NoScript replacement in-built into Firefox

[JagsLive]

In wake of NoScript adding its own whitelist updates to Adblock Plus ( http://adblockplus.org/blog/attention-noscript-users ) I would like to make a feature request for a NoScript replacement in-built into next Firefox (4.0 ?) so Firefox users don't need to rely on NoScript addon.

Ok, I've been to this "Feature Brainstorming" page ( https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Feature_Brainstorming ) but didn't know where exactly should I make/add a feature request. I'll highly appreciate if a moderator/any knowledgeable person help me out on this...

Many thanks, - Jags

Here's a lengthy discussion at Slashdot : http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/01/236248

Excerpt from a post by "derfy" :
"First, noscript added code that disabled adblock plus if EasyList was used. Then, noscript auto-adds (no user prompting) an abp subscription whitelisting his sites. You cannot delete it (it readds upon FF restart), only disable it."

[JagsLive]

@ "malliz"

obviously Firefox users will be able to disable it if they wants to (if its being added at all !).

And yea, my original post is a request on "how to make a feature request" not any kind of poll on whether that feature should be added into next Firefox or not.

[malliz]

It's still code bloat. Sorry but maybe someone needs to develop another JS blocking extension but certainly this is not something that should be added to Firefox by default

[James]

JagsLive, your certainly not the only one that thinks this or that useful extension/feature should be added in by default. If every little or big extension/feature that people thought should be added in by default were actually added in, then Firefox would not be nearly as light as it is now, plus it would be much harder to maintain. A article by a former Firefox developer. http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/ben/archives/009620.html

my original post is a request on "how to make a feature request".

While we Firefox users on this independent forum are welcome to discuss feature ideas here, this is not the proper place to track such with random posts and get features put in as the tracking of feature requests/enhancements among many other thing is done in bugzilla.mozilla.org

[malliz]

If only the current crop of Dev's had that article tattooed on them

[the-edmeister]

Two reasons I would be against something like NoScript being built into Firefox.
1. It would be too complicated for the "average" user.

2. The developers would strip out all the best features, and more than likely users who really use NoScript would still need to install an extension to get the features that were left out.

Here is one example. The SpellBound extension had a number of options that didn't make it into the built in spell check, such as the ability to change the color of the underline for misspelled words.
http://spellbound.sourceforge.net/dev - Sure changing that color wasn't exactly easy, but at least it could be done. That to me is a real big accessibility issue.
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1117155&p=5895775 - Ken Saunders was trying to figure out how to add a sound to alert users with vision limits, to a misspelled word. Fortunately someone has taken over the old SpellBound extension to make it compatible with Firefox.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/9207

Another example is Pikes BookmarkBackup extension, which did and does a lot more than merely do automatic backups of bookmarks.
http://www.pikey.me.uk/mozilla/?addon=bb
Firefox 1.5 brought the built in bookmark backups feature in Firefox, but it only does bookmark backups (and stores only the last 5 backups) - no other Profile files can be backed up. BB almost died, but many of us users here at MozillaZine convinced Pike to keep it going. It's still useful and works with Firefox 3 and 3.5Beta4 - the best thing about it with Firefox 3 and above, is that it does automatic bookmark backups in the "universal" bookmarks.html format - which Firefox 3 doesn't do. (Yep, there is a hidden pref to keep the bookmarks.html file in the Profile folder up-to-date, but that's one "backup" - not a series of backups from the last 7 days of usage.)


Ed

[sysKin]

What the-edmeister said.

In particular, for huge majority of users a webpage either works correctly or doesn't. So whatever built-in-noscript would do would effectively be "do you want this webpage to work correctly" button, which doesn't make sense.

[ottodv]

I don't think NoScript type of functionality should be included by default into Firefox.

Contrary to what many NoScript users think, most people actually don't use NoScript. NoScript may be useful if you are somewhat paranoid or can regularly be found browsing the shallow end of the Internet. But for most users the default protection provided by Firefox/Google Safe Browsing is probably more than enough.

The principle behind NoScript is that a site's JavaScript doesn't work until it gets whitelisted, which causes most sites not to work properly. If this were default Firefox behavior one of two things can happen: a) the user realizes he/she has to add a site to the whitelist for it to work or b) the user is confused and decides to switch to another browser... and the number of people complaining that Firefox "doesn't work" skyrockets.

[pocketmans]

sounds a good idea. I did a check into the source code of noscript, it is just insert lots of site rules into firefox security policy. Basically noscript is an security policy editor. Should firefox has that?

Also it would be nice to include http://www.tidyread.com features too.