.
you said so yourself,"many of which are multiple-listed in Hosts files supplied by third parties."
I LOVE MY XP,but I HATE MICROS...T!!!(do you understand?)
i'm tired of hearing about abp. :roll:
the only thing abp got going for it is,"it can allow blocked pages/js/ads when necessary without having to do it manually in C:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc\hosts."
IMHO,besides that,"abp is still completely unnecessary!!!"
please,stop mentioning abp.
i think you are a little confused here.
do not confuse MVPS the Software Program, vs winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.txt Hosts List.
again,you said so yourself,"many of which are multiple-listed in Hosts files supplied by third parties."
the hosts list can come from anybody.even MICROS...T a.k.a :twisted: .
do you understand me now???
2.)i can't stand pdfs.
i don't have any pdf software/plug-ins,or the latest ff version.
look,if i use this abe rule:
Note.there is http in front of each sub,& i had to change com to moc.
MAY RECAPTCHA ROT IN HELL!!!

Code: Select all

sub0.example.moc/blah/blah/blah/ 
sub1.example.moc/blah/blah/blah/ 
sub2.example.moc/blah/blah/blah/ 
sub3.example.moc/blah/blah/blah/
it works!
...but if i use:

Code: Select all

sub*.example.moc/blah/blah/blah/
it doesn't work. :(
i don't know what to tell you.
3.)i always use mail.yahoo.com to log in to yahoo mail.
if i have the cookie from the previous session,i get auto logged-in into yahoo mail.
if i don't have the cookie.i get sent here:login.yahoo.com/config/login_verify2?&.src=ym
so,if you put:
000.0.0.0 login.yahoo.com
into C:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc\hosts
you will not be able to log-in into yahoo mail.
it's not going to matter what you allow,or don't allow in ns.
remember,hosts overwrites ns.
that's why i said,"there needs to be a connection between hosts,& ns!"
this is "similar" to what abp :roll: does.(again,look at 1c above.)
please,don't confuse hosts with,what's allowed,or not allowed in ns.
4.)i know all of you guys are unpaid volunteers.
I MAJORLY APPRECIATE EVERY VOLUNTEERS HELP!!!
Tom,i don't want to sound ungrateful(i'm not),but if you did not over analyze every word.just think,how much time you could save!?
some things are just "as is," & do not need to be discussed.
like i said,"i'm not a noob."
i know the ins,& outs of ff,& ns pretty well.
Tom,THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL THE HELP!!!

NOW,lets see what Giorgio has to say.

Re: abe,untrusted,& elements

Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 6:54 am
by Tom T.
Hello Guest,
i covered it pretty accurately before,"Giorgio openly brags about coding a simulated server that runs within a browser?"
I would imagine that any such simulated server will still require an IP address of its own (your IP address as assigned by your ISP or whatever), and will also require the correct IP of connecting clients, so that it can respond to them.
I LOVE MY XP,but I HATE MICROS...T!!!(do you understand?)
Yes. :)
please,stop mentioning abp.
OK. I don't use it myself.
i think you are a little confused here.
do not confuse MVPS the Software Program, vs winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.txt Hosts List.
You are correct. Sorry for the confusion. (but then, it was a very long post ;) )
2.)i can't stand pdfs.
i don't have any pdf software/plug-ins,or the latest ff version.
Try Foxit Reader. Free for home use, and much more lightweight (smaller file size, etc.) than Adobe Reader. 4MB vs 400.
I prefer to use v2.0, probably available from oldversion.com, because it has no inherent support for JavaScript or other executables.
Automatically interacts with Firefox to open/save web .pdfs, after asking your permission (to open or save to disk), as it should.
Individual opinion only. Neither I nor this Forum is responsible for third-party products or the consequences of your use of them.
(Now my lawyer is happy.)
MAY RECAPTCHA ROT IN HELL!!!
May spammers rot in Hell.
You have no idea how many dozens, or sometimes hundreds, we delete and ban each day.
The recaptcha would go away, and the spam filter would be much less aggressive against you, were you to take a minute or two to register.
You do not need to divulge any personal information to do so.

Code: Select all

sub0.example.moc/blah/blah/blah/ 
sub1.example.moc/blah/blah/blah/ 
sub2.example.moc/blah/blah/blah/ 
sub3.example.moc/blah/blah/blah/
it works!
...but if i use:

Code: Select all

sub*.example.moc/blah/blah/blah/
it doesn't work. :(
This is one case where it really is necessary to read the instructions. :D
ABE is a powerful and complex tool with its own syntax.
If you wish to allow example.com *and all of its subdomains*, use simply

Code: Select all

.example.com
If you wish to further fine-tune this, using wildcards in some places, allowing some /blahs but not other /blahs, etc. then you will need to use regular expressions. I don't know whether you're familiar with those, but if you need help in creating a specific rule, just post the details (in a separate topic thread) of what you want to accomplish, and someone here will help you.
so,if you put:
000.0.0.0 login.yahoo.com
into C:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc\hosts
you will not be able to log-in into yahoo mail.
Of course not. You've just instructed your browser (any browser) to send all requests to fetch yahoo login page from address 000.0.0.0, which doesn't exist. So don't do that.

Why *would* you do that, if you use yahoo mail? The Hosts file doesn't define *your* IP address to any given web site; rather, it maps a text-based URL to a numerical IP (to a non-existent one, if you want to block evil or annoying sites; otherwise, to legitimate ones).

Nothing in Hosts can change your own IP address. The mapping to zero is just a fast way of blocking undesired sites.
remember,hosts overwrites ns.
Remember, hosts overrules everything else, including your ISP's DNS, or whatever DNS you use.
The browser looks there first, and if no match is found, then it does the usual DNS lookup by your predetermined method.
that's why i said,"there needs to be a connection between hosts,& ns!"
There is.
NoScript is an add-on to a web browser.
A web browser is an application that allows you to request resources (such as web pages) from the Internet.
Internet resources are assigned unique 32-bit addresses (in IPv4; longer in IPv6).
Humans find it awkward to work with, or remember, 32 binary digits.
So web sites instead register addresses such as mail.yahoo.com.
If Hosts does not contain a mapping for that address to a 32-bit number, which is shown to us humans as four octets converted into decimal numbers and separated by dots, then your ISP or some other Domain Name Server does a "lookup" of the text name, converts it to the proper numerical address, and sends the request there.
For those who don't use a hosts service, the default hosts file usually contains only the localhost internal address of your own machine, 127.0.0.1
Therefore, all other text addresses are looked up by the DNS.

So, no, NS cannot override your Hosts, nor change it.
I think you are requesting that Hosts somehow communicate with NS, allowing a site but not its script.
Not possible. Hosts merely provides an address, a destination.
I will give you the address of my favorite saloon. What you do when you get there is your business. :mrgreen:
Hosts and DNS lookup provide addresses to destinations. What you do when you get there is your business. (such as allowing JS)
NS helps you manage your business before or after you get there, via permissions.
If you block it in Hosts, by mapping to 0, you'll never get there.
please,don't confuse hosts with,what's allowed,or not allowed in ns.
It seems that it's you who's doing that. I hope the above clears it up.
Tom,THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL THE HELP!!!
You're quite welcome. :)
NOW,lets see what Giorgio has to say.
I will ask him to review your posts when he has a chance.

Re: abe,untrusted,& elements

Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 9:52 am
by Giorgio Maone
Guest wrote: 1.)would it be possible for noscript to feed websites a false ip address?(mask the user's ip address.)
Impossible.
Your IP is an integral part of any TCP/IP communication (much lower level than scripts or HTTP), and TCP/IP based networking protocols need to know it in order to send responses back to you. That's well beyond NoScript's reach.
As others pointed out, "masking" it would require a proxy server running on a different host with the public IP you want to show, and if your goal is anonymity, this other IP should change often and should be used also for side-channel (non HTTP) requests, such as DNS resolution.
In other words, you really really need TOR.
Guest wrote: 2.)in abe,how come i can block data:image/png;base64, ,but i can't block  ???
I'm very surprised you can actually do the former, since ABE is an anti-CSRF countermeasure and as such is supposed to work with HTTP/HTTPS requests only.
The ability of blocking some data: URIs may be an unintended side effect of some implementation detail (I didn't bother to check), but is definitely not supported and out of ABE's intended scope.
Guest wrote: 3.)speaking of pictures...
while i know ns wasn't meant to be a picture blocker.it is!
Adblock Plus is and was also meant to be: as such, it's much more likely to devote development efforts to RFEs regarding its core business, than me diverting them from security-related features.
Guest wrote: 3a.)is it possible for us to select our own picture replacements!?(any picture in any format from our hard-drives.)
this is useful for links under those pictures that are still needed.(otherwise,you are just pointlessly looking for
something you can't see.)
There's been some talk about supporting a "Replace" ABE action, but at this moment the underlying Gecko networking architecture makes it very difficult if not impossible. Maybe in the feature, when and if there's some browser API support (the HTTPS Everywhere crew is lobbying for improving this stuff).
On the other hand, a hard-coded (maybe customizable via about:config) replacement for blocked images is feasible. I suppose it would suffice, wouldn't it?
A serious problem with both approaches, though, is that unless the image specifies its size in CSS or HTML markup (and most don't), there's no way to correctly size the replacement (it will be shown in its default size, which may or may not be acceptable).
And no, I'm not going to add a special syntax to ABE in order to specify in-DOM replacements which make sense only for this twisted adblocking-oriented use case. Again, please use Adblock Plus if you need to block ads and have RFEs about adblocking (this answers to 3c, too).
Guest wrote: 3c.)speaking of beacons/web bugs.
did you ever consider bringing that feature back?
No, it's simply impossible to implement in modern browsers, which heavily use parallel speculative prefetching in order to improve perceived performance.
Guest wrote: if not,how about automatically blocking any picture in any format that is 1x1 pixels in size from 1st,or 3rd party???
As I stated above, in most cases you cannot know the actual size of an image before loading it, and once is loaded the tracking is done.
Also, speculative loading means that the load starts even before the HTML has been parsed into a DOM, hence even in those case where the size of the image is available from markup, it cannot be used reliably.
This basically means that a blacklist approach (like ABP's or Ghostery's), albeit horrible, is the only feasible.
Guest wrote: 4.)could you please include wildcards ( * ) in abe!?
so,instead of:
sub1.example.com
sub2.example.com
sub3.example.com
it could be:
sub*.example.com
or
*.example.com
Not sure about your problem.

Both sub*.example.com and *.example.com match sub1.example.com, sub2.example.com and sub3.example.com in ABE URL pattern syntax.
If you want to match example.com too with just one pattern, as others explained above, you need to use ".example.com" or "*.example.com example.com".
Then, if you've got more specific pattern matching needs, you can laways use regular expressions.
It's hard to imagine a more flexible URL matching system...

But maybe your problem is that you're actually trying to match

http ://sub0.example.moc/blah/blah/blah/some/additional/crap/here.js

In this case,

Code: Select all

http:// sub0.example.moc/blah/blah/blah/
will match (leftmost substring matching), but

Code: Select all

http://sub*.example.moc/blah/blah/blah/
won't, because glob matching is anchored on the right unless you specify a trailing wildcard (it precisely matches the /bla/blah/blah/ directory, but not its subdirectories).
Therefore in this case, you need

Code: Select all

http://sub*.example.moc/blah/blah/blah/*
Guest wrote: 5.)is it possible to use the hosts file directly instead of untrusted?
Nope, and it's useless as well. If a domain resolves to an invalid or local address in your hosts file, there's no need to block it in NoScript because it will never be actually loaded by Firefox, no matter if it's a script or not.
Guest wrote: 6.)speaking of hosts...
Giorgio,have you ever thought of doing an update patch for the hosts file?
before you say no,hear me out.
[...]
Heard, and no chance. I'm not gonna patch the whole DNS subsystem for each supported OS or write a new portable+scriptable DNS (and before you repeat you don't care how it's done, these are the only ways it could be done, and I do care).
Guest wrote: WITH ALL DUE RESPECT,could you please put about noscript with a check-box in front of it into appearances?
Yes I could.
Guest wrote: 8.)elements remover.
huh?what is this mess?
It's a tiny feature which helps me removing those floating boxes (AKA DIV popups) which on JavaScript-enabled pages could be closed by hitting a button or after a timeout, and as such is very functional and streamlined.
While your proposal sounds very interesting, it's material (and workload) for a whole new add-on, and I even suspect some already exist.
Surely some of its use cases are covered, yet again, by Adblock Plus' Element Hiding Helper, and even more surely I've got no time to develop a quasi-clone of it (or of the retired Aardvark extension) right now.
Guest wrote: 8e.)Giorgio,would it be possible to block only a part of something???
PLEASE,CONSIDER ALL OF THIS BEFORE YOU SAY NO???
I can't understand what "part" and "something" mean here, really.
Guest wrote: i know i'm forgetting something,but this is more than enough.
Indeed. Next time please keep each RFE separate in its own forum topic, to make the discussion manageable.
Thank you.

Re: abe,untrusted,& elements

Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:03 pm
by Thrawn
Giorgio Maone wrote: glob matching is anchored on the right unless you specify a trailing wildcard (it precisely matches the /bla/blah/blah/ directory, but not its subdirectories).
Therefore in this case, you need

Code: Select all

http://sub*.example.moc/blah/blah/blah/*
I didn't know that double-glob syntax was possible! Thanks, Giorgio!

I may use this sometime, instead of regular expressions, to write ABE rules that apply to all subdomains but only one protocol, eg:

Code: Select all

Site https://*.sensitive-site.com/*
Accept from SELF
Deny
Giorgio Maone wrote:
Guest wrote: 5.)is it possible to use the hosts file directly instead of untrusted?
Nope, and it's useless as well. If a domain resolves to an invalid or local address in your hosts file, there's no need to block it in NoScript because it will never be actually loaded by Firefox, no matter if it's a script or not.
I did like Guest's idea, though, of automatically marking sites as untrusted if they're blocked in Hosts, so that they don't clutter the menu.

Re: abe,untrusted,& elements

Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:26 pm
by Thrawn
Tom T. wrote:
please,stop mentioning abp.
OK. I don't use it myself.
I agree; I use it, but only for manual blocking and the anti-malware subscription, not for EasyList. There's just no need once you install NoScript and RequestPolicy.
Tom T. wrote:
2.)i can't stand pdfs.
i don't have any pdf software/plug-ins,or the latest ff version.
Try Foxit Reader. Free for home use, and much more lightweight (smaller file size, etc.) than Adobe Reader. 4MB vs 400.
I personally (again no endorsement) quite like the PDF Viewer addon, aka pdf.js. Opinions on its security are mixed compared to external programs like Foxit, but at least JavaScript doesn't tend to have buffer overruns, and it's only a few hundred KB. Plus pdf.js doesn't swallow Ctrl+W like Adobe does (I don't remember whether Foxit is any better).

There was a point where pdf.js was apparently running in the document context, so it was blocked by NoScript, but that's now fixed.

Re: abe,untrusted,& elements

Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:03 am
by Tom T.
Thrawn wrote:I did like Guest's idea, though, of automatically marking sites as untrusted if they're blocked in Hosts, so that they don't clutter the menu.
It seems that this would require either NS loading the 16,000-entry Hosts file at launch, or searching it for a match whenever a not-untrusted script appears in the menu. Both seem extremely resource-intensive. Also a waste for the vast majority of users who have the default single-entry Hosts file.

Also, my hosts file contains entries ranging from base 2LD to even 4LD sub.sub.domains.com. Often, there are multiple subdomains of a single domain.
Probably accumulated over years of contributions, but in any case, how would NS handle this, given that users may choose to show, block, or allow, base 2LD, full domain, full address?

I've taken a great deal of time to compile a list of 100+ of the most-frequently-seen offenders in the sticky derided by OP, SOME SITES YOU MIGHT NOT WANT TO ALLOW.
Marking those as Untrusted shrinks menus considerably.
Actually looks like it might be time to update that, as the source, http://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/thirdparties/, seems to have added a few more. I'll try to find time to do that, or if you have the time and are willing, please feel free. :)

98% of the sites in my Hosts are unlikely to be encountered by me (foreign sites, malware sites, etc.) or are dupes of a base 2LD, which in some cases is already blacklisted.
IMHO, this RFE is unnecessary, has an unfavorable workload/reward benefit, and a very unfavorable resource cost/benefit ratio.

Re: abe,untrusted,& elements

Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 3:34 am
by Thrawn
Tom T. wrote: Actually looks like it might be time to update that, as the source, http://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/thirdparties/, seems to have added a few more. I'll try to find time to do that, or if you have the time and are willing, please feel free. :)
Will do, thanks.

ETA: Done :).
IMHO, this RFE is unnecessary, has an unfavorable workload/reward benefit, and a very unfavorable resource cost/benefit ratio.
Fair call. My original reaction was 'interesting, but Giorgio has higher priorities'.

Re: abe,untrusted,& elements

Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 6:57 am
by Tom T.
Thrawn wrote:
Tom T. wrote: Actually looks like it might be time to update that, as the source, http://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/thirdparties/, seems to have added a few more. I'll try to find time to do that, or if you have the time and are willing, please feel free. :)
Will do, thanks.

ETA: Done :).
Thanks! :D

Re: abe,untrusted,& elements

Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:55 pm
by Guest
I APOLOGIZE TO EVERYBODY FOR THIS 100 PAGE LONG POST!
@ Tom.
hello again.
1.)hmn,AGREED...more,or less.
the whole point/question was,"how do you get around that???"
even take it beyond tor,or tor project!
who else am i supposed to annoy about this,but an expert like Giorgio!?
he partially answered it below.
2.)i know you love xp,besides the fact who made it! :)
3.)i really don't see the point of it. :roll:
4.)if you have a Hosts List.why bother with MVPS the Software Program,anything like it,or :roll: ?
just,let the Hosts List do it's thing silently in the background without any interaction from you!
yes,i know it was long.it's just,i had been sitting on all of this for a very long time.
i'm very sorry!!!
i know you just quickly read it.that's why we have so many misunderstanding,& will have more.
5.)Foxit Reader.
lol.that's the program i was thinking of,& PDF Viewer for a plug-in(like Thrawn said) in my last reply.
6.)...but,i do know how many registered users post spam. :(
it's just very frustrating to post examples.(way too many false positives.)
7.)this one works:

Code: Select all

http://sub*.example.moc/blah/blah/blah/*
i had been using ns for a little over a year,& i was more surprised than a vet like Thrawn!
this one clearly does not apply to what i "wanted."

Code: Select all

.example.com
8.)another misunderstanding.
yes,0 to block!!!
it has nothing to do with "hiding" my ip.

i could had just as easily used 127(i just didn't want Giorgio to bite my head off.) ,or 255.
i know how angry Giorgio gets about 127,the flame war between Guardian,& "The Rube?" about 0,& routers.even,you giving the instructions on how to open the Hosts List with wordpad,& changing all 127s to 0s.(except the 1st one.)
i told you,"i'm not a noob!!!"
Nothing in Hosts can change your own IP address.
exactly what i had meant!!!
9.)yes,yes hosts first!
then,"basically" your isp server(s). after that,atleast "one" of the 13 major servers around the world.
like i said,"i'm not a noob!!!"
10.)yeah,yeah i know.
for example:
123.456.789.254 = mail.yahoo.com (just an example.please,don't over analyze it.)
problem is,how many people can remember numbers for each website!?
that's why we use names,but that is not very important here!
I think you are requesting that Hosts somehow communicate with NS, allowing a site but not its script.
ooohh,so close. :(
a.)no,the NS should communicate with hosts.(C:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc\hosts)
b.)simply put:instead of storing the untrusted in about:config-noscript.untrusted.
they will be referenced from:C:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc\hosts.
then,appear as blocked by default in NS's untrusted sub-menu.
NOTE:only site specific js will go into:about:config-noscript.untrusted.
c.)to further emphasize on your argument with Thrawn.
if Giorgio wrote that software patch for hosts.
then,only hosts(NOT THE OS) could read (* and +) .
this would make the Hosts List somewhere between 1,500-3,000 entries.
it's a lot less system(hardware) ,resources,or even ns intensive!???

don't you think???
after that,the entire world community would decide what to (+) for exceptions.
Tom,if you don't see/understand the benefits in any of this.there is no point in explaining this to you yet again!
it's ultimately up to Giorgio,& he doesn't seem to care. :( :( :(
only Thrawn sees my vision.THANK YOU!
11.)again,please,don't confuse hosts with,what's allowed,or not allowed in ns.
no,YOU misunderstood me again.
12.)again,Tom,THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL THE HELP!!!
now,will you please stop overanalyzing things!?i'm begging you.

@ Giorgio.
hello.
it's very good to hear from you again,& thank you very much for your time!!!
1.)"masking" was a poor choice of words on my behalf.(as i had explained to Tom in a previous reply.)
tor/tor project use external/physical servers.
have you ever thought of,adopting your simulated server that runs within a browser to do the same???
2.)that's a good side effect.(data:image/png;base64,) :)
it's a shame abe can never block  . :( :( :(
would it ever be possible under any circumstances?
3.)abp. :roll:
kill it!
wait,it's mr. burns...errgh abp.
aww,it's abp.kill it!
4.)maybe "Replace" ABE action in the future!
okay,looking forward to it!
maybe customizable via about:config.
unless the image specifies its size in CSS or HTML markup (and most don't), there's no way to correctly size the replacement (it will be shown in its default size, which may or may not be acceptable).
obviously,if a user uses a wallpaper sized picture(instead of 25x25 pixels) that would be an overkill.
if the picture uses the CSS,or HTML markup.then,the picture from your hard-drive would be stretched/shrunk to the wright size.(works for me.)
that's why i said,you need this abe rule(or something like it) for multiple pictures/websites:

Code: Select all

# TEST
Site example.moc/a/pic.jpg=C:\Sub\picture.png
Deny
Note:there is http in front of example,& i changed com to moc.
MAY RECAPTCHA ROT IN HELL!!!
Giorgio,i swear,"in no way,shape,or form was this meant for ad blocking!!!
for example,why not just put:
000.0.0.0 pictures.2click.com
into hosts!?
this abe rule would be for sites that use 3rd. party pics,or sub.example.com while the main pics are still on example.com.
i know you don't care,but think about it for very distant future.
5.)it's a shame you can't block pics by size.
ff seems to have a lot of problems with displaying pics properly. :(
6.)who knew!?yes,this works perfectly:
sub*.example.moc/blah/blah/blah/*
now,my abe rules will be a lot shorter,& less repetitive!
Giorgio,THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!!
7,& 8.)i think,my short explanation to Tom above in # 10a-10c says it all.
plus,patching the whole DNS subsystem for each supported OS,or write a new portable+scriptable DNS...
i would not wish that on any body!!!
all i want is,for the hosts file to see the:
000.0.0.0 *doubleclick*
the same as this:
000.0.0.0 marketing.2clickindustries.moc
000.0.0.0 anon.2click.speedera.moc
000.0.0.0 ad-g.2click.moc

that's all.
not to mention,this software patch would work on "all" windows.(i can't speak for other OSes.i'm not "that" familiar with all of them.)
which ofcourse,will work with "all" of the browsers!
9.)THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!!
now,about noscript won't open by accident a million times.
again,Giorgio,i don't want to take away anything from your work/credits,or everyone who has helped!!!
10.)i know how elements remover works.it's just uncomfortable to use.
at least,why not just right click on the element,& select remove/block from the right click menu!?
i knew you were going to say,'it's too much work,or i can make another plug-in from this.'
abp Element Hiding Helper.(i know about it) :roll:
sigh,abp again.
it only hides the problems.it does not block them.
the only one i can think of that comes close is Nuke Anything Enhanced.
addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/nuke-anything-enhanced/
11.)see the InformAction Forums red box at the very top of this page.
then,the ns,flashgot,hackademix,& informaction pics/links.
under them,the blue box with:Board index ‹ NoScript ‹ NoScript Support...
FAQ Register Login.
now,imagine if that blue box had some kind of pic/bar inside it.
would it be possible to block everything in that blue box.except for Login,& the very end of that pic/bar?
12.)i know you are going to hate this long post,but there are no real programers/experts left but you.
like i said,"who else am i going to annoy about this?" :)

@ Thrawn.
1.)i know,like i said,"i was more surprised than you!"
2.)thank you very much!
i'm glad someone likes my idea!
3.)yes,i'm familiar with Request Policy,but it's just not for me.
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!?
5.)look at my reply to Tom above in # 10a-10c.
6.)Thrawn,THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL THE HELP!!!

Re: abe,untrusted,& elements

Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 12:42 pm
by Guest
HAPPY HOLIDAYS EVERYBODY!!!