K používání rozšíření pro Android budete potřebovat Firefox pro Android. Abyste si mohli prohlédnout doplňky Firefoxu pro desktop, navštivte verzi pro desktop.

Přihlásit se
Ikona doplňku

Recenze doplňku NoScript Security Suite

NoScript Security Suite od Giorgio Maone

Hodnocení: 4,4 z 5
5
1 715
4
293
3
167
2
120
1
105
Recenze od uživatele robsku
od uživatele robsku, před 5 lety
I'm sorry I wrote a bad review. It seems to be deleted, although it was not inappropriate - it was mistaken, and PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THIS *FEATURE*; whether intentional or not.

We now have a possibility to use Multi-Container support of Firefox with NoScript; I was very bummed by the missing of ABE from the WebExtension, but this can do some of the same thing; and without understanding the almost esoteric syntax.

See, I though the permissions I had set were disappearing. Turns out the page was in separate container than the last time I had allowed those permissions. The permissions are *CONTAINER SPECIFIC*. I hadn't really properly put Multi-User Container add-on really to good use!

Now I don't lose permissions. I can have certain (all possible to keep things working) Google servers blocked on default - same with any FaceBook servers. In fact, FaceBook servers are only allowed on FaceBook container. And if a site that does not belong to YouTube container, but needs to show video from YouTube, I either temporarily allow the servers, or I move the site into YouTube container; which needs a good good reason if it's not a Google's YouTube services. OR, I'll add another container for pages that don't need all the YouTube and Google servers allowed, but need to have just those allowed that let the videos roll; and move that site there. This is in fact incredibly great way to work, although I still miss the Legacy version - I will soon try changing to a fork that has all the modern support of FF, and support for legacy add-on's. Then I can use the original, and get the massive power of ABE, but will the Legacy code be updated to have same support for multiple containers? That I would love, best of both worlds.

I even have a container for MyWOT.com, which everyone should know already is a scam itself, but the user reviews are real - and great. So that container shouldn't be able to reach any info not loaded while in that very container. And only MyWOT.com ever is.

P.S. I'm 95% certain I wrote a bad review lately - I even deleted the old good one before that, so I didn't just imagine it all, as it's gone. So what happened?

P.P.S. I was really hard thinking of giving you five stars, because it was stated that all the features of legacy version were available here as well. Well, I remember a lot of settings I see nowhere; most notable of them being ABE rulesets. So I almost didn't, just 4; here's your 5 stars anyway ;)

FINALLY: You have to make users so clear about this multi-container feature, that they don't get mistaken like I did. If they use multi-containers, they should easily understand it; if not, what does it matter? ;) But definitely make it clear and clearly shown ;)
2 400 recenzí
  • od uživatele Uživatel Firefoxu - 19469020, před 9 dny
  • od uživatele Uživatel Firefoxu - 14500718, před 10 dny
  • od uživatele Uživatel Firefoxu - 19459487, před 12 dny
    I'm notified every time WebGL is blocked on each page load. There's no way to disable these notifications and it's very irritating.

    Edit: updated to 5 stars as it can be disabled after all but the setting isn't described very clearly.

    Odpověď vývojáře

    zveřejněno před 12 dny
    You should not get any notification. Just a little placeholder inside the page, to be able to enable it back. And you can disable it by unchecking "NoScript Options>Appearance>Show synthetic placeholders for invisible capability probes"
  • od uživatele Cello, před 18 dny
    it's 5-stars, because it's little time and effort to manage and also Edward Snowden said that noscript is the best protection in the whole internet...(after some Firefox update, noscript does seem to block internet in Firefox,,, but I'm sure there will be a workaround in the next edition ... buona vacanza)
  • od uživatele Uživatel Firefoxu - 19223232, před 20 dny
    ok its a good security 4 ur browser but now the web is so slow that i cant even play a game on poki 💀💀
  • od uživatele Tony Klaus, před 22 dny
  • od uživatele Uživatel Firefoxu - 19311874, před 25 dny
  • od uživatele Michael Rabinovsky, před měsícem
    No Script is an incredibly useful add-on. In the past, I'd have given it five stars; it now gets only two (see issues below). All in all, I'd say it's still better to have it than not, but that's only because there is no better alternative, and there is no difference between having to completely disable it on a page versus not having it at all.

    First of all, it would have gotten three due to the issues I list further down, but it gets two because of a major functionality problem that makes it obnoxious to use, and by its admission, not private in private windows.

    In the past, when you set it to trust top-level domains, it would automatically set them to temp trusted; however, for whatever reason, it now sets them to "custom," for me, which functions the same as untrusted, and changing it doesn't even refresh the page for you.

    The default setting handling is a huge inconvenience, but that is not where the problems end. You cannot restore previous functionality by manually setting the top-level domain to temp trust. To enable scripts on the page, you must set it to trust, which makes it permanently trusted, and keeps a log of every page you visit in private windows. If you try to change it to temp trust and refresh the page, it goes back to "custom."

    Besides that, the description for the extension is outdated. Not only does it still mention Flash, but it also claims no loss of functionality when you need it, which is not true. In most cases, enabling some scripts will return the functionality you need, but there are several reasons why that's not always the case.

    Sometimes, certain scripts you need will be on sub-domains of the top-level domain, and they need to be enabled separately; however, NoScript doesn't show them because it thinks they are part of the main domain, so you have no way to make the site work without completely disabling the addon for the page.

    In other instances, sites won't load all the scripts until they load some other domains. For example, a CDN containing vital scripts might not appear on the list because it's called after an analytics script has run. There is no way to know that unless you enable each script on the list, one by one. The domain doesn't need to be related; it's just something about how the page loads.
  • od uživatele Angel, před měsícem
    Esta vaina debería tener un modo automático para aquellos que no saben de programación.
  • od uživatele whatever, před měsícem
  • od uživatele HunterMirror, před měsícem
    He notado en las demás reseñas, que las personas no parecen comprender el propósito de este addon. La idea es que bloquee los scripts, si una página se rompe por ello, es algo perfectamente esperable, no es culpa de la extensión perse, sino de quien desarrolló dicha página web, queda a tu criterio si lo quieres añadir a la lista blanca o no. Lo realmente triste y reprochable, es más bien que hoy en día hayan tantas páginas que quieran que actives los scripts si o si para poder usarlos, incluso páginas que no los necesitan para nada.

    El abuso de los scripts y la manía de convertir las páginas web en "aplicaciones", es lo que ha causado que ahora usar el navegador implique un consumo cada vez mayor de RAM, sin contar los riesgos de seguridad innecesarios del uso de scripts, tanto para el usuario como para el webmaster/desarrollador. Así que por mi parte, prefiero que se rompan las páginas que sean, no les voy a activar los scripts si no son páginas que hagan un uso inteligente y justo de ellas.
  • od uživatele k4mmi, před měsícem
  • od uživatele Uživatel Firefoxu - 19265671, před měsícem
    It give me the power to control every script on every sites.
  • od uživatele Uživatel Firefoxu - 18710229, před měsícem
    This add-on works as intended and has saved me from a lot of potential problems and annoying website antics.
  • od uživatele DORNBOSS, před 2 měsíci
    The best!
  • od uživatele Air, před 2 měsíci
    Very useful on a computer, however, enabling it by default on a mobile phone will block many important features, including but not limited to any AI features and video browsing
  • od uživatele Uživatel Firefoxu - 14206743, před 2 měsíci
    更新がないために移行します
  • od uživatele Uživatel Firefoxu - 19157064, před 2 měsíci
    Completely breaks reddit on mobile, site becomes unusable. I only got it for help blocking reddits creepy tracking bs on this browser.
  • od uživatele Cory Sanin, před 2 měsíci
    One star for SidebarUtil.tab.js

    Disruptive as hell and for what? Why do you need to know if I have a sidebar open? I don't even know what a sidebar is. Remove this nonsense.
  • od uživatele Uživatel Firefoxu - 19145735, před 2 měsíci
  • od uživatele And?, před 2 měsíci
  • od uživatele A Tea Daze, před 2 měsíci
  • od uživatele srzlt, před 2 měsíci
  • od uživatele jordan9543, před 2 měsíci
  • od uživatele vit55555, před 2 měsíci