HTTP Switchboard for Chrome/Chromium:

No, they are not redundant although they overlap to some extent. HTTPSB blocks all 3rd party requests by default (and all hostnames in the huge blocklists anyhow even if you choose the allow-all/block-exceptionally approach). On the other hand, Adblock can block things which can't be blocked by HTTPSB because it modifies the DOM which HTTPSB doesn't. See also gorhill's remarks here and here.

 

Thanks for the info tlu. I'll play around with both and see how smoothly things run.

 

i think i'll blacklist the plugins and a few others as well as well and see how it goes.
----
edit:

so in Allow All mode i have blacklisted globally Cookie, Plugin, Frame and Other.
i will only whitelist any of those if they cause too much problems.

 

I see other hosts besides google and some hosts from my extensions in the behind the scene request section:



I have strict blocking on but other is allow all. I'm going to start filtering these behind the scene requests.
On another note, I hate Chromium's new aqua changes, the scrolling is sluggish as hell.

 

They are not the same kind of extensions, so although they partially overlap, their goals are different.

The same way Adblock Plus doesn't replace NoScript+Request Policy on Firefox (and vice versa), Adblock Plus doesn't replace HTTPSB on Chromium (and vice versa). Both extensions have different primary goals even though some (but not all) of their secondary side effects overlap.

I would say HTTPSB offers full control to the user through its main UI, the matrix. You can't get that kind of control (and especially detailed information of attempted remote connections) with ABP, but then not everybody cares or wants to deal with that kind of information, in which case Ghostery or ADP is probably a better choice for them.

 

I also block cookies, but for plug-ins I personally prefer to leave them graylisted and to use Chromium's "click to play" option.

 

Yes, something I have to investigate, but whatever ends up in there is because the browser reported the requests as being not bound to any particular tab. I would like to find out the exact circumstances in which this happens, so that I can report this problem (I consider this a bug) to the Chromium devs. It happens often with XHR.

 

right you are!
Click to Play already does a good job for that.

i tried blacklisting cookies but there are a few sites i use where it is needed for login.
so i whitelisted cookies for those sites but blacklisted globally after all.

Frame i will leave globally blacklisted.
Other is also blacklisted but i don't remember what the Other cell does.

 

The other is for audio and video, also you can't save a file unless other is allowed for that host your downloading from. I use History Eraser with HttpSB as it can remove plug-in data, etc.
Edit: I just noticed that in December I'll have been on this forum for 10 years! Wow..

 

i also use HTTP SB at work but with i allow very little.
i don't want to be the one responsible for infecting the computer. lol

anyway, the other day my boss tried to reach a website to get a contact email address but the antivirus software where going nuts.

i just opened my portable version of Chrome with HTTP SB and got the email addy from the site without breaking a sweat.

 

Grohill,
After updating to 0.8.0.1 from 0.7.9.2 (thru internal updater), chrome disabled the extension, stating it requires more permissions. refer the screenshot for the same.

can you confirm, if it indeed requires more permissions. So, i can re-enable the extension manually. perhaps you might add a note to change log for the same.

b/W Nice job! changes to 0.8x version are welcomed

Thanks, Harsha.

 

Yes, the "downloads" permission is required in order to be able to backup the data to a user selected file. I meant to disclose this in the changlog but forgot about it in the end.

 

A minor issue: I cannot see the entire flyout on my 1024x600 netbook for some sites. The scrollbar is there, but it still crops out some content.

 

There is an old bug in Chromium about this: https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=36080#.

 

gorhill, having imported the default recipe for google, when using Gmail, sometimes the page does not display because it says "js disabled". Actually sometimes just reloading fixes the issue.

 

Gmail is not enabled by the Google preset. I didn't actually create a preset for Gmail. I will try to for next revision. As a general rule, if I can distinguish between two services by their hostnames, even if they are of the same 1st-party entity, I rather have two separate preset recipes -- hence I didn't make Gmail as part of Google. But it always end up depending on the complexity of the presets. Last revision I just trashed the idea of distinguishing between all Google various services, as I was facing complicated preset writing issues.

Never mind my above ramblings. I found an old account I had with Gmail which I opened years ago but never really used, so I could test what rules are required in HTTPSB. I had assumed that Gmail was on "gmail.com", but now I see it is on "mail.google.com", so I will add the missing "frame mail.google.com" into the preset.

 

If you have used HTTPSB for a while, you understand that in the matrix, sets of domain/subdomains are subtly visually separated by a slightly larger vertical spacing. I was never completely satisfied with this, especially when collapsing all the rows.

Current design:


So I am trying to come up with a way to avoid the vertical spacing, and instead using a slight indent to emphasize subdomains.

New proposed design:


In both pictures above I show fully expanded/fully collapsed.

Which one do you prefer?

Keeping in mind that the subdomains have to be visually distinguishable from domain (because clicking on a domain cell affects all related graylisted subdomain cells).

 

I do just fine as is, but I've been using HTTP for a while now so it's easy to read. The second method i think would be easier for rookies, but perhaps make the indent move in further, showing more of the white area.

 

I like the above format because of the separation effect.

 

Guess I'll collapse the subdomains then, if nothing else can be done about it.

 

I like the concise proposed design, and believe that new users might benefit from tooltip text for the buttons on the matrix toolbar.

Anyway, just wanted to thank you for your hard work and expertise Raymond HTTP Switchboard has given me peace of mind and a sense of control when browsing the web. Much appreciated!

 

For me the ideal would be a combination of both. If I had to choose one, the old (present) matrix is more intuitive because you are searching for information in the centre of the matrix and the separation in the proposed one is far left.

 

I agree

 

if you are trying to save vertical space just use a thin line with a contrasting colour.

 

It's not for saving vertical space. It's that currently when the matrix is partially or wholly collapsed, the logic of the vertical spacing become confusing visually.

The vertical spacing is supposed to emphasize sections with different domain names (example.com vs example.net), which works well currently when the matrix is fully expanded, but become just plain ugly and confusing when collapsed, because the vertical spacing is not really needed anymore when a section is reduced to a single row.

Anyway, I agree with the comment saying there must be a visual more obvious than just an indent on the left, so for now no change until I figure a visual which would allow me to get rid of the vertical spacing.