Has anyone tried the "new" RequestPolicy 1.0 extension for Firefox? I don't believe it's available directly from Mozilla, but it is on the developer's own site.
Yes, and I reverted back to 0.5.27 [now 0.5.28] shortly after. There has been some discussion of version 1.0 in this thread.
I am trying v1.0.0b3. When using the new default-allow mode, the web is IMHO much more usable. This bug still exists, but no requests are missing when you view the Request Log. RequestPolicy 0.5.28 has the same bug, by the way.
This probably isn't really a bug. See https://github.com/RequestPolicy/requestpolicy/issues/403 for an explanation.
From https://www.requestpolicy.com/1.0.html: RequestPolicy 1.0 also lets you make multiple rule changes at a time. From https://www.requestpolicy.com/channels.html (my bolding): ---------- Tip for making blocking the default for a given website when using "default allow" mode: manually add a rule that blocks everything from that domain. For example, to lock down http://www.softpedia.com/, manually add a Block rule with Origin=*.softpedia.com and Destination=(blank).
If you want to use your existing 0.x rules with 1.x, and also wish to use the new "default allow" mode, I believe that following the tip from the last post could be of great help.
I found the older request policy to be tricky... but that 1.0b version made it the internet more easy and workable.... to the point it was then a useable addon! Ill give 1.0 a shot...
...which is why I don't understand why 1.0 isn't made the official release. There hasn't been a new 1.0 beta issued since August 2012.
I think the developer stopped developing RequestPolicy. Last release in the pre version 1 period just removes the Survey.
installed 1.0 and it just appeared as 1.0.0b3 anyhow which is what was using... works fine and seems non intrusive allowing me to use the internet as before so can't go wrong with it.
I agree . With 1.x in default-allow mode, you can control which sites you wish to spend time configuring. What I'm not sure about is whether using RequestPolicy 1.x in default-allow mode is a good use of my time, given that blacklist scanners like Ghostery already have an extensive list of trackers (nearly 1800). IMHO a blacklist scanner should be used in conjunction with RequestPolicy, because RequestPolicy is "all or nothing" for a given domain, whereas blacklist scanners can do partial blocking.
If anyone can figure out how to make the tip from post #5 work with sites like http://www.nbcnews.com/, please tell. I already added another rule for allowing *.nbcnews.com to *.nbcnews.com .
Here's the method I'm using with default-allow: 1. If a given destination is one or more of the following: a) blocked by Ghostery b) commonly seen as a destination c) a "big name" website (such as google.com, googleapis.com, etc.) then I block it generically (i.e. Origin=(blank)). 2. If a generic block rule from step 1 is causing a problem for a given website, add specific allow rule(s) from the website's domain to the necessary domain(s). 3. If there are too many specific rules from step #2 for a given destination domain, then the generic block rule from step #1 is removed. 4. For sites where protection should be the highest, the tip from post #5 can be used. I've had trouble on the few sites I've tried this on so far though.
So has version 1 reduce overlapping with NoScript in features? I remember using RP with NS sometime ago and it overlapped quite a bit in features. I contacted the developer and he said he was aware and would release a new version with less or no overlapping. I was waiting but no major version was released. Now that it's released I would wanna try it again.
It's more of a complement to NoScript than a competitor. See FAQ. The latest v1.0 beta seems stable. I'd suggest using it if you want the new features.
I know it's more of a complement to NoScript. Still it would overlap in features and actions when used with NoScript which would make it rather redundant. I had pin-pointed them to the Developer through email. He said the overlapping would be reduced in version 1. And Googling had shown that many users were also aware of the overlapping. Hence I asked. Do you find the new version overlapping with NS in any way?
I don't think this addon is being developed anymore unfortunately, there has not been an update in a few years. It sucks because it had a lot of potential. There's way too many bugs in the beta and stable version, more so the beta version. Hopefully the developer can continue working on it one day.
There's been no change in overlap amount between 0.5x and 1.0x, IMHO. But then again, I didn't perceive much overlap between 0.5x and NoScript either. I wouldn't be using both if one was a superset of the other.
Is this project dead? What's the worst bug you've experienced with v1.0.0b3? And the most commonly experienced bug?
The most major bug I have found is that sometimes the menu duplicates items and you see websites listed twice. This is a pretty annoying bug for me as well in 1.xx https://github.com/RequestPolicy/requestpolicy/issues/386 but it works fine in 0.5.28 There are tons of other bugs Ive come across that I can't possibly list them all. I think there needs to be a ton of work to be done still on 1.xx, but I have doubts that will happen anymore. I saw that before but if you notice the only thing he really changed was he removed one piece of code. He literally hasn't done any 'real' changes since July 2012. If you call that activity i'm not sure what to tell you.
There's a list of issues at https://github.com/RequestPolicy/requestpolicy/issues. The only one that maybe affects me so far is https://github.com/RequestPolicy/requestpolicy/issues/345.
