Major sites including New York Times and BBC hit by 'ransomware' malvertising

Re:Major sites including New York Times and BBC hit by 'rans... by makecheck on Wednesday March 16, 2016 @09:04AM (#11296922)

I wonder how much JavaScript is only being used to produce a small number of common effects. In other words, how necessary is it really for sites to execute arbitrary code?

Maybe we have reached the point where browsers should implement the top 10-20 effects in standard ways (that of course the user can choose to override). That would make it feasible for many web sites to avoid JavaScript entirely and still produce the effects they want, and let us move away from this “execute arbitrary remote code by default” aspect of web pages.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Major sites including New York Times and BBC hit by 'rans... by oneeyedpigeon on Wednesday March 16, 2016 @09:10AM (#11296954)

HTML5 has been going in exactly this direction re: form inputs (@autofocus, @required) but, yes, I agree that it would be nice to extend that to, for example, some of the core ui interactions present in frameworks such as bootstrap.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Major sites including New York Times and BBC hit by 'rans... by Raphmedia on Wednesday March 16, 2016 @01:42PM (#11299199)

We can already do a bunch of effects that used to be done with JS using CSS alone (transition, animations, etc.).

Most of the JS that we do on websites those days is really helpful for the end user and are the result of the recommendation of UX specialists. (form management, navigational help, async loading of content, preloading content, front-end browser geolocalisation, better responsive for mobile, etc.)

[ Parent | on HN ]