Linked by Howard Fosdick on Sat 31st Dec 2011 07:57 UTC
Permalink for comment 501789
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 14:35 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/11/13 17:07 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/10/13 23:13 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/08/13 14:57 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/07/13 11:40 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/04/13 12:45 UTC
Linked by nfeske on 05/31/13 10:12 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/29/13 16:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2010-01-21
Well, I guess you can do that with JavaScript but it doesn't have any advantage over using an image.
They might use JavaScript to generate a long list of -tags to try different IP-addresses though.
Just sending a longer HTML-page is easy too ofcourse.
So the only thing you are protecting yourself against in this case is an attacker which expects JavaScript to be available and working.
You misunderstand. NoScript's name is unfortunate because it hasn't merely whitelisted Javascript for a very long time.
The ABE module hooks into Firefox's HTTP subsystem and is capable of inspecting and refusing any request not made completely independently by a plugin like Java or Flash.
By design, it does intercept exploits made using <img> tags, stylesheet <link>s and @imports, and all manner of other mechanisms attackers can imagine.
(Of course, it doesn't block exploits via Java or Flash-native HTTP, which is why I also use the securely-implemented FlashBlock-like functionality too)