SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard
Google made a change in Chrome 57 that removes options from the browser to manage plugins such as Google Widevine, Adobe Flash, or the Chrome PDF Viewer.
If you load chrome://plugins in Chrome 56 or earlier, a list of installed plugins is displayed to you. The list includes information about each plugin, including a name and description, location on the local system, version, and options to disable it or set it to "always run".
You can use it to disable plugins that you don't require. While you can do the same for some plugins, Flash and PDF Viewer, using Chrome's Settings, the same is not possible for the DRM plugin Widevine, and any other plugin Google may add to Chrome in the future.
Starting with Chrome 57, that option is no longer available. This means essentially that Chrome users won't be able to disable -- some -- plugins anymore, or even list the plugins that are installed in the web browser.
Please note that this affects Google Chrome and Chromium.
Source: http://www.ghacks.net/2017/01/29/google-removes-plugin-controls-from-chrome/
(Score: 2) by number11 on Tuesday January 31 2017, @10:22PM
PaleMoon has worked just about everywhere for me. There are a few websites that don't like the user-agent string, but I use SecretAgent to lie about the user-agent anyhow. There remain a few websites that are problematic, but it's hard to tell if the fault lies with PaleMoon, SecretAgent, NoScript, AdBlock Latitude, my VPN, or something else. Some of those sites give problems with Chromium-based browsers as well.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 31 2017, @10:48PM
The fault generally lies with the third party script libs a lot of sites embed, they have faulty UA sniffing in them to determine script capabilities instead of querying if something is supported directly which will break them for any UA they fail to recognize.
(Score: 2) by Pino P on Wednesday February 01 2017, @02:25PM
How is a site supposed to query support for essential HTML elements and CSS selectors and properties before sending the HTML and CSS to the browser, particularly if the user has disabled script? IE 8 is unsupported and therefore presumed vulnerable, but IE 9 is still supported for a few more months.
And even if you have convinced the user to allow script on your domain, how is a site supposed to query support for new language features introduced in ECMAScript 6? You can't catch a SyntaxError, and the commonly used snippet involving a new Function violates any Content Security Policy that doesn't include 'unsafe-eval'.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 02 2017, @03:40PM
The site is supposed to send 1 html file and 1 css file to the browser
The browser then figures out which part of the css to use
Their is absolutely no *need* for 90%+ of all sites to script anything, the scripting may add some nice shiny-ness but that's about all for the vast majority of sites (of course thanks to braindead frameworks lots of site don't work at all without scripting, but that's under control of the one making the site)