<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://www.techrepublic.com/search" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Discussion on An interview with Giorgio Maone, creator of NoScript ]]></title>
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824]]></link>
    <atom:link rel="hub" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" />
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824/rss" />

    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>2013-05-19T18:37:27-07:00</lastBuildDate>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[&quot;NoScript is about the only reason that I've continued to run Firefox.&quot;]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3684768]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Ditto, ditto, ad infinitum.  I am impressed with Chrome &amp; Dragon, and I seldom use them because I cannot install NoScript on them.I was under the impression that I was a rare kook for using NS, and I'm happy to see that I'm not so rare, especially among knowledgeable people.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3684768]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jeslurkin]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:38:09 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Edge is good.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3680510]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3680510]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[boxfiddler]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2012 21:57:04 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Don't shoot, please, Maj37]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3680227]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[But you can blame me. I wrote it. And I appreciate your comment. I did go back and forth about that, but the edgier side of me won.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3680227]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2012 06:28:54 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Takeaway Not True]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3680243]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Actually Michael your takeaway is not true and is one of my pet peeves about advertising it bothers me when people speak in absolutes. I for one and I am sure I am not alone have never heard of NoScript, but then I use FireFox very little.  On the other hand thanks for the loaded questions and those that solicited answers that assume your takeaway is in fact wrong, also thanks for the link.  Is this one of those times when we should shoot the editor rather than the writer, who writes your takeaways?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3680243]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[maj37]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2012 06:23:43 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I forgot to mention...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3680226]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[&quot;NoScript is about the only reason that I've continued to run Firefox.&quot;Pretty much same here. I have to say FF is improving in the areas that would have me use something else, read &quot;something faster.&quot; But for years NoScript has been the reason I've pushed firefox everywhere and used it myself.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3680226]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[pgit]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2012 06:20:27 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[NoScript is always my first addition to a fresh browser.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3680090]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I am also deeply grateful that NoScript is one of the few extensions which has always worked in SeaMonkey.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3680090]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[seanferd]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 16:46:32 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[NoScript]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3680033]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[is about the only reason that I've continued to run Firefox.  Today, I've read that the Firefox 13 &quot;tab page&quot; feature captures images of every page that Firefox fetches (unless &quot;Private Browsing&quot; is enabled), which introduces a security risk because that includes online banking websites, webmail pages, and other &quot;sensitive&quot; websites.  It seems to me that every Firefox new release makes the browser and its interface worse instead of better, and now leaves one to wonder whether it is also less secure.These problems are, of course, the consequence of the &quot;rapid development cycle&quot; where bad ideas are introduced without proper consideration and the implementation of even the good ideas are flawed.  Just what the inspiration has been for this rollercoaster folly ride is a mystery to me.That said, thank-you Giorgio Maone for all of the work you have done to increase Firefox security!!  I hope that you can eventually develop a comparable extension for Chrome, too.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3680033]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Ocie3]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 14:17:56 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[also use &quot;temporarily allow ...site...&quot;]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3680027]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[when I setup NS for people I tell them to use &quot;temporarily allow ...site...&quot; instead of using (always) &quot;Allow ...site...&quot;and, yes it is a good idea to check the whitelist occasionallyI do that whenever a new NS version update is installedI am glad that NS is still supported on Firefox 3.6.xas some of the important features were removed from later versions of Firefoxeg.the warning messages for:I am about to view a page that uses low-grade encryption.I leave an encrypted page for one that isn't encryptedI submit information that's not encrypted.I am about to view an encrypted page that contains some unencrypted information.I set up v.13 on a system for a friend and couldn't find these anywhere in the settingsneedless to say I wasn't all that impressed with that]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3680027]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Who Am I Really]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 14:16:29 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I set up a few for people like my parents.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3680000]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[For Internet Banking and Financial sites they are set up to only use the desktop link, using FF and NoScript, SSL Everywhere, Perspectives.  Little bit of training that if the HTTPS: is not the right color something is wrong. That way even if they allow globally its less likely to get hijacked and when it does gets detected easier.My current bane is, strangely, lyrics and music download sites.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3680000]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[bboyd@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 12:01:01 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Thanks, Henri]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679992]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I can't speak for Giorgio. But in our correspondence, I sensed that he was acutely aware of NoScript being hands-on. I forgot to ask if he was working.....]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679992]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 11:25:07 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[You are welcome, HippieKarl]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679946]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Those are two excellent choices.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679946]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 11:23:11 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[You are welcome, Solenoid]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679972]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Interviews are my favorite type of article. Getting to know the person is priceless.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679972]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 11:17:09 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Thanks, Tony]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679971]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Giorgio is dedicated to keeping NoScript as relevant and useful as possible. That was easy to see in our correspondence.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679971]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 11:15:38 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Thanks, J]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679982]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[It was an honor to work with Giorgio.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679982]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 11:13:54 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Wouldn't be without NoScript on FF !]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679935]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[But unfortunately, I have always felt that  I have to abstain from recommending it when I install FF on the computers of my retirees, as I imagined that requiring them to decide whether or not to permit any or all of several script sources when launching a webpage would simply be too much for them. After reading the interview, however, I'm wondering if installing NoScript and then clicking ??Allow scripts globally?? might not be an alternative, thus providing them with a modicum of security from XXS, Clickjacking, etc. But I hesitate, as in the event a user who happens to click on the NoScript button sees the warning which accompanies this setting, I'm the one who is going to be called upon to explain why I allowed so dangerous a setting ! What goes 'round comes 'round....In any event, thanks for an instructive interview, Michael - and mille grazie to Giorgio for his great work !...Henri]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679935]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[mhenriday]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 10:34:31 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA['Possibly'???]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679969]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Mr. Maone suggested that he wrestles with being paranoid about &quot;... corporations *possibly* colluding with governments to turn the Internet into the ultimate wiretapping and control device.&quot; Does he not know Eric Schmidt's initial financing came from the NSA/CIA 'black budget'?!, or see where the business models of Google and the 'Security State' overlap?!  Gee, if corporations WERE &quot;colluding with governments to turn the Internet into the ultimate wiretapping and control device&quot;, what do you think it would look like? Something so blatant and obvious that everyone would react to their suspicions, or rather something that exudes a bit of end-user value or reward while collecting and aggregating your thoughts, dreams, and aspirations? I fear the frogs are being boiled here very slowly(!), and with meticulous precision....Now that the GoogleEarth address-and-IP logger vans have come and gone, they're still telling Facebook things they wouldn't even tell their mom.EORThanks for posting this interview; NoScript and Ghostery are my friends, and Mr. Maone is one of my internet heroes.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679969]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[hippiekarl]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 10:28:31 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Wow!]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679942]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I was impressed with your interview with Andrew Young (re: ScriptNo for Chrome), but you've clearly topped yourself here. Thank you again Michael.I agree strongly with other posts that NoScript makes web surfing tolerable and fearless. It is invaluable, indispensable, and nothing even comes close in comparison.NoScript does seem to be catching on, at least anecdotally. The last time I went looking for addons within Firefox, it was listed in the top 3 popular addons (or maybe it was just related to the search I was after).]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679942]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Solenoid]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 10:23:07 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Good article Michael]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679963]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[And my Thanks to Mr Maone. Been using Noscript since the early days and as yet no one has come up with an even vaguely sensible reason to stop.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679963]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Tony Hopkinson]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 09:57:03 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[A very extraordinary article...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679941]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[It isn't often we in the technical field get to see the human side of things! Needless to say No Script is literally a requirement when I use Fire Fox and I try to get my clients to use it exclusively, since they are not very good at updating their anti-malware very often.I have to admit, that I'm using Dragon(Chrome) now, because it opens so rapidly and downloads pages at lightning speeds. Avast has a &quot;script shield&quot; feature that seems to do a pretty good job of blocking any bad actors on all the web sites I go to. I must say it has become more boring at my honeypot lab, now that these kind of features are becoming prevalent. I'm excited to hear the news on his Chrome development plans!I would love to go back to Fire Fox eventually, and I still use it often; especially since it also supports Trusteer's Rapport. Mozilla has done a better job, lately, of updating without breaking plugins and other security features such as this. I imagine Mr. Maone goes fairly crazy keeping up with the mad update cycle browsers have now.On older XP machines, I've had to go back to Mozilla and IE8, because Chrome derivatives don't seem to work well on that platform anymore. The breakneck speed of browser modernization, has resulted in very impressive results, as far as I can tell. If I were to ask a question of Giorgio, it would be,&quot;how has the transition to the HTML-5 way of doing things effected your development cycle?&quot;Thanks Michael for another fine article, and especially thanks to Mr. Maone!!!]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679941]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[JCitizen]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 09:31:13 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Well said, Pgit]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679910]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I'm thinking there are many that agree with you.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-392824-3679910]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 08:14:38 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

