InformAction Forums

I generally use quite a few tabs & windows. While I almost never want to actually globally allow scripts, there are times when I desire to allow them globally just for one tab. It is possible to simulate this by disabling "Automatically reload affected pages when permissions change", allowing globally, and then only operating on a single tab. However, there are times when it is helpful to be able to refer to other tabs in dealing with whatever site it is for which I enabled scripts globally. To do so it is necessary to keep switching back and forth from having scripts enabled globally and having them disabled. Having the option to allow globally for a single tab would make it quite a bit easier to do this and prevent the possibility of acting in either the tab in which it is desired to have scripts globally enabled or the ones in which normal operation is desired when the configuration is set for the other.

Agreed.

So if you a link opens in a new tab (e.g. because you middleclicked it) JS would not be allowed anymore? The same for pop-up windows?

I am with d on this, it has the potential to be as useless as the temp-allow all on this page. For different reasons but still.

Lots of talk lately about localised global allow (if that makes sense). I guess that's a consequence of growing site complexity. But it has as many problems as ever; in fact, more, because the longer the list of dependencies, the bigger the impact of writing a blank cheque (or check).

I still suggest that those who want this take a look at Tab Permissions - although I don't endorse the 'agree to everything in advance' approach.

Well if it is only done on a per tab, or tab & child basis, that is still going to be safer then Allow Globally.

I do it now, from time to time.
I'll go to a site I consider "safe", but also know that I will need a lot of Temp Allow's before it works correctly, so I Allow Global, do what I need to do, then revoke Allow Global. During that time, or if I forget to revoke ... A single tab/children would be better in that respect.

(Now theoretically maybe I should have whitelisted particular domains, but I typically don't whitelist anything.)

therube wrote: I'll go to a site I consider "safe", but also know that I will need a lot of Temp Allow's before it works correctly, so I Allow Global, do what I need to do, then revoke Allow Global. During that time, or if I forget to revoke ... A single tab/children would be better in that respect.

(Now theoretically maybe I should have whitelisted particular domains, but I typically don't whitelist anything.)

Huh?

You're not willing to persistently whitelist a site, but to get similar convenience, you're willing to allow scripts globally? Do you trust the site, or not?

I don't get it...

This is basically the same as http://forums.informaction.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=8309

> You're not willing to persistently whitelist a site

Right.

> but to get similar convenience, you're willing to allow scripts globally?

Right.
It is rare that I do that, but I do from time to time.

> Do you trust the site, or not?

I trust no one.

> This is basically the same as http://forums.informaction.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=8309

Not really. Similar.
This is a request to have Allow Global only affect a single tab (with perhaps children too).

The other is why a single Temporarily Allow All doesn't "TAA" (where they are expecting it to act more like an Allow Global). (Now the conversation may have morphed, but ...)

As the OP described, while this is essentially like Allow Globally (without global refresh), it is nonetheless safer (IMO) because other/non-child windows would not be affected (Allowed Globally). And if you were to forget to revoke, there is only one (starting) avenue (window) for Allow Global to affect, rather then ALL windows.