- par Utilisateur ou utilisatrice 15666953 de Firefox, il y a un anNoté 4 sur 5Sadly underrated, but in my experience more user friendly than noscript security suite and it doesnt break websites as much either. I would give it a full 5 star rating if it wasnt for the ads you put in the UI which I think is unnessecary.
- par IgotaBONGO, il y a 3 ansNoté 1 sur 5Couldn't come up with a name of your own? Because you're NOT an upgraded version of NoScript. It's that the ORIGINAL NoScript by Giorgio is a GPL product that you can continue this user deception for your own benefit. But hey, does this sound familiar?
Embrace, extend, and extinguish.
And how does that work for you..?
I suppose your masters didn't like the original NoScript that much? And I assume that, as with (the .xpi of) your other add ons, it includes the sources you'll allow by default because they're paying the bills?
- par Utilisateur ou utilisatrice 14221448 de Firefox, il y a 3 ansNoté 4 sur 5I started using this add-on after uMatrix started messing up after the switch to FF quantum. I think that the author isn't getting a fair shake from all the negative reviews. That said, he is probably to blame for giving his product an almost identical name to the real NoScript. I personally just use this to block 3rd-party scripts and elements. If that's all you wish to do, then his provides the simplest, albeit not necessarily the easiest, way to do so.
- Whitelisting/blacklisting with regexp
- minimalist and out of your way
- trivial to switch off at any time
- can log to console for debugging purposes
- Whitelist/blacklist respectively only use one regexp each for each type of content. I had to cook up a convoluted way of writing my regexps like this:
- Not recommended for people who intend to block ALL scripts and objects by default as opposed to just 3rd party ones.
- Name is misleading and should not be construed as being related to NoScript.
Overall, while my browsing experience might not be absolutely 100% safe, it is definitely comfy. I would recommend this to someone who is familiar with scripting and the web who also appreciates the KISS principle.
- par Utilisateur ou utilisatrice 13542504 de Firefox, il y a 4 ansNoté 1 sur 5This rewrite is useless for all but website developers, simply because 90+ percent of its users cannot perform FUNCTIONAL as opposed to STRUCTURAL control.
Next time try testing with other users. It is as useful to me as me detailing the microcode implementation of the circular shift assembly language instruction on a particular processor would be to you. Wake up guys! Learn how to user test widely used products or find some job far,far away from end user software. Know your audience. Silo-ing in software is as destructive of quality as it is in politics.
- par Utilisateur ou utilisatrice 12520026 de Firefox, il y a 4 ansNoté 4 sur 5it's a lite!
not fair and a little bit pointless to compare it with old noscript addon (< ff57). But definitely it's better as the new noscript-10.1.1 (quantum compatib). Which is almost not usable...
- par f00kwit, il y a 4 ansNoté 1 sur 5Not nearly as flexible or useful as the old Noscript. The "temporarily allow" functionality is gone (or buried never to be found) and some webpages do not function at all. One of my banks being one that doesn't function, so this is a remove and burn add-on for me. I understand that the new FF required new versions of things like add-ons and extensions, but this one is just a dud.
- par Utilisateur ou utilisatrice 13471731 de Firefox, il y a 4 ansNoté 1 sur 5compliqué d'utilisation, blocage tout ou rien plutôt que de choisir un script à autoriser. bref rien à voir avec "no-script", utilisation du non de du module connu pour attirer des utilisateurs