I am still on FF 56 and generally happy with NoScript. After checking the FF57 status and reading what others wrote I felt compelled to do two things. First, I sent a complaint to Mozilla directly - not just about NoScript, but the whole debacle that the move to webextenions has become. They knew this would happen and let the train wreck continue any way.

Second, I am really disappointed at the vitriol directed at this developer. Most, if not all, of the blame is with Mozilla and that is where you should be directing your anger. Things that could be done pre 57 are no longer either a) allowed or b) possible or c) both.

I don't doubt that he is disappointed and angry too. One of the, if not the, most poplular extensions for years, and now kicked to the curb through little fault of his own. I'm sure he will continue to try to make it better but what is 'better' in 57+ will not ever be the same as the older versions.

the android version don't block anything on FF57 and the UI on the desktop has ugly scrollbars here

The old version was amazing, truly a power user's addon. The new version... well I understand that you had to rush a complete redesign and rewrite... but it's too bad that it lost a lot of functionality. On the up-side, I do like the new interface.

In particular I'd like to point out that the addon does not work in Private Browsing mode. Would it be possible to add back the Temporary Permissions feature and allow people to "Temporarily Allow" URL's for the duration of Private Browsing sessions?

New addon for Firefox Quantum is bad. Why is log.js open always. I always get 1.000 notification on console and it takes more CPU usage. New interface is worse than old one. I can't understand which domain is blocked or allowed.

I want old interface an system back. If you can't do same. Do it similar. Or work with good interface designer. I don't want to delete this add-on.

I hope you can fix all problems soon.

Very useful extension. Happy to see the developer listened to our feedback.

Hey guys, even the new gui is not comfortable as it used to be and so on...please consider this as a free addon and how much time is needed to update it concerning the new quantum firefox code - just give it some time and a fair chance instead of bashing around - giorgio, please go on with your good work, so we can all benefit from noscript again

Thank you very much for your effort to make this work with "Quantum (57+)".

But please give us back some oft the ofunctionality and ease of use of the old version.

e.g. temporary allowing scripts

cheers

Actually a 5*, it might be language related but in germany the translations are way to long for the new interface (Words don't fit in the reserved space).
Sadly it looks really bad.
For the other stuff I like the uMatrix like way to control what gets loaded.
Also, even thought I need to look how it works somewhere, that we got some https contol looks promising.

this version is too complicated to handle for me. I am not the read-a-long-guide-before-doing-anything-complicated guy, so I am missing simplicity and intuitivity. I loved the former versions.

YESS ! Available for Firefox 57 !
Thank you.
This Add-on is a must have !
It allows you to browse the web securely.

Didn't work with https://www.rnz.de/ (no Pic) and it isn't opssible to login here at my Mozilla Account and my googlemail account works only with simple HTML with noscript active.
Update 28.11.17 - Good Work! Now everything is fine.

It's not as functional as the original, and it took a while to figure out how to temporarily allow a script. You have to click twice on the trusted icon. The bottom line is it still works.

1). As a regular NoScript user unfamiliar with code/script-related stuff, I must say this update is less UN-intuitive than the former and a bit more straightforward —still not a marvel in signage, indeed, but it never was, and seems it plays its role.

2). Mr. Maone is not obliged to respond to rude demands for his free, voluntary add-on. Those childish users calling us "bootlickers" hopefully will go away after another "better" (if possible) add-on, or even better, come with an improved one themselves.

I can tell the developers working on all the gripes i had. Good work to you all, have always loved this app and will continue to support it.

the best of the best,.....

I'm really glad NoScript made it to Quantum so quickly and the people who complain about missing features probably don't realize that this is a complete rewrite of an extension that has had the chance to mature for many, many years. Comparing the two is completely unfair and I really appreciate the many, many hours of spare time that has been put into this. I can see the UI could use some improvements, though. I would be very happy to lend you a hand with that if you want/need it (I work as a lead front-end developer), so let me know if you would like to take me up on that offer.

WebExtension is a big change, so former NoScript is dead and NoScript 10 is just a new extension.
Hopefully the developer will probably recover some advanced features of the XUL version, but it will take time we must be patient.

As today, there is no alternative on Firefox 57.
It seems that developer of the excellent ScriipSafe on Chrome Webstore doesn't want to port it on Firefox.
He could have done this for Microsoft Edge since a long time, and nothing has been done.

And surfing without a script controller is I M P O S S I B L E
.
I just don't understand why Mozilla team has not developed a basic embedded javascript manager as it was in the very good former Opera 16 (presto engine), so it could have let all the time to the third party developers to create a more advanced extension.

This is not acceptable, THIS IS A VERY BIG FAULT from Mozilla.

The main issue I could address now to the developer is :

1) no possibility to grant authorization to a full domain (this is a big difference with ScripSafe which lets the choice to the user)

Example : I want to authorize domain and all subdomain of the CDN provider Akamai, This si possible with scripsafe by using the "trust" option instead of "allow", it is not possible here

I want to authorize all Akamai because due to load balancing process the CDN server may change a lot, and so you still need to allow various subdomain. Maybe the developer could implement very quickly a joker system allowing to enter domains like :

*.akamai.net
*.hd.akamai.net

In first case we allow every subdomain of akamai.net
In the second case we limit to every subdomain of hd.akamai.net

2) No synchornization option

Ideally, NoScript should store the users data in cloud through the Firefox account as ScripSafe does in the Google Account.
But maybe it is not possible according to the Firefox account policy, so the workaround should be to be able to synchronize data to/from a local path on the computer.

One just have to create this path in a OneDrive or Google Drive synchronized directory...and this should be done.
I have several computer, each computer has several users session, this is just annoying to set up NosSript for each repeating always the same process. And when I set up a new computer, I must restart from the beginning.

With ScripSafe, this is very easy... the extension automatically download and upload to Google Accounts (one must activate such option).

If ScripSafe is ever ported to Firefox with the same functionalities, I drop NoScript

3) Slow GUI
As today, the NoScript GUI is I N C R E D I B L Y slow.
As a comparison ScripSafe is incredibly fast to display the distant hosts list

But this version is a kind of quick done dirty version, let's be patient, this will be probably fixed in the future, but developer must know that the situation is as today not acceptable. I also suspect that NoScript 10 slows down the browser

4) Inefficient filtering mechanism

In the former XUL extension, the filtering engine of NoScript was crappy as it was oftenly forgetting a lot of distant host.
So one needed sometimes to switch to "allow all scripts" to see these hosts, and go back to "forbide all scripts", and so we could set rules for theses invisible hosts.

As compared, ScripSafe was far better as there was not such issues.
Finally.... XUL NoScript is dead and this is a very good thing because the filtering engine of NoScript was outdated and the author didn't want to admit that.

Let's see now if this brand new Web Extension addresses such issues, I can't say at this moment.

Best stuff you can have on Firefox. Can image browsing web without it. Thanks thousand times for it and keep up amazing work.

First of all thank you for all the effort you put into the new Quantum-enabled version of NoScript. I can imagine, it took a lot of time to rewrite this extension, which had been developed for years, completely from scratch.

It is noticable that the new version has been written in a big hurry. The UI is not fully developed and looks like it was made for newbies than for experienced computer users. I know, the UI cannot be changed back. We all will have to accept that XUL is gone. I don't think, the new UI is bad in general. It is just not finished yet.

Sadly, some very important features are still missing. For me personally, giving temporary permissions to a website is a must-have feature. I think this is such a key component that I wonder why it has not been implemented yet. How am I supposed to test a website? Giving it permanent permissions and later revoking them again is not a very effective way.

There are still a lot of things to be done. However, I think a huge step was made already. The basic functionality is now implemented as a WebExtension with more functionality to follow. Keep up the good work. I am sure, the comments and ratings of NoScript will become better soon.

"To all the people complaining about the new UI (not that I expect any of them to see this): Giorgio can't revert back to the old UI because that kind of UI is no longer supported on Firefox 57 and above. Nice things like native drop-down menus and dialog boxes are no longer allowed. Those were part of XUL addons. Now we only have WebExtensions add-ons à la Chrome, and if you know Chrome, you know that its add-on interface situation is the same. "Nice" UIs have been prohibited by Mozilla, on purpose, so your gripe is with them, not with Giorgio, the developer of this add-on.

I do agree that the UI could use some work anyway, though, in terms of understandability, ease of use, and looks. But this is still an early version which had to be released in a rush, so give it a while.

I'll still deduct one star from my previous rating because too much comfort functionality is missing at the moment. Temporary exceptions, selective and site-wide, were one of my most-used features of NoScript, and they're not in yet. Also, the options screen is severely lacking, a lot of the behaviour I used to customise can't be changed right now. I assume that all of these things are still possible, and just haven't been implemented yet. Part of that blame, once again, can be put on Mozilla for their hasty and clumsy shutdown of XUL extensions and the rushed und grossly unfinished transition to WebExtensions, which is making life hard for all add-on developers."

Word.