×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Mozilla To Enable Click-To-Play For All Firefox Plugins By Default

timothy posted about a year ago | from the choose-your-own-adventure dept.

Firefox 181

An anonymous reader writes "Mozilla on Tuesday announced a massive change to the way it loads third-party plugins in Firefox. The company plans to enable Click to Play for all versions of all plugins, except the latest release of Flash. This essentially means Firefox will soon only load third-party plugins when users click to interact with the plugin. Currently, Firefox automatically loads any plugin requested by a website, unless Mozilla has blocked it for security reasons (such as for old versions of Java, Silverlight, and Flash)."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

181 comments

Need for speed! (2, Informative)

sandytaru (1158959) | about a year ago | (#42729035)

Hopefully this speeds up Firefox considerably. I stopped using it because it was so much slower than Chrome at some basic tasks. But considering Chrome is incredibly unstable on Windows 8, I'm willing to give Firefox another chance.

Re:Need for speed! (2)

Synerg1y (2169962) | about a year ago | (#42729117)

Such a simple solution, they already have plugin detection, so they probably just expanded that with an on / off switch. And... nobodies thought of it, I like it, mozilla needs some fresh new features... I still can't get sync to work easily for what I want it to (multiple computers, 1 bookmarks file, idc about mobile devices for those). I'm willing to bet the next versions of chrome and IE will include it though.

Re:Need for speed! (1, Insightful)

bogaboga (793279) | about a year ago | (#42729141)

I stopped using it because it was so much slower than Chrome at some basic tasks

Are you a "high speed" trader?

What real useful difference does it make? Seriously?

Re:Need for speed! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729221)

About as much difference as switching from a Pentium III to a i7 machine.

Chrome is really fast. It does stand out when you use it, even if I prefer to use Firefox.

Don't see the difference (4, Informative)

sjbe (173966) | about a year ago | (#42729637)

Chrome is really fast. It does stand out when you use it, even if I prefer to use Firefox.

I use both daily and frankly can't really see any speed difference for anything I need to do. While there probably are some differences I'm usually more limited by the speed of my connection to the ISP than anything else.

Re:Don't see the difference (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729869)

I was especially speaking about the rendering time of the page, which can be pretty significant. It depends what sites you browse and what kind of machine you have, but I can tell you that I never thought rendering time mattered that much over ISP download until I tried Chrome.

Not trying to sell you on Chrome, once again I prefer other browsers, but I can tell why some people swear by it.

Re:Don't see the difference (1)

Fallingcow (213461) | about a year ago | (#42730061)

Firefox kicks on my MacBook's system fan when I start it with one or two tabs. Chrome doesn't when I start it with two dozen tabs, and it still launches faster.

Firefox with a dozen tabs open noticeably increases occurrences of the Spinning Beachball system wide. It's almost as bad about that as Eclipse, in fact. Chrome doesn't start to crowd out my other work or even itself slow down until I reach ~40 tabs open; until then, new tabs open damn near instantly and switching tabs takes just about no time at all, while the same cannot be said for Firefox.

As a bonus, a crashed tab generally doesn't kill the whole browser.

In short, I can tell when Firefox is open even if I'm not using it, while I can't with Chrome.

Re:Need for speed! (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729287)

I stopped using it because it was so much slower than Chrome at some basic tasks

Are you a "high speed" trader?

What real useful difference does it make? Seriously?

Step 1: Crippling addiction to absorbing information from the internet at all times.
Step 2: Run out of information to absorb from familiar places.
Step 3: Boredom.
Step 4: Find new place from which information can be absorbed. That new place discusses application speed and responsiveness with nanosecond resolution.
Step 5: Absorbed information must be used! Develop brand new crippling addiction of obsessing over browser speed.
Step 6: ???
Step 7: Gain attention by complaining on public forums! Which is a form of profit.

Re:Need for speed! (1)

fbobraga (1612783) | about a year ago | (#42729525)

I use Firefox here (in work) and at home: I've tried Chrome some times: as aways, the difference in speed I've noted is, basically, in startup time only

Re:Need for speed! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729689)

From my experience - in a single tab chrome is much faster than firefox. With a large number of tabs, firefox is actually faster.

Re:Need for speed! (4, Informative)

asavage (548758) | about a year ago | (#42729863)

Chrome uses a massive amount of RAM. About 3x more than Firefox. It is good if you have a lot of RAM but can even run poorly on 8 GB systems, such as if you have virtual memory disabled because of a SSD. I switched back to Firefox because of this.

Re:Need for speed! (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about a year ago | (#42730323)

The thought of high-speed traders working through a web browser amuses me.

If they are so time sensitive that mere seconds of delay could through them off, they should not be using a consumer-level OS and browser, but something a bit more realtime.

Re:Need for speed! (1)

bogaboga (793279) | about a year ago | (#42730431)

they should not be using a consumer-level OS and browser, but something a bit more realtime.

Like...?

Re:Need for speed! (1)

Cinder6 (894572) | about a year ago | (#42729223)

Chrome works fine on Windows 8 for me. Of course, I've gone back to Firefox, but for different reasons.

Re:Need for speed! (1)

sandytaru (1158959) | about a year ago | (#42729591)

I keep getting nasty "page has stopped responding" on everything from Facebook to Gmail. I keep hoping the flurry of updates they're sending out will fix it. This just started in the last week or two and it's getting quite frustrating. Hopefully the Google guys are getting the crash reports I keep filing...

Re:Need for speed! (1)

Mike Frett (2811077) | about a year ago | (#42729641)

Chromium works great for me on Xubuntu 12.04. However, I use Firefox mostly and it also runs fine. Have also tried various other WebKit based Browsers that are super fast, but I still use Firefox.

Once you get use to something, it's difficult to switch, but very possible and doable. I used Windows since 1998, switched to Linux last year (2012) never looked back. Incidentally, In Firefox I use Flash Block and Stop Tube to 'click to play' HTML5 and Flash; great add-ons.

Re:Need for speed! (1)

ahabswhale (1189519) | about a year ago | (#42730615)

I use Chrome on Windows 8 and I haven't had any problems with (no crashes or other odd behavior). Maybe it's you.

Please include flash! (5, Insightful)

Torp (199297) | about a year ago | (#42729037)

Subject says it all... why enable flash by default? Even if it didn't have any security holes, it's still the great battery eater...

Re:Please include flash! (1)

Servaas (1050156) | about a year ago | (#42729087)

Why even have flash enabled is equally valid but the simple fact is theres still a lot that uses it, and why have to click it when you dont have to worry about battery life? (desktop or AC'd laptop)

Re:Please include flash! (3, Interesting)

Torp (199297) | about a year ago | (#42729119)

Maybe you... i browse with FlashBlock on all machines, portable or not. If I want to watch a movie I'll click to enable just the movie, thank you.

Re:Please include flash! (0)

afidel (530433) | about a year ago | (#42729343)

Ditto, I didn't move to Chrome until AdBlock Pro and Flashblock worked properly, which lucky for Google coincided with the Firefox team deciding that breaking the UI and 10-20% of plugins every few weeks was acceptable. I've played with Firefox again since things got back to a normal change of pace but I just haven't felt that I gained anything so I stick with Chrome due to better integration between desktop and mobile.

Re:Please include flash! (3, Insightful)

Lucky75 (1265142) | about a year ago | (#42729801)

I don't understand how people keep getting their extensions broken by firefox updates? If they're written properly, they don't break with updates anymore.

Re:Please include flash! (1)

Derek Pomery (2028) | about a year ago | (#42729803)

Huh. Better integration between desktop and mobile?
I use Firefox Sync to link tablet/phone/desktop just fine.
Which is nice 'cause typing passwords on mobile is a pain.

Is also nice to see desktop tabs on tablet. Makes moving over it to show a nice reddit awww photo to family easy.

Re:Please include flash! (4, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about a year ago | (#42729479)

90% of auto-starting flash is adverts. For the few things that are actually useful content, it isn't much extra effort to click. I was amazed at how much my browsing experience improved when I installed a click-to-play plugin for Flash.

Re:Please include flash! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729115)

You are free to change the behavior of flash if you like, but the majority of people just want their pages to load. This seems like a really good compromise to me. Again, you can go to the config file and change it to your heart's content.

Re:Please include flash! (2)

pushing-robot (1037830) | about a year ago | (#42729145)

Quite a few pages have hidden flash elements that are vital to the operation of the page. Most web music players, for instance. Blocking flash by default would break quite a few sites.

Software developers—and browser makers in particular—have to weigh security against user experience.

Re:Please include flash! (4, Insightful)

Secret Agent Man (915574) | about a year ago | (#42729333)

Which is why Chrome's Click to Play also puts a puzzle piece in your address bar, which you can click to run all plugins on a page once or all the time for a given domain. Does Firefox do something similar? There are lots of cases where there's no clickable space to enable a third party plugin.

Re:Please include flash! (3, Insightful)

Cajun Hell (725246) | about a year ago | (#42729529)

Most web music players, for instance. Blocking flash by default would break quite a few sites.

Some peoples' "broken" sites are other peoples' "fixed" sites.

Re:Please include flash! (1)

squiggleslash (241428) | about a year ago | (#42729701)

In which case you put a yellow bar at the top of the screen with "This webpage uses the Flash media player to show some content. Do you want to enable this plug-in?"

Also: do I need to guess that it's still not going to be the case that it'll be possible to prevent HTML5 video from playing if the bastards building the page have made it auto-play? NOTE TO MOZILLA: _nobody_ wants this. Nobody. There is nobody in the world who wants a massive multimegabyte video to download and start playing unless they've specifically acknowledged they're ready for it. I don't give a rat's ass that you've seen sites considered legit like Youtube auto-play videos, even Google f---s up from time to time.

I don't want massive multimedia crap to start downloading until I've explicitly given permission. That should have been the default right from the beginning, when the good people of Netscape first created the plug-in concept. Nobody else does either.

Why? Because people load pages in the background. Because others click on a link and go AFK for a moment while they wait for the page to prepare itself. Because people load pages where there are other people around and do not want their computers suddenly talking or playing music or otherwise disturbing others around them. And yes, because other people pay by the byte or have download caps, especially mobile users.

Re:Please include flash! (2)

Merk42 (1906718) | about a year ago | (#42730401)

So you're suggesting Firefox doesn't follow the W3C/Whatwg standard?

I'm sure if it were spun as "iOS refuses to follow standards for <video> tag" you'd be up in arms.

Re:Please include flash! (1)

rmstar (114746) | about a year ago | (#42729707)

Quite a few pages have hidden flash elements that are vital to the operation of the page. Most web music players, for instance. Blocking flash by default would break quite a few sites.

True, although many sites, especially fash-heavy ones are only bearable when broken.

The web music player issue can be solved in firefox with flashblock by right-clicking on the icon, and unblocking all flash content from that site.

Re:Please include flash! (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about a year ago | (#42729761)

Quite a few pages have hidden flash elements that are vital to the operation of the page. Most web music players, for instance. Blocking flash by default would break quite a few sites.

I consider that a feature ... any site I hit that whines it needs Flash gets the back button, and subsequently ignored.

Except for my work machine which I periodically need Flash for something annoying but required, I pretty much don't even have it installed.

As a user, if your site requires Flash, you'll likely never see me again.

In the 10 or more years I've been avoiding Flash, there hasn't been a single compelling thing which made me think otherwise; and while I'm sure there are people who think it's awesome, I think it's complete crap.

Re:Please include flash! (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about a year ago | (#42729923)

I've been using Flashblock for years and I don't think I've ever had this problem (closest is Veoh, where you have to click on the plain black video area to make it work). Hidden elements appear as a flash object in the upper-left corner of the page.

Re:Please include flash! (1)

wvmarle (1070040) | about a year ago | (#42730387)

Firefox's FlashBlock (click-to-play for Flash) extension works just fine. I don't have problems with sites being broken - or at least I don't notice they're broken. And if they're really broken (IE-only kind of sites, they still exist) I just get a blank screen.

Re:Please include flash! (1)

Tridus (79566) | about a year ago | (#42729511)

Probably to make sure the creators of FlashBlock still have something to do.

Re:Please include flash! (1)

Derek Pomery (2028) | about a year ago | (#42729961)

The problem I ran into w/ FlashBlock was needing a ton of whitelisting. And for silly things even, like playing sounds.
For example, gmail would use flash (don't know if it still does) for the ping when someone sent you a chat message.
It created that invisibly, so FlashBlock didn't work - I guess prompting would, but it wasn't obvious what people were whitelisting.

Another one that did that, the game Enlightenment would use flash as a fallback after attempting HTML5 sound w/ mp3 only (no ogg fallback) so also needed manual whitelisting due to invisible content.

Again, the notification prompt in the new Mozilla interface will at least tell someone, but if they don't realise what they are whitelisting (assume it is some crappy flash ad or something) they'll get a worse experience.

So. I'm going w/ pervasiveness, and use of hidden flash for audio.

Re:Please include flash! (1)

Derek Pomery (2028) | about a year ago | (#42730039)

Oh. Then there are sites that use "detection" code and won't even show you a click-to-play area on the screen. They'll simply bounce you to some error content if they fail to create the invisible flash content.

Hopefully this sort of poor behaviour is becoming rarer. Esp since Firefox on my Android tablet/phone prompts for flash too, which will hopefully drive some website awareness.

Re:Please include flash! (1)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | about a year ago | (#42729993)

I haven't looked at the code to verify why it is that sites don't work, but I see a lot of news sites in particular where the videos don't play if I have plugins on click-to-play in Opera. The CNN video page is one example, the videos just don't start. I suspect that there is some Javascript that is injecting the Flash movie in a way that I don't even see it to click on it to enable it, but like I said I haven't looked at the code for the sites that don't work. I go to Chrome when I come across a site like that instead of whitelisting it in Opera.

if you want flash to be click to play (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42730327)

about:config
plugins.click_to_play true

Re:Please include flash! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42730335)

Advertising, which Mozilla's biggest donor happens to rely on for the bulk of it's revenue.

Re:Please include flash! (1)

colfer (619105) | about a year ago | (#42730405)

JQuery can eat up cycles too. A common replacement for Flash animation is the jQuery "Cycle" plugin. Well, jQuery sets 13ms timeouts by default for effects. If I have two or three of those things running in ads on a page, my laptop's fan kicks on. The parameter, jQuery.fx.interval, is not that well known, and a developer on a decent system would not notice the CPU overuse. The 13ms resolution is not really needed for simple slideshows.

Re:Please include flash! (1)

colfer (619105) | about a year ago | (#42730557)

To be clear on jQuery effects, I'm talking about Javascript with no browser plugins, just those big redundant ad js files that often rival the total byte size of the images on a page. Flash is at least compact. (I develop with js instead of Flash, but I try to keep it reasonable.)

Re:Please include flash! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42730487)

flashblock extension can fill the gap

So why the hell does Flash get a pass? (5, Informative)

idontgno (624372) | about a year ago | (#42729071)

I found it Reading the Fucking Article:

Going forward, Mozilla will essentially be blocking all plugins except the very latest version of Flash. The company won't say why it is exempting Adobe's plugin, but it's most likely because users expect their videos to play automatically (and advertisers expect their ads to load automatically).

Emphasis mine.

"Follow the money." That's a reason I can understand.

Makes me glad I usually run with Adblock and NoScript.

Re:So why the hell does Flash get a pass? (1)

i kan reed (749298) | about a year ago | (#42729129)

Flashblock+adblock. they're not illegal. They solve all your problems in that regard.

Re:So why the hell does Flash get a pass? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729711)

Illegal? The fact that you even brought that up speaks volumes about the world we live in.

Re:So why the hell does Flash get a pass? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42730109)

Ding ding ding we have a weiner!

Re:So why the hell does Flash get a pass? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42730229)

But they will sometimes cause sites to fail to load. I use them and I've seen some sites that won't work until you turn them off. Then they still won't work until you reload the page. I suspect the Mozilla developers ran into the same issue and decided that is too much to ask from the average user. I know what's going on so I can work around the issue but the average user would be totally confused by such behavior and would say that Firefox broke their web experience.

Re:So why the hell does Flash get a pass? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729487)

i think opera does this by default, atleast mine does. and i don't think i changed anything.

Re:So why the hell does Flash get a pass? (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about a year ago | (#42729601)

So for me, nothing will change - I'll still have to keep FlashBlock installed.

Seriously... if I could only enable one plugin, it'd be FlashBlock - even over AdBlock. It makes the web significantly better, and - after several years of use - I still only have a handful of sites (like YouTube) whitelisted. Flash just isn't necessary for most things.

Re:So why the hell does Flash get a pass? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729821)

FlashBlock and AdBlock are extensions, not plugins.

Re:So why the hell does Flash get a pass? (1)

jfengel (409917) | about a year ago | (#42729605)

Ah, thanks. My first thought on reading TFS was, "Oh, perhaps I could consider skipping NoScript," and wondering whether I'd miss its Javascript controlling features as well.

But no, enemy #1 is still there, so NoScript stays firmly in place.

Note to advertisers: I do NOT run with AdBlock. Just NoScript. Ads, yes. Singing dancing flashing noisemakers, no. And yeah, I have Javascript blocked, for the same reason. If that means that the site is unusable, then I will find an alternative that pisses me off less.

Re:So why the hell does Flash get a pass? (2)

MozeeToby (1163751) | about a year ago | (#42729931)

Going forward, Mozilla will essentially be blocking all plugins except the very latest version of Flash. The company won't say why it is exempting Adobe's plugin, but it's most likely because users expect their videos to play automatically (and advertisers expect their ads to load automatically).

Emphasis mine.

FFS, you're bolding and ranting like that's the word from Mozilla when what you are quoting is uninformed speculation from the author of the article (though it very well may be true). I suspect the average user being confronted with what is, to them, an error message when they go to youtube.com (or any number of other flash reliant sites) might have some bearing in the decision.

Re:So why the hell does Flash get a pass? (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about a year ago | (#42729955)

I use Flashblock, NoScript, BetterPrivacy, Ghostery (with GhostRank aka Plugin-Based Analytics disabled) and CookieMonster but not Adblock. I allow the unobtrusive ads to appear on purpose.

Adblock is good for dial-up users though.

Opera (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729099)

My favourite browser in terms of usability/interface/features(even when i don't use most of them) has had this for quite a while, its wonderfull to avoid those annoying flash add's with sound. Also when combined with the option of blocking every pop-up window by default and display just a warning on the down right corner allowing the user to load/open it, is another basic, yet great advertising blocker for whom do not wish to use other complex tools.

no annoying music (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729157)

this will prevent annoying music from automatically be played.

Re:no pr0n (1)

DickBreath (207180) | about a year ago | (#42729627)

This will make pr0n sites useless without the animated thumbnails.

But maybe that's a good thing.

Re:no pr0n (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42730091)

Those are usually JS-powered and don't require flash...they guzzle bandwidth like a data-hungry slut who needs money for college books though.

I predict chaos (5, Insightful)

Phoenix Rising (28955) | about a year ago | (#42729177)

While we as technical users might enjoy a plugin-free experience with no extra clicking involved, the average Joe User is going to be pissed off.

I run with NoScript - does pretty much what Mozilla wants to do (plus script blocking), except without the big gray box. The average user is not interested in NoScript type functionality - they want a rich web experience out of the box, and if that includes Flash, PDF files, and audio, then that's what they want.

I suspect the reason Flash is turned on isn't because of ads - it's because there are a number of high profile corporate websites out there that become unusable if Flash isn't enabled.

Re:I predict chaos (1)

The MAZZTer (911996) | about a year ago | (#42729233)

Also some Flash objects do not have a visual presence, and in fact sit off the screen since they do other things. I believe Google's Pacman logo uses Flash to power sound in IE (since it doesn't support HTML5 audio).

Re:I predict chaos (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729611)

Also some Flash objects do not have a visual presence, and in fact sit off the screen since they do other things. I believe Google's Pacman logo uses Flash to power sound in IE (since it doesn't support HTML5 audio).

You make it sound as though removing annoying sound playback from web pages is a bad thing.

plugin-container contained? (3, Funny)

empties (2827183) | about a year ago | (#42729201)

What will I do with the excess memory if plugin-container.exe doesn't get out of hand anymore? Or perhaps we'll see a new big process: plugin-container-container

Look before you jump off that cliff... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729273)

I used to enable it by default, however, since I have started using things like listening to clips on the Android Market (Music section), if its enabled, there is no actual object to "click to enable", so as long as they have a good whitelist system, I can see this as being a very good thing,

However, the Android Market music store area isn't the only area where no actual object(s) exist in order to "click to play", so I can see forum's and buglists being bombed with user complaints when they find a site they use isnt working properly and it is in IE or Chrome or whatever browser they use.

I love it, but it needs a control feature or some way to detect things like the Android Market music store area in order to fix issues like the ones I am listing here.

This already exists (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729337)

It's called NoScript. Everything is blacklisted by default and yet just a single click away.

In Opera it's native/built-in... apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729663)

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3417739&cid=42729485 [slashdot.org]

* Been that way, for YEARS now too... & just like with tabbed browsing? Opera had it before FF, as usual!

APK

P.S.=> The "by site preferences" I noted there also help it function a LOT like NoScript (by setting a "GLOBAL POLICY" 1st, as the default, & ONLY activating scripts, plugins, cookies, frames/iframes (all potential avenues of attack & such), as needed & yes - on a "demand only" basis too))...

... apk

Poor misfigured HTML, hateful and hated all around (2)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about a year ago | (#42729377)

The features tacked onto HTML5 like <audio> and <script> aren't considered a plugin, thus writing your animation w/ sound in it would seem to bypass the new default click-to-play. Ah, but it doesn't matter anyway since they're not making Flash click-to-play. So either this will make annoying BS more difficult to block without breaking the site, or it stengthens Flash in opposition to HTML5. Now browsers will be even less usable without NoScript and AdBlock.

Either way you look at it HTML5 is dead to me; It's been 13 years (half the age of the Web) and we're still stuck on HTML 4.01... Time to give up folks, HTML6 won't arrive before the Singularity. The Web even tanks as a cross platform dev platform -- I can make pixel perfect feature rich cross-platform native application for Linux, Win, BSD, OSX, Android, iOS in 1/3rd the time it takes me to ensure the same "web app" works in all the browsers and OSs. It was a bad idea to begin with -- Hack together the most inefficient scripting language and a stateless static document display engine to create stateful internet enabled applications (Every damn site is a stateful application now). HTML is ugly, and pointless. Long live the Internet, but Fuck The Web.

Re:Poor misfigured HTML, hateful and hated all aro (5, Insightful)

Corporate T00l (244210) | about a year ago | (#42730021)

I can make pixel perfect feature rich cross-platform native application for Linux, Win, BSD, OSX, Android, iOS in 1/3rd the time it takes me to ensure the same "web app" works in all the browsers and OSs.

I want whatever development tool chain you're using. Just dealing with the different installer mechanisms on those platforms makes my head spin. What's your secret?

Re:Poor misfigured HTML, hateful and hated all aro (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42730529)

He's using a program called Handwave [wikipedia.org]

Adblock? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729417)

[quote]Firefox will soon only load third-party plugins when users click to interact with the plugin[/quote]
So we'll have to click on ads, before Adblock can block them?

Adblock's INFERIOR to hosts files (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729733)

As custom hosts files do a lot more, & are loaded by the IP stack when you startup your OS (as well as when you make requests via any webbound client): That makes AdBlock redundant (i.e.-> why do the job TWICE & not as well, in other words!).

PLUS, sadly, AdBlock doesn't BLOCK ALL ADS anymore by default & it can't do as much as custom hosts files do for you on more grounds! See below for a list...

I build mine, using this (after I built it, of course):

---

APK Hosts File Engine 5.0++ 32/64-bit:

http://start64.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5851:apk-hosts-file-engine-64bit-version&catid=26:64bit-security-software&Itemid=74 [start64.com]

---

Which, if you read the list of what it can do for you as an end user of the resulting output it produces listed in the link above, you'll understand how/why...

"It's as strong as steel, & a 3rd of the weight" - Howard Stark from the film "Captain America"

---

Especially vs. competing alternate 'solutions', noted below in AdBlock/Ghostery & yes even DNS servers, next, as 'examples thereof'...

(Solutions that used to be good & I even recommended them in security guides I wrote up over the decades now -> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbo=d&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000/XP%22&btnG=Submit&gbv=1&sei=ka3yUKzxB-6_0QHLroCQCA [google.com]

(Security guides of mine that did extremely well for myself and users of them) for Windows users, for "layered-security"/"defense-in-depth" purposes - the BEST THING WE HAVE GOING vs. threats of all kinds, currently!

(Not anymore though, & certainly NOT far as AdBlock's concerned especially, not after this):

---

Adblock Plus To Offer 'Acceptable Ads' Option:

http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/12/12/2213233/adblock-plus-to-offer-acceptable-ads-option [slashdot.org]

(Meaning by default, which MOST USERS WON'T CHANGE, it doesn't block ALL ads - they "souled-out"... talk about "foxes guarding the henhouse")!

---

Plus, Adblock CAN'T DO AS MUCH & not from a single file solution that runs in Ring 0/RPL 0/kernelmode via tcpip.sys, a driver (since it's part of the IP stack & tightly integrated into it) which is far, Far, FAR FASTER than ring 3/rpl 3/usermode apps like browsers, & addons slow them down (known issue in FireFox).

To wit, 10++ things AdBlock can't do, hosts can:

---

1.) Blocking rogue DNS servers malware makers use

2.) Blocking known sites/servers that serve up malware... like known sites/servers/hosts-domains that serve up malicious scripts

3.) Speeding up your FAVORITE SITES that hosts can speed up via hardcoded line item entries properly resolved by a reverse DNS ping

4.) AdBlock works on Mozilla products (browser & email), hosts work on ANY webbound app AND are multiplatform.

5.) AdBlock can't protect external to FireFox email programs, hosts can (think OUTLOOK, Eudora, & others)

6.) AdBlock can't help you blow past DNSBL's (DNS block lists)

7.) AdBlock can't help you avoid DNS request logs (hosts can via hardcoded favorites)

8.) AdBlock can't protect you vs. TRACKERS (hosts can)

9.) AdBlock can't protect you vs. DOWNED or "DNS-poisoned" redirected DNS servers (hosts can by hardcodes)

10.) Hosts are EASIER to manage, they're just a text file (adblock means you had BEST know your javascript, perl, & python (iirc as to what languages are used to make it from source)).

& more... as a tiny 'sampling' & proofs thereof!

---

Same with Ghostery:

---

Evidon, which makes Ghostery, is an advertising company.

They were originally named Better Advertising, Inc., but changed their name for obvious PR reasons.

Despite the name change, let's be clear on one thing: their goal still is building better advertising, not protecting consumer privacy.

Evidon bought Ghostery, an independent privacy tool that had a good reputation.

They took a tool that was originally for watching the trackers online, something people saw as a legitimate privacy tool, and users were understandably concerned.

The company said they were just using Ghostery for research. Turns out they had relationships with a bunch of ad companies and were compiling data from which sites you visited when you were using Ghostery, what trackers were on those sites, what ads they were, etc., and building a database to monetize.

(AND, when confronted about it, they made their tracking opt-in and called it GhostRank, which is how it exists today.)

They took an open-source type tool, bought it, turned it from something that's actually protecting people from the ad industry, to something where the users are actually providing data to the advertisers to make it easier to track them. This is a fundamental conflict of interest.

To sum up:

Ghostery makes its money from selling supposedly de-indentified user data about sites visited and ads encountered to marketers and advertisers. You get less privacy, they get more money.

That's an inverse relationship.

Better Advertising/Evidon continually plays up the story that people should just download Ghostery to help them hide from advertisers.

Their motivation to promote it, however, isn't for better privacy; it's because they hope that you'll opt in to GhostRank and send you a bunch of information.

They named their company Better Advertising for a reason: their incentive is better advertising, not better privacy.

---

Yes, so overall? Absolutely - hosts are superior!

Vs. even DNS servers too (which hosts files can supplement to overcome THEIR shortcomings, as follows):

---

A.) Running another program (sometimes in usermode no less, far, Far, FAR slower than kernelmode by many orders of magnitude & easily attacked) vs. the single hosts file (tightly integrated into the IP stack itself as part of it). ADDING COMPLEXITY & MORE "moving parts" room for error & breakdown!

B.) Wasting CPU cycles, RAM memory, & other forms of I/O to do what a single file can do

C.) Wasting ELECTRICITY (especially if the DNS server is setup as a separate machine) even if run as a service/daemon on a single system as user has

D.) DNS has NUMEROUS faults, & should anyone request a sampling of them? Ask & "ye shall receive" (see my 'p.s.' below...).

---

HOWEVER:

I don't "hate" DNS servers!

In fact - I use them myself (since I don't attempt to resolve 'every host-domain there is online' via hosts, only my favorites @ the top of the file, 20 of them, which beats hashtable indexing or b-tree binary seeks past 2++ million records no less).

I use specialized FILTERING DNS SERVERS that help block out malicious sites/servers/hosts-domains via DNSBLs:

---

Norton DNS:

http://setup.nortondns.com/ [nortondns.com]

198.153.192.1
198.153.194.1
198.153.192.60
198.153.194.60
198.153.192.50
198.153.194.50
198.153.192.40
198.153.194.40

OpenDNS:

http://www.opendns.com/home-solutions/ [opendns.com]

208.67.222.222
208.67.220.220

ScrubIT DNS:

http://scrubit.com/ [scrubit.com]

67.138.54.100
207.225.209.66

Comodo Secure DNS:

http://www.comodo.com/secure-dns/switch/windows_vista.html [comodo.com]

8.26.56.26
8.20.247.2

---

ALL in layered formation in both my network connection AND my Cisco/LinkSys stateful packet inspecting router.

(Again - for the concept of "layered-security"/"defense-in-depth": The best thing we have going currently vs. malicious threats online & otherwise...)

* :)

(Beat THAT with a stick... or better yet? With information that disproves my points (to any 'naysayers' or trolls, that is)).

Now - I truly KNOW this post will no doubt be downmodded, because Advertisers do NOT want this type of information getting out en-masse to enlighten users - they bought out Ghostery, crippled Adblock, but TRY THAT with a local hosts file (good luck!) especially one a user builds himself!

APK

P.S.=> A DNS FLAWS LIST OVER TIME FOR REFERENCE (only partial):

---

DNS flaw reanimates slain evil sites as ghost domains:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/02/16/ghost_domains_dns_vuln/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

BIND vs. what the Chinese are doing to DNS lately? See here:

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/11/29/1755230/Chinese-DNS-Tampering-a-Real-Threat-To-Outsiders [slashdot.org]

---

SECUNIA HIT BY DNS REDIRECTION HACK THIS WEEK:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/26/secunia_back_from_dns_hack/ [theregister.co.uk]

(Yes, even "security pros" are helpless vs. DNS problems in code bugs OR redirect DNS poisoning issues, & they can only try to "set the DNS record straight" & then, they still have to wait for corrected DNS info. to propogate across all subordinate DNS servers too - lagtime in which folks DO get "abused" in mind you!)

---

DNS vs. the "Kaminsky DNS flaw", here (and even MORE problems in DNS than just that):

http://www.scmagazineus.com/new-bind-9-dns-flaw-is-worse-than-kaminskys/article/140872/ [scmagazineus.com]

(Seems others are saying that some NEW "Bind9 flaw" is worse than the Kaminsky flaw ALONE, up there, mind you... probably corrected (hopefully), but it shows yet again, DNS hassles (DNS redirect/DNS poisoning) being exploited!)

---

Moxie Marlinspike's found others (0 hack) as well...

Nope... "layered security" truly IS the "way to go" - hacker/cracker types know it, & they do NOT want the rest of us knowing it too!...

(So until DNSSEC takes "widespread adoption"? HOSTS are your answer vs. such types of attack, because the 1st thing your system refers to, by default, IS your HOSTS file (over say, DNS server usage). There are decent DNS servers though, such as OpenDNS, ScrubIT, or even NORTON DNS (more on each specifically below), & because I cannot "cache the entire internet" in a HOSTS file? I opt to use those, because I have to (& OpenDNS has been noted to "fix immediately", per the Kaminsky flaw, in fact... just as a sort of reference to how WELL they are maintained really!)

---

DNS Hijacks Now Being Used to Serve Black Hole Exploit Kit:

https://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/dns-hijacks-now-being-used-serve-black-hole-exploit-kit-121211 [threatpost.com]

---

DNS experts admit some of the underlying foundations of the DNS protocol are inherently weak:

http://it.slashdot.org/story/11/12/08/1353203/opendns-releases-dns-encryption-tool [slashdot.org]

---

Potential 0-Day Vulnerability For BIND 9:

http://it.slashdot.org/story/11/11/17/1429259/potential-0-day-vulnerability-for-bind-9 [slashdot.org]

---

Five DNS Threats You Should Protect Against:

http://www.securityweek.com/five-dns-threats-you-should-protect-against [securityweek.com]

---

DNS provider decked by DDoS dastards:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/16/ddos_on_dns_firm/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Ten Percent of DNS Servers Still Vulnerable: (so much for "conscientious patching", eh? Many DNS providers weren't patching when they had to!)

http://it.slashdot.org/it/05/08/04/1525235.shtml?tid=172&tid=95&tid=218 [slashdot.org]

---

DNS ROOT SERVERS ATTACKED:

http://it.slashdot.org/it/07/02/06/2238225.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

TimeWarner DNS Hijacking:

http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/23/2140208 [slashdot.org]

---

DNS Re-Binding Attacks:

http://crypto.stanford.edu/dns/ [stanford.edu]

---

DNS Server Survey Reveals Mixed Security Picture:

http://it.slashdot.org/it/07/11/21/0315239.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

Halvar figured out super-secret DNS vulnerability:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/has-halvar-figured-out-super-secret-dns-vulnerability/1520 [zdnet.com]

---

BIND Still Susceptible To DNS Cache Poisoning:

http://tech.slashdot.org/tech/08/08/09/123222.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

DNS Poisoning Hits One of China's Biggest ISPs:

http://it.slashdot.org/it/08/08/21/2343250.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

DDoS Attacks Via DNS Recursion:

http://it.slashdot.org/it/06/03/16/1658209.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

High Severity BIND DNS Vulnerability Advisory Issued:

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/02/23/156212/High-Severity-BIND-Vulnerability-Advisory-Issued [slashdot.org]

---

Photobucket's DNS Records Hijacked:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=1285 [zdnet.com]

---

Protecting Browsers from DNS Rebinding Attacks:

http://crypto.stanford.edu/dns/ [stanford.edu]

---

DNS Problem Linked To DDoS Attacks Gets Worse:

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/11/15/1238210/DNS-Problem-Linked-To-DDoS-Attacks-Gets-Worse [slashdot.org]

---

5 years after major DNS flaw is discovered, few US companies have deployed long-term fix (vs. Kaminsky Bug above...):

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2013/012913-dnssec-266197.html?page=3 [networkworld.com]

---

HOWEVER/AGAIN - there DNS servers ones that help, vs. online threats, as listed above earlier...

... apk

Not Flash? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729465)

Flashblock is the one plugin running on every one of my browsers.

Brilliant! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729483)

This will surely work.

It's not like there's ever been a vulnerability with Flash.

It'll be perfectly safe.

=/

Opera's had this for years (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729485)

In it's "only on demand" option, by site no less, for preferences via Tools menu, Preferences, Advanced tab in the popup window screen, Content tree item...

* :)

APK

P.S.=> Just like with tabbed browsing, opera had it BEFORE FF did...

... apk

Re:Opera's had this for years (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729781)

Guess what? NOBODY CARES what you think, with your crippled M$ stinkbox or your faghag browserette. Go edit your GHOSTS file, you bandwidth-stealing lowlife.

(it was too quiet around here...)

Opinions vary (242++:1 vs. yours)... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729941)

"Guess what? NOBODY CARES what you think, with your crippled M$ stinkbox or your faghag browserette." - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 29, @02:10PM (#42729781)

See subject-line above, & your "FoaMiNg-@-teh-MouTh" so-called 'opinion' vs. the thoughts of your /. peers, & 242++ of them (& I post as AC (hard to get even +1, as /. hides our posts & we "AC"'s start @ ZERO/0 points, unlike registered "lusers", lol!)):

---

+5 'modded up' posts by "yours truly" (8):

HOSTS & BGP:2010 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1901826&cid=34490450 [slashdot.org]
FIREFOX IN DANGER: 2011 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2559120&cid=38268580 [slashdot.org]
TESLA:2010 -> http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1872982&cid=34264190 [slashdot.org]
TESLA:2010 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1806946&cid=33777976 [slashdot.org]
NVIDIA 2d:2006 -> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=175774&cid=14610147 [slashdot.org]
Ubuntu Linux sends back local disk query strings to CANONICAL: 2012 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3304601&cid=42234351 [slashdot.org]
Question to Mr. Mark Shuttleworth @ UBUNTU/CANONICAL: 2012 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3304725&cid=42243467 [slashdot.org]
COMPUTER ASSOCIATES BUSTED FOR ACCOUNTING FRAUD:2010 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1884922&cid=34350102 [slashdot.org]

----

+4 'modded up' posts by "yours truly" (5):

APK SECURITY GUIDE:2005 -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=167071&cid=13931198 [slashdot.org]
INFO. SYSTEMS WORK:2005 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=161862&cid=13531817 [slashdot.org]
WINDOWS @ NASDAQ 7++ YRS. NOW:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1290967&cid=28571315 [slashdot.org]
CARMACK'S ARMADILLO AEROSPACE:2005 -> http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=158310&cid=13263898 [slashdot.org]
What I admire about Theo DeRaadt of BSD fame: 2012 -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3007641&cid=40785151 [slashdot.org]

----

+3 'modded up' posts by "yours truly" (8):

APK MICROSOFT INTERVIEW:2005 -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=155172&cid=13007974 [slashdot.org]
Linux security failures 2011-2012: 2012 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3319303&cid=42306663 [slashdot.org]
APK MS SYMBOLIC DIRECTORY LINKS:2005 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=166850&cid=13914137 [slashdot.org]
APK FOOLS IE7 INSTALL IN BETA HOW TO:2006 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=175857&cid=14615222 [slashdot.org]
PROOFS ON OPERA SPEED & SECURITY:2007 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=273931&cid=20291847 [slashdot.org]
HBGary POST in Fake Names On Social Networks, a Fake Problem:2011 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2375110&cid=37056304 [slashdot.org]
APK RC STOP ROOKIT TECHNIQUES:2008 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1021873&cid=25681261 [slashdot.org]
Elevator Algorithm for harddisk drives #2 of 2 (1st's in +1): 2012 -> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3287917&cid=42158041 [slashdot.org]

----

+2 'modded up' posts by "yours truly" (23):

CODING FOR DEFCON (my compressed/packed exe + sizecheck @ startup technique): 2005 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=158231&cid=13257227 [slashdot.org]
HOW DLL API CALL LOADS WORK:2008 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1001489&cid=25441395 [slashdot.org]
WERNER VON BRAUN - A Nazi Scientist used by U.S.A. for rocketry: 2011 -> http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1957608&cid=34933062 [slashdot.org]
APK TRICK TO STOP A MALWARE:2008 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1010923&cid=25549351 [slashdot.org]
DOING SHAREWARE 1995-2004:2007 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=233779&cid=19020329 [slashdot.org]
MHTML SECURITY BUG FIX IE:2011 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1973914&cid=35056454 [slashdot.org]
EXCEL SECURITY FIX:2009 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1139485&cid=26974507 [slashdot.org]
CODING JOBS OFFSHORING:2007 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=245971&cid=19760473 [slashdot.org]
WE SHOULD PENALIZE & TAX JOB OUTSOURCERS/OFFSHORERS: 2008 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=978035&cid=25176841 [slashdot.org]
BOGUS POLITICIAN PERFORMANCE: 2008 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=978035&cid=25176955 [slashdot.org]
MS PUTS YOU TO WORK:2006 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=174759&cid=14538593 [slashdot.org]
ARSTECHNICA & JEREMY REIMER LOL:2008 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1021733&cid=25675515 [slashdot.org]
CYBERSECURITY LEGISLATIONS:2011 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2222868&cid=36379698 [slashdot.org]
FILTERING ONLINE:2010 -> http://politics.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1790178&cid=33610372 [slashdot.org]
APK ON PLANTED SHILLS BY TELECOM/ISP/BSP:2010 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1827308&cid=33940988 [slashdot.org]
TAX THE TAR OUT OF OUTSOURCERS/OFFSHORERS & PENALIZE THEM ALSO #1 of 2: 2012 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2795637&cid=39728333 [slashdot.org]
HBGary & Chinese Water Army b.s. posted: 2012 -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2615084&cid=38662598 [slashdot.org]
OPERA & MULTITHREADED DESIGN: 2007 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=290711&cid=20506147 [slashdot.org]
MICROSOFT "FLIPS THE SCRIPT" ON CISPA: 2012 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2817555&cid=39833573 [slashdot.org]
Microsoft's MISTAKE in Windows 8 "metro-ized" ready for 3-5 yr. old interface on PC desktops (1 of 2, other is +1): 2012 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3330901&cid=42354181 [slashdot.org]
VLC 64-bit being better than MediaPlayerClassic on Win7 64-bit: 2012 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3336253&cid=42378657 [slashdot.org]
Windows 8 failed for 3 simple reasons: 2012 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3411357&cid=42706875 [slashdot.org]
Delphi/Object Pascal & C++ vs. NIKLAUS WIRTH PASCAL/KERNIGHAN & RITCHIE C on EfNet IRC failure & possible fix: 2012 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3350243&cid=42437411 [slashdot.org]

----

+1 'modded up' posts by "yours truly" (139) & we AC's start at ZERO, not 1 or 2 like registered users on /. do:

APK SSD/RamDrive/RamDisk usage since 1996:2008 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1014349&cid=25591403 [slashdot.org]
DISASSEMBLY & PROTECTING CODE:2010 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1719570&cid=32907418 [slashdot.org]
APK ON RESERVED PORTS IN WINDOWS:2007 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=235621&cid=19229493 [slashdot.org]
MEMORY FRAGMENTATION: 2007 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=367219&cid=21434061 [slashdot.org]
NORTON DNS & DNSBL:2011 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2311948&cid=36708742 [slashdot.org]
IRON FILESYSTEMS:2007 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=359507&cid=21347933 [slashdot.org]
APK ROOTKIT KILLING TECHNIQUE USING RC:2011 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2428486&cid=37405530 [slashdot.org]
APK STOPPED CONFICKER BEFORE ANYONE DID:2009 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1159209&cid=27178753 [slashdot.org]
APK ON WINDOWS DFS vs. LINUX COPYING FEATURES LIKE IT:2008 -> http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=447752&cid=22361236 [slashdot.org]
WINDOWS #CPU's SUPPORTED (much higher now in Win7/Srv2k8 now, 256):2009 -> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1160287&cid=27191729 [slashdot.org]
DISK DEFRAG STRATEGY OPTIONS:2011 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2435272&cid=37443738 [slashdot.org]
APK PART OF ULTRADEFRAG64 PROOF:2011 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2435272&cid=37443252 [slashdot.org]
DATASTRUCTURES & SQL:2011 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2080454&cid=35794668 [slashdot.org]
BINARY HEAPS:2010 -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1686094&cid=32581292 [slashdot.org]
CACHE COHERENCY:2005 -> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=168793&cid=14070783 [slashdot.org]
DELPHI ROCKS VB/VC++:2007 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=236049&cid=19261269 [slashdot.org]
MEMORY FRAGMENTATION IN FF:2007 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=367219&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=21434061 [slashdot.org]
CODING PROFESSIONALLY:2005 -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=170925&cid=14238424 [slashdot.org]
MULTIPLE MESSAGE QUEUES:2010 -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1618508&cid=31847246 [slashdot.org]
APK ROOTKIT.COM ON WINDOWS VISTA IPSTACK SECURITY:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1339085&cid=29106629 [slashdot.org]
USING CSC & SCIENCE TOGETHER IN ACADEMIA:2010 -> http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1531366&cid=30971224 [slashdot.org]
PROGRAMMING CONCEPTS MORE IMPORTANT THAN SYNTAX:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1314993&cid=28827429 [slashdot.org]
SSD DECADES OF USAGE:2009 -> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1273501&cid=28375697 [slashdot.org]
CODING .NET FROM VB:2006 -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=176229&cid=14641701 [slashdot.org]
LAMP SECURITY:2011 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2243006&cid=36462748 [slashdot.org]
SLASHDOT "Pro-*NIX" SLANT CONTROVERSY = GOOD:2005 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=154725&cid=12974078 [slashdot.org]
WINDOWS vs. IBM vs. LINUX ARCHITECTURE STEALING:2005 -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=160244&cid=13414756 [slashdot.org]
ADBANNERS & VIRUSES:2005 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=169309&cid=14112880 [slashdot.org]
SECURITY BUGS LINUX vs. WINDOWS:2011 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2247480&cid=36485068 [slashdot.org]
NYSE+LINUX STOCK EXCHANGE LIE BY PENGUINS:2010 -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1842764&cid=34046376 [slashdot.org]
APK ON PROCESSEXPLORER & NETSTAT:2009 -> http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1328371&cid=28981169 [slashdot.org]
COMPLETION PORTS + SCHEDULING LINUX vs. WINDOWS:2005 -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=160290&cid=13419053 [slashdot.org]
WINDOWS vs. LINUX SECURITY ISSUES:2009 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1135717&cid=26948399 [slashdot.org]
LINUX IMITATING WINDOWS:2005 -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=170126&cid=14177851 [slashdot.org]
LINUX SERVING DUQU ROOTKIT: 2011 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2551740&cid=38215752 [slashdot.org]
WINDOWS vs. Linux SECURITY VULNS UNPATCHED:2011 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2077414&cid=35776848 [slashdot.org]
WINDOWS vs. Linux vs. Mac SECURITY VULNS UNPATCHED:2010 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1681772&cid=32524188 [slashdot.org]
APK Windows vs. Linux on UNPATCHED SEC. VULNS:2011 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2059420&cid=35656126 [slashdot.org]
PROOF MS HAD LESS BUGS THAN LINUX/MACOS X:2005 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=173564&cid=14442403 [slashdot.org]
PROOF MS HAD LESS BUGS THAN LINUX/MACOS X:2006 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=173016&cid=14398069 [slashdot.org]
APK USING KDE & LINUX:2010 -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1750240&cid=33214838 [slashdot.org]
APK CONGRATS TO LINUX:2005 -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=170296&cid=14192885 [slashdot.org]
APK KUDOS TO LINUX:2005 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=162921&cid=13614370 [slashdot.org]
LINUX WENT DOWN 2x in LESS THAN 1 YEAR @ London Stock Exchange:2011 -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1999478&cid=35231358 [slashdot.org]
LINUX SECURITY vs. JAVASCRIPT:2010 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1820234&cid=33892258 [slashdot.org]
CONGRATS TO LINUS TORVALDS ON MILLENIUM PRIZE: 2012 -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2913441&cid=40308721 [slashdot.org]
KUDOS TO LINUX KERNEL 3.3 - 3.5 & NO BUGS PRESENT: 2012 -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2995701&cid=40727067 [slashdot.org]
GENETICS PLAYING WITH GOD'S ENGINEERING on mice: 2011 -> http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2581286&cid=38423712 [slashdot.org]
1 GOOD THING ABOUT HACKER/CRACKERS:2011 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1982796&cid=35119212 [slashdot.org]
MINIMUM WINDOWS SERVICES:2005 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=157321&cid=13190570 [slashdot.org]
HIDDEN SECURITY BUGS:2005 -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=164039&cid=13698742 [slashdot.org]
APK & FIREFOX BUGFIX TEAM:2005 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=161697&cid=13526010 [slashdot.org]
WHY OPERA ROCKS:2005 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=170983&cid=14242283 [slashdot.org]
OPERA BEST SPEED & SECURITY: 2010 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1881444&cid=34333966 [slashdot.org]
OPERA "SUPERIOR WARRIOR":2009 -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1309763&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=28768721 [slashdot.org]
OPERA=FASTER & MORE SECURE:2005 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=157615&cid=13208800 [slashdot.org]
OPERA "The Superior Warrior" vs. FIREFOX:2007 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=286721&cid=20452183 [slashdot.org]
OPERA:2007 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=233227&threshold=1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=18969947 [slashdot.org]
OPERA BY SITE PREFS:2010 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1881444&cid=34333758 [slashdot.org]
OPERA 64-BIT "FOR INDEPENDENT SMART PEOPLE" ROUND 1 FOR WINDOWS & MAC RELEASED:2011 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2576256&cid=38388178 [slashdot.org]
OPERA HAS AN ADBLOCK ADDON: 2012 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2579684&cid=38412366 [slashdot.org]
APK SANDBOXING IE:2007 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=236547&cid=19310513 [slashdot.org]
APK ON SANDBOXIE:2010 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1875754&cid=34281930 [slashdot.org]
CHROME NEEDS BY SITE PREFS TO SANITYINANARCHY:2011 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2358734&cid=36946676 [slashdot.org]
DO YOUR BEST WORK OUR YOUNG MENS LIVES RIDE ON IT:2010 -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1898806&cid=34472826 [slashdot.org]
STAT I/II SKEWING:2010 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1504756&cid=30711074 [slashdot.org]
SEARCH ENGINES:2005 -> http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=162717&cid=13598832 [slashdot.org]
PORTING CODE:2007 -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=236367&cid=19291677 [slashdot.org]
DARTH CHENEY POLITICALS:2007 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=237091&cid=19362755 [slashdot.org]
WINDOWS EMPLOYS YOU BETTER:2006 -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=174277&cid=14498965 [slashdot.org]
MS PUTS YOU TO WORK:2005 -> http://books.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=169549&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&tid=109&mode=thread&cid=14132540 [slashdot.org]
"666":2008 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=548476&cid=23353722 [slashdot.org]
APK ON HARDCODES & SHELLOPEN ASSOCIATION:2010 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519842&cid=30854906 [slashdot.org]
DR. DEMENTO SHOW:2010 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1678308&cid=32494990 [slashdot.org]
CA DISREPUTABLE #2 of 2:2010 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1884922&cid=34351020 [slashdot.org]
NO PROOF USED BY LOB:2010 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1907190&cid=34529734 [slashdot.org]
ON KIDS CODING & ARMCHAIR QB's:2011 -> http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2040490&cid=35508400 [slashdot.org]
FPGA & TERMINATORS:2011 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2341586&cid=36842168 [slashdot.org]
APK ON CHESS:2010 -> http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1877160&cid=34293988 [slashdot.org]
RON PAUL & WIKILEAKS:2010 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1907000&cid=34528958 [slashdot.org] /. "CATERING TO CRONIES":2010 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1664046&cid=32336794 [slashdot.org]
BEING MORE "ALL AROUND" THAN 1 DIMENSIONAL IN IT/IS/MIS:2005 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=166174&cid=13863159 [slashdot.org]
GET RID OF S. BALLMER @ MS:2008 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=543962&cid=23310698 [slashdot.org]
COMBO OF CODER/NETWORKER = MOST DANGEROUS HACKER/CRACKER: 2011 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2590324&cid=38490476 [slashdot.org]
FACEBOOK ENHANCES mySQL: 2012 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2643681&cid=38857629 [slashdot.org]
APPSTORE/WALLED-GARDEN DL OF APPS WON'T HELP vs. TODAY'S INFECTION VECTORS: 2012 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2655681&cid=38943319 [slashdot.org]
REGISTRY ACCESS WINDOWS 32-BIT vs. 64-BIT in code: 2012 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2680271&cid=39093835 [slashdot.org]
2nd REGISTRY ACCESS WINDOWS 32-BIT vs. 64-BIT in code: 2012 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2680271&cid=39093873 [slashdot.org]
CHINESE "CYBER-WAR" THREAT: 2012 -> http://politics.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2718289&cid=39312311 [slashdot.org]
ON DR. MARK RUSSINOVICH MS DESKTOPS APP & MORE: 2012 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2741569&cid=39445275 [slashdot.org]
DEFENDING STEVE GIBSON OF SPINRITE + "SHIELDS UP" vs. DEFAMATION: 2012 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2747957&cid=39479257 [slashdot.org]
OS/2 & What I thought was cool about it & when I used it: 2012 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2761033&cid=39550525 [slashdot.org]
ActiveX Usage in Korea still "huge": 2012 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2767885&cid=39584683 [slashdot.org]
On "insta-downmods" & /. "fine moderation" (b.s.!): 2012 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2772023&cid=39606941 [slashdot.org]
TAX THE TAR OUT OF OUTSOURCERS/OFFSHORERS & PENALIZE THEM ALSO #2 of 2 + ECONOMIC CLASS 1984-1985: 2012 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2795637&cid=39729177 [slashdot.org]
GATTACA #1 of 2: 2012 -> http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2792033&cid=39722291 [slashdot.org]
GATTACA #2 of 2: 2012 -> http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2792033&cid=39711991 [slashdot.org]
ROMAN MARONI (lol) = arth1 "murder of the English Language": 2012 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2773803&cid=39617941 [slashdot.org]
FLASHY FLASH DRIVES: 2005 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=154997&cid=12998477 [slashdot.org]
ROOTKIT CREATORS "GO PRO": 2005 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=165958&cid=13843462 [slashdot.org]
MS LESS SECURITY ISSUES THAN *NIX in 2005: 2006 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=173564&cid=14441639 [slashdot.org]
OPERA ROCKS & WHY: 2007 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=233227&cid=18969947 [slashdot.org]
McAfee, Symantec, ClamAV, COMODO, ArcaBit/ArcaVir, & Dr. Web "False Positive" of my "APK Hosts File Engine 5.0++": 2012 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2872677&cid=40107921 [slashdot.org]
Linux "Fine Security" (lol, NOT!) 2011-2012: 2012 -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2875333&cid=40119001 [slashdot.org]
SAY NO TO MS & SAY NO TO A JOB: 2005 -> http://books.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=169549&cid=14132540 [slashdot.org]
"START ME UP" REGARDING WINDOWS 8, METRO, & RIBBONS: 2012 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2955431&cid=40538813 [slashdot.org]
GHOSTERY TRUTHS #1: 2012 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2931443&cid=40413453 [slashdot.org]
GHOSTERY TRUTHS #2: 2012 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2931443&cid=40413493 [slashdot.org]
"DEAR MR. GATES": 2012 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2955431&cid=40536263 [slashdot.org]
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation tax shield: 2012 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2957987&cid=40549931 [slashdot.org]
Colorblindness and camouflage: 2012 -> http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3010409&cid=40798555 [slashdot.org]
HBGary and "Freedom of Speech" plus REAL NAMES on forums: 2012 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3012595&cid=40811497 [slashdot.org]
Large Projects (millions of lines) vs. TINY ones (200k lines) & rewrite: 2012 -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3026933&cid=40885035 [slashdot.org]
Native Code/"single stand-alone" non-interpreted code executables are "where it's at": 2012 -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3041081&cid=40956381 [slashdot.org]
Windows in the "Fortune 100/500" high TPM environs & 99.999% "Fabled '5-9's'" uptime: 2012 -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3110069&cid=41305947 [slashdot.org]
Brennz bitching about Mikko Hyponnen Security Expert: 2012 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3129943&cid=41398979 [slashdot.org]
AntiVirus FALSE POSITIVES (even on themselves) 3-10 examples: 2012 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3132237&cid=41402041 [slashdot.org]
Speaking to Naval Information Warfare Officer on China threat: 2012 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3156485&cid=41517129 [slashdot.org]
FTC Busts Phone Support Scammers: 2012 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3161653&cid=41543619 [slashdot.org]
Polish & Russian = Romulans & Vulcans: 2012 -> http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3156271&cid=41517631 [slashdot.org]
Good for Mr. T. (Linux kernel 2.7): 2012 -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3164013&cid=41553831 [slashdot.org]
Building homes, RIGHT: 2012 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3227591&cid=41863891 [slashdot.org]
CA's breached = 5/6 Linux based: 2012 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3222433&cid=41835589 [slashdot.org]
I post as AC and get modded up when all my other posts were downmodded: 2012 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3186429&cid=41660255 [slashdot.org]
Windows 7 will NOT GET "SERVICE PACK #2": 2012 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3207047&cid=41753975 [slashdot.org]
Opera can do "site specific" preferences vs. online threats (Jeremiah Grossman's only NOW hitting on my idea there): 2012 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3237707&cid=41913801 [slashdot.org]
Linux security blunders 2011-2012: 2012 -> http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3281695&cid=42128897 [slashdot.org]
HIPAA: 2012 -> http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3290685&cid=42171403 [slashdot.org]
Adbanners having malicious code in them: 2012 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3299759&cid=42215249 [slashdot.org]
Elevator Algorithm for harddisk drives #1 of 2 (1st's in +3): 2012 -> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3287917&cid=42156255 [slashdot.org]
Microsoft's MISTAKE in Windows 8 "metro-ized" ready for 3-5 yr. old interface on PC desktops (2 of 2, other is +2): 2012 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3330901&cid=42354749 [slashdot.org]
How to install NVidia DRIVER ONLY (not control panelware stuff too): 2012 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3344029&cid=42407223 [slashdot.org]
DUSTING 'CruTcHy' the NOOB who can't prove his words he's a professional coder & is a "pot calling a kettle black": 2012 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3272015&cid=42125693 [slashdot.org]
How programming changes you into a "nerd" but ANYONE could learn it (& value others too): 2012 -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3368605&cid=42530957 [slashdot.org]
THE APOPHIS ASTEROID (what to do to destroy it (how & when)): 2012 -> http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3371057&cid=42541663 [slashdot.org]
CODING BIND/BOUND VARIABLES & USING SQL STORED PROCEDURES on DB engine servers, vs. DirectExecute ExecSQL stuff in front ends: 2012 -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3368605&cid=42530471 [slashdot.org]
Using GroupPolicy @ AD Level (via gpedit.msc) or SECPOL.MSC to set NTLMv2 vs. NTLMv1 security vs. penetration: 2012 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3368135&cid=42527187 [slashdot.org]
DOING AN "IRON CROSS" vs. "Gorilla Arm" on touchscreen not making it on PC desktops: 2012 -> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3361017&cid=42495827 [slashdot.org]
LinkSys/CISCO router featureset (most of it, lacking VPN & Port Forwarding/Triggering onlY): 2012 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3406867&cid=42689537 [slashdot.org]

---

* THE HOSTS FILE GROUP 41++ THUSFAR (from +5 -> +1 RATINGS, usually "informative" or "interesting" etc./et al):

APPLYING HOSTS TO DIFF. PLATFORM W/ TCP-IP STACK BASED ON BSD: 2008 -> http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1944892&cid=34831038 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1490078&cid=30555632 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1461288&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=30272074 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1255487&cid=28197285 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1206409&cid=27661983 [slashdot.org]
0.0.0.0 in HOSTS:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1197039&cid=27556999 [slashdot.org]
0.0.0.0 IN HOSTS:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1143349&cid=27012231 [slashdot.org]
0.0.0.0 in HOSTS:2009 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1198841&cid=27580299 [slashdot.org]
0.0.0.0 in HOSTS:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1139705&cid=26977225 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1319261&cid=28872833 [slashdot.org] (still says INSIGHTFUL)
APK 20++ POINTS ON HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1913212&cid=34576182 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1869638&cid=34237268 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1907266&cid=34529608 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1725068&cid=32960808 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1743902&cid=33147274 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1862260&cid=34186256 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP:2010 (w/ facebook known bad sites blocked) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1924892&cid=34670128 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS and BGP +5 RATED (BEING HONEST):2010 http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1901826&cid=34490450 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS FILE MOD UP FOR ANDROID MALWARE:2010 -> http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1930156&cid=34713952 [slashdot.org]
BANNER ADS & BANDWIDTH:2011 -> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2139088&cid=36077722 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP ZEUSTRACKER:2011 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2059420&cid=35654066 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP vs AT&T BANDWIDTH CAP:2011 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2116504&cid=35985584 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP CAN DO SAME AS THE "CloudFlare" Server-Side service:2011 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2220314&cid=36372850 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS & PROTECT IP ACT:2011 http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2368832&cid=37021700 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP:2011 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2457766&cid=37592458 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP & OPERA HAUTE SECURE:2011 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2457274&cid=37589596 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP vs. botnet: 2012 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2603836&cid=38586216 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP vs. SOPA act: 2012 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2611414&cid=38639460 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP vs. FaceBook b.s.: 2012 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2614186&cid=38658078 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP "how to secure smartphones": 2012 -> http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2644205&cid=38860239 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP "Free Apps Eat your Battery via ad displays": 2012 -> http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2734503&cid=39408607 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS MOD UP "How I only hardcode in 50 of my fav. sites": 2012 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2857487&cid=40034765 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS vs. TRACKING ONLINE BY ADVERTISERS & BETTER THAN GHOSTERY: 2012 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2926641&cid=40383743 [slashdot.org]
HOSTS FOR ANDROID SMARTPHONES: 2012 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2940173&cid=40455449 [slashdot.org]
APK Hosts File Engine 5.0++ 32/64-bit: 2012 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3397505&cid=42651965 [slashdot.org]
APK Hosts File Engine 5.0++ 32/64-bit: 2012 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3137925&cid=41429093 [slashdot.org]

---

* THE APK SECURITY GUIDE GROUP 18++ THUSFAR (from +5 -> +1 RATINGS, usually "informative" or "interesting" etc./et al):

APK SECURITY GUIDE (old one):2005 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=154868&cid=12988150 [slashdot.org]
APK SECURITY GUIDE (old one):2005 -> http://books.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=168931&cid=14083927 [slashdot.org]
APK SECURE SETUP FOR IP STACK:2005 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=170545&cid=14211084 [slashdot.org]
APK SECURITY GUIDE (old one):2005 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=170545&cid=14210206 [slashdot.org]
APK SECURITY TEST CHALLENGE LINUX vs. WINDOWS:2007 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=267599&threshold=1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=20203061 [slashdot.org]
APK SECURITY GUIDE:2008 -> http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=970939&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&no_d2=1&cid=25092677 [slashdot.org]
APK SECURITY GUIDE:2008 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1027095&cid=25747655 [slashdot.org]
APK SECURITY GUIDE:2008 -> http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=970939&cid=25093275 [slashdot.org]
APK SECURITY GUIDE: 2008 -> http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=970939&no_d2=1&cid=25092677 [slashdot.org]
APK SECURITY GUIDE:2008 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=416702&cid=22026982 [slashdot.org]
APK SECURITY GUIDE:2009 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1361585&cid=29360367 [slashdot.org]
APK SECURITY GUIDE:2009 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1218837&cid=27787281 [slashdot.org]
APK SECURITY GUIDE:2009 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1135717&cid=26941781 [slashdot.org]
APK SECURITY GUIDE:2010 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1885890&cid=34358316 [slashdot.org]
APK SECURITY GUIDE:2010 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1638428&cid=32070500 [slashdot.org]
APK SYSTEM TUNING:2010 -> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1497268&cid=30649722 [slashdot.org]
APK SYSTEM TUNING:2010 -> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1497268&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=30649722 [slashdot.org]
MICROSOFT SECURITY:2010 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1546446&cid=31106612 [slashdot.org]

---

* "Eat your words", flavored with "the bitter taste of SELF-DEFEAT" & YOUR FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH!

You are outnumbered 242++:1 as the ratio here... lol!

APK

P.S.=>

"Go edit your GHOSTS file, you bandwidth-stealing lowlife." - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 29, @02:10PM (#42729781)

LOL, when advertisers & websites STEAL MY BANDWIDTH I pay for out-of-pocket each month to my ISP? Around 40% of the mass of pages today roughly iirc??

NO thank-you! Only a fool would do that...

(AdBlock's the same in concept, but NOT AS GOOD (see my last post you replied to on that note)).

As far as "editing" my custom hosts file? I don't HAVE to, it populates cleanly for me, via my OWN work:

---

APK Hosts File Engine 5.0++ 32/64-bit:

http://www.start64.com/index.php?option=com_content&id=5851:apk-hosts-file-engine-64bit-version&Itemid=74 [start64.com]

---

Since, unlike MOST forums "Ne'er-do-Wells", I have the ability to program things, myself...

... apk

Re:Opera's had this for years (1)

ledow (319597) | about a year ago | (#42729795)

Seconded. This is the one of the best things about Opera - I don't get bogged down in junk or risk my computer on junky adverts loading because they "need" Flash.

I just click the play button that takes place of the Flash / Java / whatever plugin image if and when I want to view it and it loads and plays JUST THAT ONE.

Why would anybody use anything else? Hell, I can kill my modern laptop just scrolling too much down a popular image site (which just auto-loads more images as you go) and get to the point where the browser CRAWLS along by doing nothing more than looking at some images. God knows what it would be like for someone with a browser that loads every Flash video, plugin, etc. along the way.

Good man/Agreed, 110%: Have you tried 12.13 RC? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42730019)

It seriously ROCKS (especially since they got rid of the 12.12 memory leak & lag on scrolling + backspacing (was used to kill a security bug though, that I *believe* may still affect OTHER browsers too - they finally got that right & faster/smooth too!)).

http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/ [opera.com]

* Trust me, you'll love it too.... I do!

(Agreed, 110% with your sentiments too - Opera is, as I have called it here before? "The SUPERIOR WARRIOR" in the way of webbrowsers!)

APK

P.S.=> That RC though - Unbelievable quality, speed, security & more (from a RC too, surprising)...

... apk

Turn it on now: about:config in the address bar... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729521)

Type about:config in the Firefox address bar, search for plugins.click_to_play and double-click the entry to toggle it to true.

This should prevent all plugins from loading until clicked on.

(Read about Finfisher and Flashback trojan at Wikipedia, great shame on you Apple!)

Re:Turn it on now: about:config in the address bar (1)

snemarch (1086057) | about a year ago | (#42730277)

I had that turned on - but since click2play in firefox reqires (required?) the element to be visible, a few sites broke without any warning. For instance, the Garmin Communicator plugin I use to upload training sessions from my GPS running watch doesn't have any visible UI widgets.

What's so special about Flash? (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about a year ago | (#42729847)

If Click-to-play was enabled on all browsers for all plugins there would be less tendency to use useless plugins to make a website pretty.

It's not like Flash is security-bug-free. You could also use a flash plugin to store a flash based cookie if the browsers privacy settings don't accept your traditional tracking cookie...

https://extensions.gnome.org/ won't work (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729897)

https://extensions.gnome.org/ is incompatible with Click-To-Play. It took me quite some time to figure that out. The error message was incredibly vague. Can we make an exception so that other Gnome / Firefox users won't have the same problem?

See https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=686038.

Good for Personal use, terrible for business/group (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42729975)

This isn't a really good idea for a company running multiple workstations... it interferes with normal everyday usage (and already has been), which is resulting in having to consider dropping Firefox from our approved program list. Alas.

Whitelisting (1)

phorm (591458) | about a year ago | (#42730155)

Will this allow me to whitelist a particular domain/site?
It sounds like a great feature (one I already have with existing addons), but only if you can whitelist domains that you trust and not otherwise have to click-to-allow every time.

With that in mind, a blacklist for evil domains (like doubleclick) would be nice too. Especially if one could import it from a master file.

Firefox sucks since 4 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42730197)

And this is why I switched to SeaMonkey :-)

about:config plugins.click_to_play true (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42730289)

n/t

Just use Noscript (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42730545)

I don't see the difference in this and using noscript. Oh wait there is one good difference, noscript will also stop the Adobe flash player. So in this case noscript is much, much better. I hate the annoying play music, roam around my screen ads.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...