Recenzie doplnku NoScript
NoScript Autor: Giorgio Maone
Odpoveď od používateľa Giorgio Maone
Odpoveď od vývojára
uverejnené pred 8 rokmi"I dont see a reason why one could not try to recreate that as close as possible".
*This* is as close as possible a WebExtension can go, and I've done and I'm doing my best to compensate the unavoidable loss in usability (due to the fact WebExtensions UI are just HTML web pages) with more customizability, and at the same time to provide feature parity security-wise. If people want the old version as it was, with the floating hovering menu and the "Allow / Temporarily allow / Forbid" commands (which, BTW, functionally map one-by-one with the new TRUSTED/UNTRUSTED paradigm), they can use Firefox 52 ESR or the Tor Browser as long as they're supported: on Firefox 57 this stuff is just out of reach for add-ons.
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 can provide to people which actually rely on it, even for their physical safety (and no, uMatrix / uBlock / ScriptSafe & C. are not up to the task, simply because they've got a completely different scope).
*This* is as close as possible a WebExtension can go, and I've done and I'm doing my best to compensate the unavoidable loss in usability (due to the fact WebExtensions UI are just HTML web pages) with more customizability, and at the same time to provide feature parity security-wise. If people want the old version as it was, with the floating hovering menu and the "Allow / Temporarily allow / Forbid" commands (which, BTW, functionally map one-by-one with the new TRUSTED/UNTRUSTED paradigm), they can use Firefox 52 ESR or the Tor Browser as long as they're supported: on Firefox 57 this stuff is just out of reach for add-ons.
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 can provide to people which actually rely on it, even for their physical safety (and no, uMatrix / uBlock / ScriptSafe & C. are not up to the task, simply because they've got a completely different scope).