Firefox, Noscript, jerky video playback - Solution

Smooth operator. Behold, a tutorial showing how to resolve the jerky video playback effect on streaming websites when using Firefox with the Noscript extension, even with trusted domains and with all of the Web elements temporarily allowed. Enjoy.

https://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/firefox-noscript-webgl.html


Cheers,
Mrk

 

I have a better solution, stop using NoScript.

 

Ah, the School of Radical Thought 101.
Mrk

 

Definitely the best solution.

 

Why I say this, is because NS is quite a silly way to protect the system IMO, since it breaks 90% of the web. If you're worried about exploits and malvertising, then use anti-exploit combined with uBlock for example, it will save you a lot of time.

 

It does not break 90% of the Web, I'd rather say 90% of the Web is coded wrongly, but hey.
Mrk

 

I'm with Rasheed on this one. I stopped using NS ages ago. Long live uBO! I actually felt liberated lol. Plus, the Web finally worked properly (more or less).

 

I don't think this is the case, the web simply needs JS in order to function. Blocking all or most ''first party'' scripts in order to protect yourself from browser exploits is just plain silly, let's face it. There are better, way less intrusive ways to protect the system.

 

Have to agree. I switched from NoScript to uBO and never looked back. Think though Tor browser still
uses NoScript pre-installed or has that changed?

 

Very little of the Web needs JS. Uses it yes, needs it no. For instance, Gmail still has the old non-JS interface that actually works better and faster than the fancy one. Wilders works without JS. Most of the stuff you read does not need JS. Only sites where you interact "heavily" needs it, and even then, it's a stretch. If you think about it in detail, what is the actual real NEED for JS proper?

It is the simple example of: they did it because they could, but they never stopped to ask whether they should.

Mrk

 

I agree. However, this doesn't mean to me using Noscript in that way. Controlling javascript is much easier and straightforward with uBlock Origin in combination with Dynamic Filtering in hard or medium mode. The only reason why I have still installed Noscript is its XSS filtering (although I rarely see any warnings, perhaps because 3rd-party scripts are blocked by uBO's medium mode?) and its protection against identity leaks - everything else is disabled.

 

IDK about Tor. I may give it a spin one day.

 

The reason why the Tor browser has Noscript installed is to keep its fingerprint identical.

 

Please explain. NoScript in Tor browser is configurable, so IMO this can change the fingerprint. View https://support.torproject.org/tbb/tbb-34/

 

Yes, that's true. However, uBO is much more configurable by enabling/adding filter lists and so on, so I guess it would make a Tor user more identifiable. But I remember that there was once a discussion about replacing Noscript with uBO, I'm too lazy to search for it

 

I thought that it would be more likely that the compilers of Tor trust Giorgio more than Raymond.

 

Yes I agree, but that's not what I meant. What I'm saying is that it's simply a fact that most websites rely heavily on JS, so disabling first party scripts for more security is not a good idea. Am I happy about websites being bloated with JS scripts, no of course not.

I absolutely hate dynamic ''on the fly'' loading, a good example is imdb.com, it used to be a fast, snappy website, then some idiot decided to change things, and now it's way too slow, you have to wait a couple of seconds for certain parts of the website to load, what a joke. Of course blocking first party scripts isn't an option, because then it won't work.

 

I think we both misunderstood each other. You may recall I had an article - Noscript for ordinary people, essentially ALLOW scripts, but block a lot of other stuff, like lan, unrestricted css, ping, frames, remote fonts. That plus UBO, you have a "functioning JS" Internet, minus a great deal of useless, useless, pointless stuff.
Mrk

 

I would agree with that entirely. Unfortunately given that I stopped using NoScript because it is just too much work.

 

to say it clear: uBo in its basic settings is very powerfull. and i dropped NS a decade ago because of convenience and behavior. uBlock (origin or not) had more features that script blocking and thus i dropped ABP and NS. and no change awaiting.

i dont have doubt NS is working properly, but at least its only a script stopper, no ad blocker.
yes, i have set my opinion, and it last a long time for now.

and yes, i was surprised that NS has such issues.

for the proposoal about 90 per sent, sorry, thats not true. you cant visit pages like msi, asus, mailer services and a lot more with filtered javascript. do you know AJAX? wilders -> xenforo, and other forum software is using ajax, even it is not named like this. this is a really nativ thought, sorry.

 

We're going OT, but it's remarkable that Mullvad browser (FF based) includes NS and uBO.

 

Used it years ago on Windows and Linux. NoScript was pre-installed.

 

When your using the Tor browser in Tails (portable OS based on Debian GNU/Linux)
it includes NoScript AND uBlock Origin.

 

Thanks

But didn't find the entry in about:config and then looked for it and found this

"No extensions use prefs.js any longer"

https://forums.informaction.com/viewtopic.php?p=99999#p99999

So it is interesting that it is having an effect in your case