- Оценена с 2 от 5от Simón, преди 5 годиниPlease, explain in the add-on description why does NoScript now ask for a new permission to "download files and read and modify the browser's download history".
Besides, the new UI quite sucks, but the rules list semi-transparency seems to be what makes the NoScript Settings page sluggish.
- Оценена с 2 от 5от Azarilh, преди 5 годиниWhoa, this new version is great! Jus' like 2 girls 1 cup!
PS: Why NoScript need to read the download history now? LOL
EDIT: Ok, that's fine. Thank you for the reply. Still, the new version is unfriendly, like others say too.
EDIT after 2 years i tried it again: UI still sucks, my rating remains 2/5. Too bad.
Отговор от разработчикапубликувано на преди 5 годиниUnlike "legacy" add-ons, WebExtensions cannot interact with your filesystem directly. The restored "Export" feature actually goes through the browser.downloads API to let you save your configuration locally.
- Оценена с 2 от 5от Firefox user 13515039, преди 5 годиниIn its current state, it is barely serviceable. It is still better than nothing, I know, because when I disabled it I started getting hijacked by rogue webpage scripts again. But it has alot of catching up to do to be as pleasing as the pre-Quantum version.
That annoying, user unfriendly popup window really has to go. The previous version had a more discreet and tolerable messaging UI at the bottom of the screen. Now it is in popup window format at the top of the page, in your face to annoy you very quickly.
And a suggestion of a much needed feature. An option dedicated to automatically allowing Facebook scripts. Since nearly every website now days has scripts for Facebook, it is getting tiresome to have to allow Facebook with nearly every website I visit.
- Оценена с 2 от 5от Roelof, преди 5 годиниThe addon doesn't save trusted, untrusted and custom entries. Maybe the plugin stores information in non-persistent storage (which is cleared with any privacy-aware configuration).
This makes the plugin unusable, as re-allowing all services every single time is way more time consuming than just blocking scripts alltogether.
And even if you manage to save settings, they're not synched, so users who use two or more devices need to re-apply settings every time, on every. single. device.
The old version worked a whole lot better, it's a shame this level of quaity has not yet been achieved on the new WebExtension version.
- Оценена с 2 от 5от Firefox user 13577838, преди 5 годиниThe latest extension for Firefox Quantum is a real PITA because whitelisted sites are not saved, so they have to be recreated every time FF restarts. Extremely annoying and time consuming.
- Оценена с 2 от 5от Firefox user 13372577, преди 5 годиниIt does work (more or less) so I cannot justify a 1-star rating. But like others have said, this is not the NoScript we knew and loved. And while I know there is a temptation to just blame Firefox57 for old addons no longer working well, the truth is that we cannot blame Firefox57 for the dreadful new interface that NoScript has, nor for the buggy way it works (forgetting your settings, for example).
I don't want to be overly harsh here. For many years this developer has given us a fantastic product that millions of us found "essential". For that he must be commended. However, the new NoScript no longer has a place in my little "arsenal of defence". I've moved on.
If anyone is interested in alternatives, I find uBlock Origin is enough for my needs, provided the "I'm an advanced user" option is checked off and third party scripts / frames are globally blocked ("medium blocking mode", as per the author). If you want more power, there is uMatrix - still not a 100% replacement for NoScript but good enough for the vast majority of people.
- Оценена с 2 от 5от Firefox user 13560145, преди 5 годиниHad better experiences with NoScript years ago. The new version with the current Firefox is bad. It forgets settings and is buggy. I'am using ScriptSafe now. It's the same as under chrome. This addon works fine.
- Оценена с 2 от 5от Anonymous, преди 5 годиниThe new version has to be fixed full stop. The UI did not need to be fixed. And now the app does not remember settings on some sites. I'm thinking about uninstalling this until it is back up to its previous quality.
- Оценена с 2 от 5от Firefox user 13556987, преди 5 годиниJust joined on here to give my view.
I've used NoScript continually since its inception and thinking back there were a few hiccups early days which over time got ironed out, I think it will be the same with this version.
There were lots of folk ranting when it couldn't be used on the new Firefox, some demanding that something be done instantly, which was obviously impossible.
Giorgio obviously got on with this version and possibly rushed both building it and putting it out, these things happen.
However, buggy though it is, it is useable and as with all similar programs when many folk start using them bugs surface, the bugs are a PITA but hopefully, with time, will be resolved.
Lets not forget, that thanks to Giorgio's time and effort over the years, many thousands of surfers, me included, have been protected from who knows what was lurking behind some scripts.
Why not cut him a little slack, even such as the mighty Microsoft, Google, Apple and such others put out buggy stuff and that's with their thousands of programmers and millions of pounds!
So why have I given it two ( for the time being ) stars.
Mainly due to two things.
One, to me very important, there not being available, from the day it came out, any decent instructions in layman's terms, as to how to use it, I'm reasonably computer savvy and can normally get my head around most things, eventually, but this had me going spare, marking sites as trusted then having them revert to untrusted after shutting down and re-starting was a real pain, until I discovered only this morning, whilst reading these revues, that a simple click of the little clock solved this problem, thanks to those who mentioned it.
The second reason was because of the initial buggy nature of the first release.
Will I continue using it, of course.
Why, simply because, even as it is, I can't find another program that is as good as this one and going by past experience it will settle down.
- Оценена с 2 от 5от Firefox user 13556524, преди 5 годиниThere is a problem with the settings. Every time I close Firefox , the settings of what sites are trusted is lost. Every time I start Firefox, I have to configure each page all over again. This is very annoying.
- Оценена с 2 от 5от Firefox user 13553842, преди 5 годиниGeorgio wrote:
> Unfortunately I cannot do the impossible (recreating legacy NoScript on the new, much more limiting WebExtension platform)
> just because "people" ask for the impossible. And I've the duty to provide the best security NoScript
BUT maybe it is not so much about recreating the old thing, than understanding what the problem with the new thing is. First you need to accept that the current approach is simply not intuitive. As a dev (I am one myself, so I had this problem myself) its hard to understand when that happens, because for you its as familiar as a part of your body, but it is obviously a mistery for everbody else.
Also, about your "duty": Its true what you said, but: if many people now dont use NoScript at all, because they do not get it anymore, you decreased web security by a lot.
- Simpler is better. Simpler might be less safer, but if the alternative is not using it at all, it's still better. Way better.
- get rid of the slider. It looks mhm good(?), but its not recognizable as one.
- there is way to much clickable stuff, one does not get what is a button, what a link and whatnot...
- make it simpler: hide everything exept: domain name, status icon and -depending on the status- two buttons for each entry.
- clear design, dont change font size and font color at any time
- No xss-popups. In fact, never, ever use popups.
- a simple list of domains like before, each with a status icon in front of it: your blue "S", for allowed, same with a little clock for temporarily allowd, red crossed "S" for disallowed
- depending on the current status of an entry, two buttons:
- if currently allowed: "disallow" and "temp. disallow"
- if currently disallowed: "allow" and "temp. allow"
- these buttons need to be different than the status icon. I would use red X and green hook/check, each with and without a little clock.
- dont make anything but the buttons clickable! not the text, not the status icon.
You can add a (clearly seperated from the other buttons, clearly different graphic) button behind each list entry to hide all the detailed settings, for the expert. Everybody else gets the simple list.
At the very buttom of the list go -clearly separated - three entries: "temp allow all" and "save permissions for this site" and "deactivate noscript".
No problem to do that in html. And believe me, people will love you again. :)
If you would like me to make a mockup of what Ive just desrcibed, just say so and tell me where to send it.
And btw.: You dont owe us anything. People have no right being rude to you about something you gave us for free. But maybe see their ill-advised passion as a testament to how important NoScript is to us. That is something I think, even if you must hate the internet right now.
I thank you for the old NoScript and that it helped increase my security. But I won't use the current one. So I would thank you again if you make it simple and easy to use again.
- Оценена с 2 от 5от Firefox user 13552862, преди 5 годиниUsed to be good before they recently broke it with confusing and to some extent buggy UI. Tried to wait it out, but it's starting to really get on my nerves so for now I'll disable it and find an alternative. Even had to disable it to write this review, since the alternative seems to be to allow more or less known scripts (permanently?) until I happen to stumble upon the right one.
I really wish they'd just leave NoScript the way it was and make this experimental version a NoScript 2 Alpha/Beta or something like that instead.