Chris has personally written over 2,000 articles that have been read more than one billion times-and that's just here at How-To Geek. But do you?Ĭhris Hoffman is the former Editor-in-Chief of How-To Geek. You could use a text-mode browser like w3m in the terminal instead of using a graphical browser. You could disable Flash entirely and never watch videos online. You have the ability to control what it does-you could even disable all images entirely and browse the web in text format, if you want. The same is true for JavaScript-leaving it enabled is a very small risk for a very big benefit. The small risk of using a web browser instead of a text editor is worth the huge improvement in usability a browser offers. To protect against such attacks, we could stop using browsers entirely, downloading web page HTML files and reading them by hand in a text editor. Meanwhile, there have been other cases where browsers themselves were exploited and disabling JavaScript didn’t help. There have certainly been a few cases where disabling JavaScript could have blocked a new security vulnerability from being exploited, but those have been rare and fixed quickly. But if your computer is so old that it can't handle modern websites, it may be time to upgrade it-as the web improves, it needs more resources to do what it does, just like any other program on your computer. If you run something super basic, it'll take up fewer resources. Lastly, disabling JavaScript will take up less CPU and RAM on your computer, which is to be expected. We don’t encourage blocking ads, but if you must, there are better ways to do so than disabling JavaScript altogether. Most websites use JavaScript-it’s what makes the web we have today possible.ĭisabling JavaScript also prevents some types of ads from loading. However, this is extremely uncommon and the rare security holes in JavaScript engines have been patched very quickly. There have been a few browser vulnerabilities that were exploited via JavaScript. Many of these people do so because of a perceived security benefit. There is a small but vocal subset of users that disable JavaScript. Var tgtTags = document.getElementsByTagName('noscript') Īlert("Num of noscript tags: " + tgtTags.length) Īlert("Num of noscript tags: " + tgtTags.Why Do People Want to Disable JavaScript? Window.addEventListener('load', onDocLoaded, false) (1) to fire on a button press, so you can see the effect in the DOM viewer of your browser's JS tools. Dunno, probably mostly irrelevant here anyway. either querySelector/querySelectorAll may have been the odd one out - returning an array that doesn't change as the document does. I forget the specifics, but I read about it the other day. The NodeList returned by getElementsByTagName is live and as such, changes size to reflect operations on the collection of elements it represents - this is why there's only one call needed to getElementsByTagName. Next, you don't need to use an id - you can grab it with any number of methods. I do this by waiting until all elements, images and scripts have been loaded. It wouldn't make any sense including jQuery just for this tiny script.)įirstly, you need to ensure that the tag exists when the javascript is called. But I plan on using the script on sites that do not use it. (I want to note that this site in fact uses jQuery. I use this to asynchronously load some stylsheets. The noscript tag is located inside the tag. I need to remove it because the code working with the element might be executed several times. Since I am accessing the element over an specific ID and using it's content a working solution might be changing the ID or emptying the content. Noscript.innerHTML = "" // doesn't do anything Noscript.outerHTML = "" // doesn't do anything (noscript) // noscript.parentNode is null I tried these: // The noscript tag has a id. I am trying to remove a tag with JavaScript.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |