My Browser Builds (Part 4)

[roytam1]

13 hours ago, DanR20 said:

Reposting this in case anyone else reproduces it, seems to be happening with noscript 5.1.9 enabled:

Problem signature:
  Problem Event Name:    APPCRASH
  Application Name:    firefox.exe
  Application Version:    4.0.5.8774
  Application Timestamp:    65a09bff
  Fault Module Name:    xul.dll
  Fault Module Version:    4.0.5.8774
  Fault Module Timestamp:    65a09c90
  Exception Code:    80000003
  Exception Offset:    003037a5
  OS Version:    6.1.7601.2.1.0.256.48
  Locale ID:    1033
  Additional Information 1:    0a9e
  Additional Information 2:    0a9e372d3b4ad19135b953a78882e789
  Additional Information 3:    0a9e
  Additional Information 4:    0a9e372d3b4ad19135b953a78882e789

 

3 hours ago, modnar said:

I too am encountering instability with the latest Serpent 52.9 - I do have noscript installed, but it's not configured to "forbid scripts globally".

Register.com crashes the browser, even with noscript disabled. Also majorgeeks.com makes it crash. For this week I have reverted to v52.9.0 (2024-01-05) (32-bit).

 

you may redownload today's build and test again

[Slavich]

Hello.

The video does not work on one of the sites in the New Moon browser. Issues errors: https://ibb.co/R6s9spk

 

Edited January 13 by Slavich

[mina7601]

11 minutes ago, Slavich said:

Hello.

The video does not work on one of the sites in the New Moon browser. Issues errors: https://ibb.co/R6s9spk

 

More details, please.

[DanR20]

1 hour ago, roytam1 said:

you may redownload today's build and test again

Thanks Roy, that seems to have fixed both versions for me.

[UCyborg]

15 hours ago, VistaLover said:

but I do acknowledge NoScript as having an avid userbase among MSFN members ...

I'm not among them anymore. TBH I only used it back then because I didn't know either uBlock and NoScript well enough and thought I "need" both. Figured I don't care for any NoScript's specialties and uBlock has the way of saying block/allow scripts from that domain if I'm on this domain, which is good enough for me.

And yeah, as they've been saying for a long time, NoScript is convoluted ugly extension under the hood. I don't need to bog the browser with subpar JavaScript performance further with such extension.

Edited January 13 by UCyborg

[dmiranda]

2 hours ago, UCyborg said:

I don't need to bog the browser with subpar JavaScript performance further with such extension.

However, NS gets stuff no other addon gets. For example, dropbox has a cross connectino to google that only NS catches up. IA related stuff, I reckon. EVery now and then (once every tree months or so, to say something) it does so with other sites too. Worth it for the minimal footprint (as you do, I don;t use it globally, just for cross stuff and ABE.

[modnar]

5 hours ago, roytam1 said:

you may redownload today's build and test again

Thank you so much!

Serpent 52.9 now works normally.

[VistaLover]

On 11/22/2023 at 4:17 AM, mina7601 said:

Has anyone noticed recently that the 2 buttons next to the files (or folders) inside an archive don't show any text in Dropbox in Serpent 52? The sign up button also doesn't show any text. Here's an example link to test.

Due to dropbox's (semi-)popularity, this issue has to be acknowledged and troubleshot, hopefully mitigated... ALL UXP-based browsers (and their current sibling , St55) suffer from this annoyance; here's latest NM28 with the bug:

The Error Console only prints cryptic messages:

Timestamp: 14/01/2024 01:28:02
Error: uncaught exception: ApiError

Timestamp: 14/01/2024 01:28:03
Error: [Exception... "Component returned failure code: 0x80004002 (NS_NOINTERFACE) [nsIWebProgress.DOMWindow]"  nsresult: "0x80004002 (NS_NOINTERFACE)"  location: "JS frame :: chrome://browser/content/browser.js :: onStateChange :: line 11154"  data: no]

Unlike previous DB breakages, this doesn't seem to be fixable by a SSUAO ...

FxESR 52.9.1, at its default UA, simply loads a blank page now on the given DB link  ; what's interesting, though, is that such an old Chromium version as 69.0 (actually, 360EEv11) is able to display the text inside those buttons properly: 

@mina7601, are you able to reproduce in the official clients, i.e. Basilisk 52.9.2023.12.09 and/or PM 32.5.2 ? If affirmative, perhaps @basilisk-dev or some member of the MCP team (I'm sure some of them, God bless their kind hearts, do occasionally visit here ) should investigate; else, perhaps @roytam1 can have a go at it... FWIW, after seeing "which button is which" in Ch69, I can now use DB in UXP, but... what the heck? ...

[Mathwiz]

23 hours ago, VistaLover said:

I've never used NoScript in my entire browsing life...; especially when it comes to UXP-based browsers, where, from the very beginning, "upstream" declared they don't support its usage with "their" browsers.

I don't use NoScript either, so I'm no help with @DanR20's issue - but to be fair, we aren't using "their" browsers, so upstream wouldn't support any of us whether NoScript is in use or not! Thus I wouldn't let "upstream" dictate my choice of extensions.

12 hours ago, AstroSkipper said:

I fear it is not really a problem of the browser but the extension NoScript which is unmaintained and lacking of updates for many years.

Maybe - but I don't think even an old, unmaintained extension should be able to crash the browser! Looks like @roytam1 may have found a solution though.

[mina7601]

1 hour ago, VistaLover said:

Due to dropbox's (semi-)popularity, this issue has to be acknowledged and troubleshot, hopefully mitigated... ALL UXP-based browsers (and their current sibling , St55) suffer from this annoyance; here's latest NM28 with the bug:

The Error Console only prints cryptic messages:

Timestamp: 14/01/2024 01:28:02
Error: uncaught exception: ApiError

Timestamp: 14/01/2024 01:28:03
Error: [Exception... "Component returned failure code: 0x80004002 (NS_NOINTERFACE) [nsIWebProgress.DOMWindow]"  nsresult: "0x80004002 (NS_NOINTERFACE)"  location: "JS frame :: chrome://browser/content/browser.js :: onStateChange :: line 11154"  data: no]

Unlike previous DB breakages, this doesn't seem to be fixable by a SSUAO ...

FxESR 52.9.1, at its default UA, simply loads a blank page now on the given DB link  ; what's interesting, though, is that such an old Chromium version as 69.0 (actually, 360EEv11) is able to display the text inside those buttons properly: 

@mina7601, are you able to reproduce in the official clients, i.e. Basilisk 52.9.2023.12.09 and/or PM 32.5.2 ? If affirmative, perhaps @basilisk-dev or some member of the MCP team (I'm sure some of them, God bless their kind hearts, do occasionally visit here ) should investigate; else, perhaps @roytam1 can have a go at it... FWIW, after seeing "which button is which" in Ch69, I can now use DB in UXP, but... what the heck? ...

Thank you very much, kind sir!! Finally, I am glad to have another kind man (along with @Mathwiz) like you confirming my report. Now, to answer your question: yes, I am able to reproduce this issue, even in the official cllients you mentioned, Basilisk 52.9.2023.12.09 and PM 32.5.2, at least under Windows 7 SP1 64-bit.

Yes, I also even discovered that this issue can't be fixed by changing the SSUAO, which is indeed very strange.

Anyway, thank you very much for your time and reply, kind sir! Much appreciated!

[Mathwiz]

3 minutes ago, mina7601 said:

I also even discovered that this issue can't be fixed by changing the SSUAO, which is indeed very strange.

I always think it's strange when an issue can be fixed with an SSUAO! But I see it all too often.

[AstroSkipper]

8 minutes ago, Mathwiz said:

12 hours ago, AstroSkipper said:

I fear it is not really a problem of the browser but the extension NoScript which is unmaintained and lacking of updates for many years.

Maybe - but I don't think even an old, unmaintained extension should be able to crash the browser! Looks like @roytam1 may have found a solution though.

But in the case of NoScript it is. At that time I had crashes and problems with NoScript from time to time. And uBlock Origin or ηMatrix never managed that.

[Mathwiz]

Yes, and it happened again to @DanR20! What I'm saying, though, is that if any extension crashes the browser, that has to be the browser's fault! Unlike Flash and other plug-ins, extensions don't have their own machine code. (Well, a tiny few do, but those "helpers" have to be downloaded and installed separately from the extension itself, so at least you're aware of them.) Extensions are just CSS, JavaScript, HTML, etc., and it's the browser's job to read and interpret those things, and handle any errors therein.

Of course, as a practical matter, if an extension is crashing your browser, the best course of action may well be to remove and replace the extension, rather than waiting for the browser developer to fix the crash. After all, even if the crash is fixed, the extension still may not work properly. We're lucky (and a bit spoiled) to have @roytam1 able to deal with issues like this so quickly.

Edited January 14 by Mathwiz

[UCyborg]

8 hours ago, Mathwiz said:

Unlike Flash and other plug-ins, extensions don't have their own machine code. (Well, a tiny few do, but those "helpers" have to be downloaded and installed separately from the extension itself, so at least you're aware of them.)

Not necessarily, they can load their own DLLs. They're probably rare, but check this for instance: https://local.comtrade.com/si/dejavnosti/financni_sektor/bancnistvo/PrevzemKomponent/Requirements.html

There's a link to XPI below under Mozilla Firefox. In the old times, when we could still access online banks without smartphone apps or Windows 10+ UWP apps, there was this extension. If you open it, you will see it comes with a x86 and x64 DLL. Look at the requirements, Pentium III and 64 MB of RAM.

Anyway, they still have the test page linked (first result if you CTRL + F > "test"), if you open it and click "Podpiši" (Sign), the certificate selection dialog that will popup is made by the DLL. So theoretically, you could do all sort of crazy things from such extension.

Maybe I was overreacting when saying NoScript is ugly, but it is notorious extension and they wouldn't recommend specifically against it just out of the blue. That said, I didn't actually experience serious problems when I still used it myself, but I also didn't turn every knob it has.

Edited January 14 by UCyborg

[AstroSkipper]

8 hours ago, Mathwiz said:

Yes, and it happened again to @DanR20! What I'm saying, though, is that if any extension crashes the browser, that has to be the browser's fault! Unlike Flash and other plug-ins, extensions don't have their own machine code. (Well, a tiny few do, but those "helpers" have to be downloaded and installed separately from the extension itself, so at least you're aware of them.) Extensions are just CSS, JavaScript, HTML, etc., and it's the browser's job to read and interpret those things, and handle any errors therein.

Of course, as a practical matter, if an extension is crashing your browser, the best course of action may well be to remove and replace the extension, rather than waiting for the browser developer to fix the crash. After all, even if the crash is fixed, the extension still may not work properly. We're lucky (and a bit spoiled) to have @roytam1 able to deal with issues like this so quickly.

Basically, I agree with you. As far as NoScript is concerned, I have extensive experience with this extension. I used it for many years in Firefox and later in Pale Moon. Unfortunately, there were always problems that only the developer could solve with an update. However, since there have been no updates for many years, I would do the devil to install it again. I've been using the combination of uBlock Origin and uMatrix or ηMatrix for many years, which works excellently and doesn't cause any of the problems that NoScript used to.