Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 21, 2021. It is now read-only.

behind-the-scene inheritance #883

Open
dezhavu opened this issue Dec 13, 2017 · 12 comments
Open

behind-the-scene inheritance #883

dezhavu opened this issue Dec 13, 2017 · 12 comments

Comments

@dezhavu
Copy link

dezhavu commented Dec 13, 2017

Is it possible to add an option for advanced users, so that behind-the-scene and other schemes (file-scheme, about-scheme, data-scheme etc) do NOT inherit from Global Scope (*), as for me I use Legacy uMatrix in unbranded build of FF 57 and it's very inconvenient to block those rules (or parse them thus increasing config file size for no reason)
A little option could be usefull in future.

Thanks for your work & time.

@dezhavu
Copy link
Author

dezhavu commented Dec 13, 2017

imagebam.com

imagebam.com

@gorhill
Copy link
Owner

gorhill commented Dec 14, 2017

More generally, you propose the ability to isolate a scope from the parent one.

@dezhavu
Copy link
Author

dezhavu commented Dec 14, 2017

As you could have noticed on the pictures attached, i use dynamic ruleset, so actually it's not a big deal to block those Global Scope domains for behind-the-scene, but the idea is that behind-the-scene should't inherit from Global Scope, IF there's a rule for that scheme:

For instance:

* * * block
* vimeo.com * allow
* vimeo.com frame allow
behind-the-scene * * block

Now vimeo.com doesn't care about behind-the-scene * * block, because it's allowed in Global Scope..
I saw numerous of samples like this in the logger, when requests from the webpage somehow appear in the behind-the-scene scheme, and if it inherits from global, omitting it's own scheme rules, thats no good for no good reason.

@dezhavu
Copy link
Author

dezhavu commented Dec 14, 2017

More generally, you propose the ability to isolate a scope from the parent one.

could be something like this if to look at it in more global, would be even more flexible, but keeping in mind of "no new feature request" didn't structure it like this, the idea is great though

@gorhill
Copy link
Owner

gorhill commented Dec 14, 2017

* * * block
behind-the-scene * * block

Using the all cell to decide whether a scope is isolated or not is an interesting idea -- I like it.

Currently the UI does not work for this though, as the all cell can toggle only between block and allow, so addressing this point would allow the proposal be implemented seamlessly in the core filtering code, the idea fits well with what is already in there.

@theWalkingDuck
Copy link

What about using matrix-off: behind-the-scene false instead of behind-the-scene * * block ?

@gorhill
Copy link
Owner

gorhill commented Dec 14, 2017

What about using matrix-off: behind-the-scene false instead of behind-the-scene * * block ?

He wants the ability to modify the way rules propagate on the z axis (from broader scopes to narrower ones), the matrix-off switch is to toggle on/off matrix filtering, I don't find this a good match for modifying z-propagation. The all cell however is a good choice, there currently is no such thing as scope * * inherit, this rule means nothing in uMatrix. So it is available for leverage -- the inherit action is already used in other cells to prevent looking up a rule from a broader scope, i.e. as a way to disable z-propagation -- something which he already uses, but he has to do it for every single allow rules added in the global scope, I can see the inconvenience.

@uBlock-user
Copy link
Contributor

uBlock-user commented Dec 14, 2017

What about using matrix-off: behind-the-scene false instead of behind-the-scene * * block ?

Removing the matrix-off rule itself would block all behind the scenes requests unless you whitelist a cell.

@dezhavu
Copy link
Author

dezhavu commented Dec 14, 2017

Removing the matrix-off rule itself would block all behind the scenes requests unless you whitelist a cell.

Yep, it takes some time to get the whole thing, could be a bit complicated at first.

There's another issue that came up when I tried updating from 1.1.17rc0 (that was post rc0, about 4 commits after it, as far as i remember). Legacy doesn't work in FF5602, neither in FF57. Webextension works in both.

Console on install:

TypeError: vAPI.messaging.send is not a function[Learn More]  popup.js:1462:9
	<anonymous> chrome://umatrix/content/js/popup.js:1462:9
	matrixSnapshotPoller< chrome://umatrix/content/js/popup.js:1441:6
	<anonymous> chrome://umatrix/content/js/popup.js:1358:29
	<anonymous> chrome://umatrix/content/js/popup.js:30:2

Dashboard available only by directly going to chrome://umatrix/content/dashboard.html
Logger available only by directly going to chrome://umatrix/content/logger-ui.html

Every option is clear inside, no checkboxes, no rules, no hosts files, even nothing in About (no version)
Console:

TypeError: vAPI.messaging.send is not a function[Learn More]  about.js:133:5
	<anonymous> chrome://umatrix/content/js/about.js:133:5
	<anonymous> chrome://umatrix/content/js/about.js:122:2

TypeError: vAPI.messaging.send is not a function[Learn More]  settings.js:154:1
	<anonymous> chrome://umatrix/content/js/settings.js:154:1
	<anonymous> chrome://umatrix/content/js/settings.js:28:2

TypeError: vAPI.messaging.addListener is not a function[Learn More]  hosts-files.js:39:1
	<anonymous> chrome://umatrix/content/js/hosts-files.js:39:1
	<anonymous> chrome://umatrix/content/js/hosts-files.js:28:2

TypeError: vAPI.messaging.send is not a function[Learn More]  cloud-ui.js:207:1
	<anonymous> chrome://umatrix/content/js/cloud-ui.js:207:1
	<anonymous> chrome://umatrix/content/js/cloud-ui.js:28:2

@dezhavu
Copy link
Author

dezhavu commented Dec 14, 2017

imagebam.com

btw latest uBlock 1.14.22 Legacy works in both

@gorhill
Copy link
Owner

gorhill commented Dec 14, 2017

uMatrix for Legacy Firefox is no longer maintained: see #824.

@dezhavu
Copy link
Author

dezhavu commented Dec 14, 2017

Yeah, well 1.1.17rc0 works at least.
Anyway, the subj remains in Logger as requests from webpage, so if you find time pls take a look at it, could be useful, as it happens when viewing saved pages too (file-scheme).

Thanks for your attention.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants