• Damage@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    If a tool is demonstrably indispensable to disable some browsers’ functionality, is it wise for browsers to have that functionality?

    • HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 minutes ago

      I’m guessing there’s just so much money (and power) in that kind of thing that it’s simply here to stay.

    • helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      19 hours ago

      There may be genuine use cases to run a script, or whatever the attacker used. The problem is the browsers will auto-run stuff, the user isn’t aware and there’s no way to stop it. All ublock (and others) do is provide the missing security layer called “don’t auto run shit from the web”.

    • JPAKx4@piefed.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      I like it being extensible instead, as some adblocks might be opinionated or unresponsive. It’s easier to swap adblocks then browsers.