There's another one I can't find, but it writes out things like "user moved mouse to x,y. User has been idle for 10 seconds, page lost focus, page gained focus" .. kinda creepy how much is available to the Javascript engine.
And thanks for the new novelty website bookmark :D
Clickable link
>No plugins detected.
Interesting. I have 6 installed on Firefox.
I mean, it's not like every desktop application you've ever used in your life couldn't do the same or more?
I think that it would be a better comparison between a pdf file and the web: pdfs files can't do the same or more.
And I would argue it is harder for the average user to view the JavaScript inside PDFs: on the web just right click and choose Inspect Element right in the browser; for a PDF you'll have to use specialized tools to decode the myriad encoding schemes inside a PDF. The average JavaScript developer doesn't know how to extract JavaScript from a PDF.
My point still stands: I do not expect a pdf document to be able to do anything like the djsumdog's link and neither do most people. If a pdf document was able to do anything like that I would consider that viewer as broken.
> The average JavaScript developer doesn't know how to extract JavaScript from a PDF.
They could learn with a few google searches.
Is the "you" in this scenario Richard Stallman?
The easy check for this would be to see whether opening the devtools in detached mode via the menus makes it notice.
Note that this would actually be quite a pain to hide from the page, just because it's something the page needs to know to display some stuff and make rendering calculations. If it was hidden from the page, we'd suddenly be complaining about debugging floating footers which are hiding under the devtools.
document.addEventListener('keydown', ({ keyCode }) => console.log(keyCode))
91
16
73
You can see each key.
The person who figured this out probably opened them via menu and had dev tools in another window, so the evil folks couldn't detect the resize.
Still better than Google Creep. Change to a search engine that protects privacy too.
Flash? Now you have heavily javascripted "website".
Table layout? Now you have bootstrap and friends.
Progressive enhancement? Fuck that, we don't have time.
And 5 years from now people will rediscover those and accessibility. Then 5 years later another kind of hell will have appeared to replace this.
The only big change for the current wave is that everything is obfuscated so it's harder for a newcomer to learn by checking how people coded things.
By far the most annoying 'feature' (more of a consequence of the internet) is the way that you can't whitelist HTTPS sub-domains. (Makes AWS Console a pain.)
It took me a while of using DDG before I realized how much I had equated "good" with "looks like Google".
What finally hit me, hard, was that I switched the DDG theme to a color scheme designed to look like Google search results, and all of a sudden the results "felt better". Markedly better.
So, I started regularly comparing results, every time I found something that I felt I didn't get the results I expected for. I would search, and then search again with !g. And almost every time I ran into something that I didn't like the DDG results for, the Google results weren't actually any better. (The rare times they were, I reported that, and often it got fixed.)
This does not work for replacing "!spi" (image search on Startpage) though. Using "!si" does a search on a non-existent subdomain sportsillustrated.cnn.com.
just tried !spi and it works as image search :D
That’s the very reason I switched to ddg, but it bites me back everytime I try to catch up on stuff everybody already knows for days, and need to fallback to !g.
The DDG bang system is one of its best features in my mind. https://duckduckgo.com/bang
Might be time for another go?
I probably do less searching than I used to, but the bang system really helps me search other sites much more effectively. The more common bangs I use are !w for wikipedia, !so for stackoverflow, !imdb, !gh, !tpb, !bm for bing maps, !bi bing images.
For local businesses and really rare topics Google is better.
On the homepage, https://www.startpage.com/, at the bottom it lists the security part a bit more.
Other than the relevance and quality of search results, there are differences in features across these sites, like date range search, for example. Image search also seems to have more flexibility on Google. I haven't checked recently if reverse image search even exists on DDG or Startpage.
> The purpose of Instart Logic technology is to disguise 3rd-party requests as 1st-party requests, thus bypassing content blockers, and even the ability of browsers to block 3rd-party cookies (because they are stored as 1st-party cookies):
https://github.com/gorhill/uBO-Extra/wiki/Sites-on-which-uBO...
Which part? The making 3rd party cookies into 1st party cookies is likely just a caching proxy. They mention the speed benefits here, and not the cloaking benefit, but.. https://www.instartlogic.com/solutions/appspeed/runtime-opti...
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7798748/find-out-whether...
From the linked discussion: "they may start “infecting” Firefox eventually, but that is not happening now"
So it sound like the developers of Instant Logic are simply choosing to target the most popular browser at the moment.
"Web publishers make simple DNS changes to flow the network domains that carry their HTML through the Instart Logic system. This allows our system to inject a small piece of JavaScript that can detect the presence of ad blockers. When an ad blocker is detected, the JavaScript-based virtualization layer Nanovisor, together with our intelligent cloud-based, machine learning platform, encrypts and delivers all the elements of the page using the customer’s existing delivery services.
As a result, each resource on the page, and any signals and actions such as measurement beacons or user clicks, will have its URL encrypted and obscured. This renders ad blockers ineffective, as they can no longer search for patterns which would indicate a resource is related to advertising.
The result is simply the experience that the web publisher intended on delivering to the end user with no changes to the ad delivery or measurement systems; end users have no need to be aware the technology is even being used."
Chromium-based browsers are being “infested” by Instart Logic tech
which works around blockers and worst, around browser privacy
settings (they may start “infecting” Firefox eventually, but that
is not happening now).
Hadn't heard about this, but this is why I still keep long blacklist in my /etc/hosts file even though I use uBlock Origin also.
Out of habit I get mine from http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm. Not sure it's the best one, but I started using it years ago when I was still using Windows and have just stuck with it.
https://github.com/brave/browser-laptop/issues/9082#issuecom...
Another variant: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7798748/find-out-whether...
"Chromium-based browsers are being “infested” by Instart Logic tech which works around blockers and worst, around browser privacy settings (they may start “infecting” Firefox eventually, but that is not happening now)."
From his linked post:
"Instart Logic will detect when the developer console opens, and cleanup everything then to hide what it does"
Is this implemented via a CDN-delivered script? Why would Chromium-based browsers be more susceptible?