Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

uBlock Origin Criticized for Blocking Content Security Policy

posted by Fnord666 on Monday October 23 2017, @09:09AM   Printer-friendly
from the Digital-Arms-Race dept.

MrPlow writes:

Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard

The popular content blocking extension uBlock Origin blocks CSP reporting on websites that make use of it if it injects neutered scripts.

CSP, Content Security Policy, can be used by web developers to whitelist code that is allowed to run on web properties. The idea behind the feature is to prevent attackers from injecting JavaScript on websites protected by CSP.

CSP reports any attempt of interfering with the site's policies in regards to scripts to the webmaster. This happens when users connect to the site, and is used by webmasters to analyze and resolve the detected issues.

[...] Raymond Hill, the developer of uBlock Origin, replied stating that this was not a bug but by design. The extension blocks the sending of CSP reports if it injects a neutered Google Analytics script.

Source: https://www.ghacks.net/2017/10/19/ublock-criticized-for-blocking-csp/

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
uBlock Origin Criticized for Blocking Content Security Policy | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 89 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 24 2017, @03:11AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 24 2017, @03:11AM (#586701)

    Go ahead and try to charge 4 bucks for visit. Go right ahead - for every one of you idiots, hundred others will offer up the same/better shit without charging.

    You are a shill/moron, probably both.

  • (Score: 2) by Pino P on Tuesday October 24 2017, @01:15PM

    by Pino P (4721) on Tuesday October 24 2017, @01:15PM (#586833) Journal

    Go ahead and try to charge 4 bucks for visit. Go right ahead

    If a viewer uses a tracking blocker on WIRED, the website doesn't charge $4 per visit. Instead, it charges $4 per 28 days. Whether a subscriber visits 1 or 28 times in the subscription period is up to the subscriber. But I see site-specific monthly subscriptions like this as an attempt by websites to shift viewer behavior toward visiting fewer websites in a month, in order to put viewers into a particular site's filter bubble.

    for every one of you idiots, hundred others will offer up the same/better shit without charging.

    Those who transmit entire articles from WIRED without permission from Conde Nast will get sued out of existence by Conde Nast for copyright infringement.

    Please cool it with the ad hominem attacks.