InformAction Forums

Hi,

I would like to restrict Permanent Permissions to some sites even though they may use some of the same as other sites.

For instance Ghostery will allow Bazaarvoice on Walmart.com but block it on all other sites that also use it.

Similar for things like allowing sharethis.com and google.com but only on selected sites.

I believe I can create Filters but that is a lot of work that I do not understand and since Ghostery can do the blocking per site, I wondered if it is possible to easily do it with NoScript.

Thanks

Site-Specific-Permission Questions? PLEASE READ THIS FIRST!

You may also want to try RequestPolicy.

Thrawn wrote:Site-Specific-Permission Questions? PLEASE READ THIS FIRST!

But, THAT'S what I was saying is too much work that NoScript should be doing for me AND it applies to the ABE stuff as well as Filters. I have been programming for longer than I like to remember and I have always maintained that software should work for me, not the other way around.

Thrawn wrote:You may also want to try RequestPolicy.

Ummm, you might want to read first four paragraphs here... I had been there and done that.

http://forums.informaction.com/viewtopi ... 708#p55702

StandingWave wrote:

Thrawn wrote:Site-Specific-Permission Questions? PLEASE READ THIS FIRST!

But, THAT'S what I was saying is too much work that NoScript should be doing for me AND it applies to the ABE stuff as well as Filters. I have been programming for longer than I like to remember and I have always maintained that software should work for me, not the other way around.

NoScript works very well, but it is a security tool first, with privacy as a side benefit.

Clearly you trust that BazaarVoice and ShareThis are not going to try to load malware, otherwise you would block them everywhere. So NoScript is not all that interested in blocking them. If you're concerned about privacy/tracking, then there are already umpteen tools for that, and NoScript is not going to try to top them all.

That said, NoScript 3.x for the desktop will help a lot with this.

Thrawn wrote:You may also want to try RequestPolicy.

Ummm, you might want to read first four paragraphs here... I had been there and done that.

http://forums.informaction.com/viewtopi ... 708#p55702[/quote]
Ah, I see. Sorry, I hadn't kept track of who was who.

But if you think that RP is too limited for the level of cross-site control you want, then NoScript is not going to be better...

Thrawn wrote:That said, NoScript 3.x for the desktop will help a lot with this.

OK, but now I am confused as that link was for "...for Mobile." a great thing and I will be grabbing (donating) a copy for my Fire, but I could not see where it mentioned "Desktop."

Thrawn wrote:But if you think that RP is too limited for the level of cross-site control you want, then NoScript is not going to be better...

You are not reading my posts fully. The Beta of RP is very buggy and at this point there is no sense in using it. IF it worked as it should, and I have no doubt it will when out of Beta, then I will certainly be using it instead of Ghostery. But for now, RP still needs a lot of work and there is no point running it just because it should do what I want.

The point I am making with NoScript is that it is **almost** doing it and it would be a small programming step to make it optional per website. Ghostery and RP do not come anywhere near close to NoScript and I would be happy to abandon both of those IF NS just offered per-website.

I am NOT bagging or denigrating NoScript, I have been a user and supporter for years. It is an awesome piece of programming and I would not use Firefox without it. BUT - per-site would be simple to include and I do not see why you keeping inferring I am not happy with NS functions. I want fewer add-ins not more and if NS does per-site then I do not need Ghostery or RP.

You seem to push RP pretty hard by always including a link to it. Do you have a vested interest in RP, is it your/relative/friend etc, software?

StandingWave wrote:

Thrawn wrote:That said, NoScript 3.x for the desktop will help a lot with this.

OK, but now I am confused as that link was for "...for Mobile." a great thing and I will be grabbing (donating) a copy for my Fire, but I could not see where it mentioned "Desktop."

That's coming too. The last paragraph of the blog post mentions that it will be a lot of work.

Thrawn wrote:But if you think that RP is too limited for the level of cross-site control you want, then NoScript is not going to be better...

You are not reading my posts fully. The Beta of RP is very buggy and at this point there is no sense in using it. IF it worked as it should, and I have no doubt it will when out of Beta, then I will certainly be using it instead of Ghostery. But for now, RP still needs a lot of work and there is no point running it just because it should do what I want.

Then use the stable version (0.5.27) instead. That's what I do. I've never even tried the beta.

The point I am making with NoScript is that it is **almost** doing it and it would be a small programming step to make it optional per website.

You think so? Please feel free to read through the source code and submit a patch to Giorgio, or fork it if you prefer. It is a freely-licensed product.

Ghostery and RP do not come anywhere near close to NoScript and I would be happy to abandon both of those IF NS just offered per-website.

Yes. I already don't use Ghostery, and at some point I'm going to seriously try replacing RP with ABE.

I am NOT bagging or denigrating NoScript, I have been a user and supporter for years. It is an awesome piece of programming and I would not use Firefox without it. BUT - per-site would be simple to include and I do not see why you keeping inferring I am not happy with NS functions. I want fewer add-ins not more and if NS does per-site then I do not need Ghostery or RP.

It's coming, but it's much more work than you seem to think.

You seem to push RP pretty hard by always including a link to it. Do you have a vested interest in RP, is it your/relative/friend etc, software?

Not at all, but the board provides shortcuts that make that link easy to do . { rp } (without the spaces).

I keep mentioning it because it is a much better fit to your requirements than NoScript is.