Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NoScript Anywhere In Development For Android

Posted by Soulskill on from the now-if-only-it-worked-on-my-tv dept.

CaffeineAddiction writes "NoScript Anywhere (NSA) is the nickname for the next major iteration of the NoScript security add-on (NoScript 3), whose guts are being turned upside down in order to match Mozilla's Electrolysis multiprocessing architecture and implement a porting for Firefox 4 Mobile, available on Android and Maemo smartphones and tablets."

10 of 57 comments (clear)

  1. NoScript and VideoDownloadHelper on OPERA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why can't Opera get into any of this? And none of the cheap hacks: Opera needs to get on the bandwaggon, maybe with a cross-over tool so it can use Firefox Add-ons because everything in the Opera community just has a "cheapened" feeling to it when someone makes something they say has equivalent function of a Firefox plugin or Add-on.

  2. Reminds me. I owe that guy money. by blair1q · · Score: 5, Interesting

    NoScript is probably the most useful thing on my computer aside from the browser itself. And without it, I'd think the internet and by extension the browser were awful, so the probability is approaching unity.

    Time to donate to the cause.

    1. Re:Reminds me. I owe that guy money. by LurkerXXX · · Score: 5, Informative

      Don't forget the shady stuff the maker of NoScript tried just 2 years ago. He silently killed part of AdBlock on comuters it was installed on, and obfuscated what he was doing. The shit really hit the fan before he started backpedaling and reversed his position. I don't trust the guy.

      http://www.techjaws.com/the-noscript-controversy/
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NoScript
      http://www.informationweek.com/news/security/app-security/217201461

  3. Add-ons in mobile FF? Yeah, right. by ronocdh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In my experience, mobile Firefox is beautiful in its replete feature set, but I find it deplorably slow—much like how Firefox 3.x was on the desktop. I haven't played around much with add-ons for fear of even longer browser startup times on my phone. NoScript is a wonderful project, but I'd like to see a lot more speed improvement on mobile Firefox before I go signing up.

    1. Re:Add-ons in mobile FF? Yeah, right. by idontgno · · Score: 2

      Well, as in all things, YMMV, but I've never had cause to complain about FF4's performance on my modded (CM7.0.3) HTC Desire CDMA. Fairly snappy, although admittedly a tiny but noticeable bit slower than Android's native browser, Whatchamacallit*. OTOH, FF4 doesn't make a horrible unusable hash of some of the websites I visit like Whatchamacallit does.

      Add NoScript and it becomes head and shoulders better than the built-in one.

      *Does it even have a distinct product name? I don't recall ever seeing it.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    2. Re:Add-ons in mobile FF? Yeah, right. by Beyond_GoodandEvil · · Score: 3, Informative

      Opera has a much lower footprint as well. Fenec's best attribute for me right now is adblock and user agent switcher, some sites really piss me off by forcing me to their mobile site that's basically just a link to their app.
      This 1000x, wtf is with everybody deciding my mobile browser needs to be redirected to m.url if I wanted to do that I would have typed in that url. Btw use about:debug on the stock android browser then select settings -> more to get to the user agent switch

      --
      I laughed at the weak who considered themselves good because they lacked claws.
    3. Re:Add-ons in mobile FF? Yeah, right. by pspahn · · Score: 2

      wtf is with everybody deciding my mobile browser needs to be redirected to m.url

      This is due to a majority of mobile users preferring to use a site that is designed with their smaller screen size in mind.

      I would guess that in nearly every case, the owner of the web site knows more about their web site than random /. guy. Providing a scaled down version of the full page is a courtesy web site owners give to their users.

      You might find that constructing a large fence in your front yard does indeed keep people off your lawn, but it also partitions you off into your own little reality.

      --
      Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
  4. Re:site-specific permissioning by MachDelta · · Score: 4, Informative

    Applications Boundaries Enforcer. (Options -> Advanced -> ABE)

    Site *.googleapis.*
    Accept from *.whateveryoursiteis.com
    Deny

  5. Untrustworthy developer. by Crasoose · · Score: 2

    I love Noscript, I don't like the developer. Because of this I've dropped Noscript from my extensions long ago. It seems everyone soon forgets about a developer who thinks he can mess with your other extensions without your permission. http://adblockplus.org/blog/attention-noscript-users

  6. Re:Overrated by MachDelta · · Score: 2

    Funny, I love it for that reason. When I go to a new site and see it has twenty different domains trying to load in ads, tracking, social garbage, and the like, that's generally a big clue that I want nothing to do with that place.