Doing so would break nearly all Internet access. Do you really run a whitelist rather than a blacklist? Is it not tedious to add hundreds of domains to one rather than a few to the other?
I actually do this. With uBlock Origin you can set to default block any JS (or just 3rd party JS) and then whitelist by domains. Then you can lock in per-site settings.
Well, I recently left uBO for AdNauseam because it actively attacks advertisers by clicking every link (thereby leading to garbage data that messes up their stats), but it can’t operate with uBO simultaneously. I’ll see what I can do to copy this approach…
I also use ublock origin on top of it, that way its a little safer to test which sites to allow. Anything blocked on ublock origin is definitely something you dont need to run the website and if it is then its likely not worth using that website anyway.
I run a whitelist. I’d rather be more private than know what to blacklist (and there’s often a lot of extra JavaScript that gets called, mostly for tracking).
It’s not that tedious. You just add as you use the internet. Refresh the page when you’ve whitelisted.
It can sometimes be annoying to have to whitelist things, but after seeing that when I allow the main domain (and maybe their CDN) through the filter, and ten more domains will try to do whatever it is they do—Google Tags and Analytics, some data broker, some cookie tracker, etc.—I’m willing to take that extra step just to keep all these companies from snarfing up my data.
A little annoyance is a small price to pay, in my mind.
I do ! I use NoScript in Firefox, and I allow scripts selectively when they’re needed. You’d be surprised how many websites just work with everything off !
This may differ depending on your usage, though. I don’t really use in-browser apps if at all possible, and I don’t use conventional social media aside from YouTube and Reddit (PeerTube and Lemmy are better but there’s still too much info / people on the corporate versions to fully switch over)
Do you really run a whitelist rather than a blacklist?
That’s a weird question. That ‘yes’ seems as easy as “do you wear your seat belt? Every TIME?!?”
Is it not tedious to add hundreds of domains to one rather than a few to the other?
After about a dozen you’re kinda set. I will enable one-offs in a private window, usually for shit news sites or the very occasional referral farm, and the exceptions are all reverted when I close the tab.
joshchandra@midwest.social 2 months ago
Doing so would break nearly all Internet access. Do you really run a whitelist rather than a blacklist? Is it not tedious to add hundreds of domains to one rather than a few to the other?
GnuLinuxDude@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
I actually do this. With uBlock Origin you can set to default block any JS (or just 3rd party JS) and then whitelist by domains. Then you can lock in per-site settings.
joshchandra@midwest.social 2 months ago
Well, I recently left uBO for AdNauseam because it actively attacks advertisers by clicking every link (thereby leading to garbage data that messes up their stats), but it can’t operate with uBO simultaneously. I’ll see what I can do to copy this approach…
corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 months ago
There’s one in your browser.
reksas@sopuli.xyz 2 months ago
I would feel like wading through sewer bare footed if I had all javascript enabled by default
joshchandra@midwest.social 2 months ago
omg, I’m using NoScript now and my eyes have been opened; I can’t ever go back!! Thanks for the analogy; that was a much-needed, jolting wake-up call.
reksas@sopuli.xyz 2 months ago
I also use ublock origin on top of it, that way its a little safer to test which sites to allow. Anything blocked on ublock origin is definitely something you dont need to run the website and if it is then its likely not worth using that website anyway.
joshchandra@midwest.social 2 months ago
Dang it… I’m starting to feel the appeal now, lol! Hmm.
Telorand@reddthat.com 2 months ago
I run a whitelist. I’d rather be more private than know what to blacklist (and there’s often a lot of extra JavaScript that gets called, mostly for tracking).
It’s not that tedious. You just add as you use the internet. Refresh the page when you’ve whitelisted.
joshchandra@midwest.social 2 months ago
Do you mean that your tool (whatever you use) can selectively block some JS while admitting others on one website?
Telorand@reddthat.com 2 months ago
Yes! NoScript is my tool of choice.
It can sometimes be annoying to have to whitelist things, but after seeing that when I allow the main domain (and maybe their CDN) through the filter, and ten more domains will try to do whatever it is they do—Google Tags and Analytics, some data broker, some cookie tracker, etc.—I’m willing to take that extra step just to keep all these companies from snarfing up my data.
A little annoyance is a small price to pay, in my mind.
termaxima@jlai.lu 2 months ago
I do ! I use NoScript in Firefox, and I allow scripts selectively when they’re needed. You’d be surprised how many websites just work with everything off !
This may differ depending on your usage, though. I don’t really use in-browser apps if at all possible, and I don’t use conventional social media aside from YouTube and Reddit (PeerTube and Lemmy are better but there’s still too much info / people on the corporate versions to fully switch over)
joshchandra@midwest.social 2 months ago
Thanks for the reminder about PeerTube… I’ve gotta look into that, too.
corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 months ago
That’s a weird question. That ‘yes’ seems as easy as “do you wear your seat belt? Every TIME?!?”
After about a dozen you’re kinda set. I will enable one-offs in a private window, usually for shit news sites or the very occasional referral farm, and the exceptions are all reverted when I close the tab.