Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. NoScript - Firefox, CPhog and Ajax...

NoScript - Firefox, CPhog and Ajax...

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
helpquestionjavahtmlcom
11 Posts 8 Posters 1 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • C Offline
    C Offline
    code frog 0
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    I recently installed an add-in that default-disables java-script for websites until you manually allow it. I'm pretty happy with it. The extension is NoScript. Since installing it CPhog no longer auto-updates new posts using AJAX. My question is this. Since a new public version of CPhog was released about the same time I installed NoScript is Ajax updating disabled in CPhog or is this a NoScript issue? Also, is anyone else using NoScript and if so are you having the same problem? - Rex


    "You have an arrow in your butt!" - Fiona:cool:
    Welcome to CP in your language. Post the unicode version in My CP Blog [ ^ ] now.

    People who don't understand how awesome Firefox is have never used CPhog[^]CPhog. The act of using CPhog (Firefox)[^] alone doesn't make Firefox cool. It opens your eyes to the possibilities and then you start looking for other things like CPhog (Firefox)[^] and your eyes are suddenly open to all sorts of useful things all through Firefox. - (Self Quote)

    M D R 3 Replies Last reply
    0
    • C code frog 0

      I recently installed an add-in that default-disables java-script for websites until you manually allow it. I'm pretty happy with it. The extension is NoScript. Since installing it CPhog no longer auto-updates new posts using AJAX. My question is this. Since a new public version of CPhog was released about the same time I installed NoScript is Ajax updating disabled in CPhog or is this a NoScript issue? Also, is anyone else using NoScript and if so are you having the same problem? - Rex


      "You have an arrow in your butt!" - Fiona:cool:
      Welcome to CP in your language. Post the unicode version in My CP Blog [ ^ ] now.

      People who don't understand how awesome Firefox is have never used CPhog[^]CPhog. The act of using CPhog (Firefox)[^] alone doesn't make Firefox cool. It opens your eyes to the possibilities and then you start looking for other things like CPhog (Firefox)[^] and your eyes are suddenly open to all sorts of useful things all through Firefox. - (Self Quote)

      M Offline
      M Offline
      Michael Dunn
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Since AJAX == async JavaScript and XML, AJAX stuff will break if you disable JS in the browser. --Mike-- Visual C++ MVP :cool: LINKS~! Ericahist | PimpFish | CP SearchBar v3.0 | C++ Forum FAQ VB > soccer

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • C code frog 0

        I recently installed an add-in that default-disables java-script for websites until you manually allow it. I'm pretty happy with it. The extension is NoScript. Since installing it CPhog no longer auto-updates new posts using AJAX. My question is this. Since a new public version of CPhog was released about the same time I installed NoScript is Ajax updating disabled in CPhog or is this a NoScript issue? Also, is anyone else using NoScript and if so are you having the same problem? - Rex


        "You have an arrow in your butt!" - Fiona:cool:
        Welcome to CP in your language. Post the unicode version in My CP Blog [ ^ ] now.

        People who don't understand how awesome Firefox is have never used CPhog[^]CPhog. The act of using CPhog (Firefox)[^] alone doesn't make Firefox cool. It opens your eyes to the possibilities and then you start looking for other things like CPhog (Firefox)[^] and your eyes are suddenly open to all sorts of useful things all through Firefox. - (Self Quote)

        D Offline
        D Offline
        David Stone
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        It's a NoScript issue. CPhog is fine here.

        And when we saw the computer, when we saw its code - and Turing saw it first - we were looking at complexity incarnate. And then suddenly we saw complexity everywhere. It materialized, it crystalized around us - even though it had always been there.
        We have yet to recover from the shock.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • C code frog 0

          I recently installed an add-in that default-disables java-script for websites until you manually allow it. I'm pretty happy with it. The extension is NoScript. Since installing it CPhog no longer auto-updates new posts using AJAX. My question is this. Since a new public version of CPhog was released about the same time I installed NoScript is Ajax updating disabled in CPhog or is this a NoScript issue? Also, is anyone else using NoScript and if so are you having the same problem? - Rex


          "You have an arrow in your butt!" - Fiona:cool:
          Welcome to CP in your language. Post the unicode version in My CP Blog [ ^ ] now.

          People who don't understand how awesome Firefox is have never used CPhog[^]CPhog. The act of using CPhog (Firefox)[^] alone doesn't make Firefox cool. It opens your eyes to the possibilities and then you start looking for other things like CPhog (Firefox)[^] and your eyes are suddenly open to all sorts of useful things all through Firefox. - (Self Quote)

          R Offline
          R Offline
          Rocky Moore
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          code-frog wrote:

          I recently installed an add-in that default-disables java-script for websites until you manually allow it

          What are you afraid of from JavaScript? In today's world of ever increasing usage of Ajax, I would think disabling Javascript would break more and more sites.. Rocky <>< Latest Post: Visual Studio 2005 Standard, whats missing? Blog: www.RockyMoore.com/TheCoder/[^]

          C S P 3 Replies Last reply
          0
          • R Rocky Moore

            code-frog wrote:

            I recently installed an add-in that default-disables java-script for websites until you manually allow it

            What are you afraid of from JavaScript? In today's world of ever increasing usage of Ajax, I would think disabling Javascript would break more and more sites.. Rocky <>< Latest Post: Visual Studio 2005 Standard, whats missing? Blog: www.RockyMoore.com/TheCoder/[^]

            C Offline
            C Offline
            Chris Maunder
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            We had a discussion in the office about just that. 1. Sites should work with javascript disabled 5. Sites should assume javascript is enabled. cheers, Chris Maunder

            CodeProject.com : C++ MVP

            S R 2 Replies Last reply
            0
            • R Rocky Moore

              code-frog wrote:

              I recently installed an add-in that default-disables java-script for websites until you manually allow it

              What are you afraid of from JavaScript? In today's world of ever increasing usage of Ajax, I would think disabling Javascript would break more and more sites.. Rocky <>< Latest Post: Visual Studio 2005 Standard, whats missing? Blog: www.RockyMoore.com/TheCoder/[^]

              S Offline
              S Offline
              Shawn Horton
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              Rocky Moore wrote:

              What are you afraid of from JavaScript? In today's world of ever increasing usage of Ajax, I would think disabling Javascript would break more and more sites..

              JavaScript is a great way to load pop-ups and page redirections, so what NoScript does is blocks JS for all sites except those on a whitelist. You just click the icon and tell it to allow JS, the page re-loads and in the future, that site is free to run JS. NoScript breaks lots of pages, but you just re-enable it for the ones that really bother you. Once you start using it you forget that pop-up ads ever existed.

              S 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • C Chris Maunder

                We had a discussion in the office about just that. 1. Sites should work with javascript disabled 5. Sites should assume javascript is enabled. cheers, Chris Maunder

                CodeProject.com : C++ MVP

                S Offline
                S Offline
                SchaeferFFM
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                Chris Maunder wrote:

                1. Sites should work with javascript disabled 5. Sites should assume javascript is enabled.

                If there is a legitimate use for javascript, you should go for it. There are lots of sites that use javascript where the use of css would be more appropriate. There is a big difference (IMO) if a site is trusted (like CP certainly is for virtually all of us) or not. So you get my 5 as far as CP is concerned.

                -- Oliver

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • S Shawn Horton

                  Rocky Moore wrote:

                  What are you afraid of from JavaScript? In today's world of ever increasing usage of Ajax, I would think disabling Javascript would break more and more sites..

                  JavaScript is a great way to load pop-ups and page redirections, so what NoScript does is blocks JS for all sites except those on a whitelist. You just click the icon and tell it to allow JS, the page re-loads and in the future, that site is free to run JS. NoScript breaks lots of pages, but you just re-enable it for the ones that really bother you. Once you start using it you forget that pop-up ads ever existed.

                  S Offline
                  S Offline
                  SchaeferFFM
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #8

                  For me, NoScript does not make much sense as i make extensive use of two excellent Firefox extensions: - Adblock (preconfigured blacklists available) - Remove It Permanently (blacklists may be imported) Additionally, i have deactivated some JavaScript permissions: - existing windows can't be moved or resized (i hate that) by JS - the context menu can't be changed - the status line text is read only Also, pop-up windows are blocked by default in Firefox. I rarely encounter annoying ads nowadays, especially not pop-up ads.

                  -- Oliver

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • C Chris Maunder

                    We had a discussion in the office about just that. 1. Sites should work with javascript disabled 5. Sites should assume javascript is enabled. cheers, Chris Maunder

                    CodeProject.com : C++ MVP

                    R Offline
                    R Offline
                    Rocky Moore
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #9

                    From the logs of vistors to my sites almost all people have Javascript enabled. I would say the few people that would visit a site that does not have them enabled is not worth the hassle and would never waste time on it. If there is a need for Javascript, use it and don't worry about the few that have to enable it to use a site. It is this building for the lowest common denominator that has held back web technologies for years. Time to move on and get this technology into a place outside basic text! Rocky <>< Latest Post: Visual Studio 2005 Standard, whats missing? Blog: www.RockyMoore.com/TheCoder/[^]

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • R Rocky Moore

                      code-frog wrote:

                      I recently installed an add-in that default-disables java-script for websites until you manually allow it

                      What are you afraid of from JavaScript? In today's world of ever increasing usage of Ajax, I would think disabling Javascript would break more and more sites.. Rocky <>< Latest Post: Visual Studio 2005 Standard, whats missing? Blog: www.RockyMoore.com/TheCoder/[^]

                      P Offline
                      P Offline
                      Pavel Klocek
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #10

                      Many exploits use js on bad websites, so I better have it off by default using NoScript and turned on for my regular websites. Pavel

                      R 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • P Pavel Klocek

                        Many exploits use js on bad websites, so I better have it off by default using NoScript and turned on for my regular websites. Pavel

                        R Offline
                        R Offline
                        Rocky Moore
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #11

                        Pavel Klocek wrote:

                        Many exploits use js on bad websites,

                        Are the exploits, Internet Explorer or actual Javascript (in other words, a problem in other browsers using Javascript such as Firefox)? If so, which exploit? After switching to Firefox back just before version 1.0, I have never had one exploit and run with Javascript enabled all the time. In addition, most poppups are killed automatically by Firefox and they few that slip by and no problem. They only other thing to disable is the ability to change the size of my window. This is not only for I, buy my wife also. She was hit continually with problems using Internet Explorer, but not once with Firefox in all this time. Disabling Javascript reminds me off all those people who got paranoid of having cookies enabled, you would have thought the were giving access to their first born by having cookies enabled. I just wish there was a CSharpscript built for all clients so we could dump this Javascript :) Rocky <>< Latest Post: Visual Studio 2005 Standard, whats missing? Blog: www.RockyMoore.com/TheCoder/[^]

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        Reply
                        • Reply as topic
                        Log in to reply
                        • Oldest to Newest
                        • Newest to Oldest
                        • Most Votes


                        • Login

                        • Don't have an account? Register

                        • Login or register to search.
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        0
                        • Categories
                        • Recent
                        • Tags
                        • Popular
                        • World
                        • Users
                        • Groups