Comments on: Surrogate Scripts vs Google Analytics http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/ Giorgio Maone's answers to the Web, the Universe, and Everything Sat, 31 Jul 2010 04:44:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.3 By: hackademix.net » Google Analytics Opt-Out Snake Oil http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-23034 hackademix.net » Google Analytics Opt-Out Snake Oil Wed, 26 May 2010 21:09:30 +0000 http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-23034 [...] in fact, almost one year and half ago, this very issue prompted the development of NoScript’s Script Surrogates feature, which prevents the breakage by “emulating” the blocked script with dummy [...] […] in fact, almost one year and half ago, this very issue prompted the development of NoScript’s Script Surrogates feature, which prevents the breakage by “emulating” the blocked script with dummy […]

]]> By: Nick http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-19603 Nick Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:33:51 +0000 http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-19603 Sorry for my slow response, but that seems to work perfectly. Thanks for the help and the fast reply! Sorry for my slow response, but that seems to work perfectly. Thanks for the help and the fast reply!

]]> By: Giorgio http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-19412 Giorgio Fri, 15 Jan 2010 17:38:08 +0000 http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-19412 @<a href="http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-19392" rel="nofollow">Nick</a>: This one works for me: <pre> document.write = function(s){ if (!/<meta/i.test(s)) document.__proto__.write.apply(this, arguments) }; </pre> @Nick:
This one works for me:

document.write = function(s){ if (!/<meta/i.test(s)) document.__proto__.write.apply(this, arguments) };
]]> By: Nick http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-19392 Nick Fri, 15 Jan 2010 03:02:18 +0000 http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-19392 Good grief, third try is the charm I hope: I have a specific issue I think NoScript surrogates can help with but I'm having a hard time getting it to work. If you have any ideas I'd love to hear them. There is a page which does a check to see if it has been opened in a new window. It does this in a page-level <script> element located in the <head> of the page. Inside this script element it does a check and then runs document.write('<META HTTP-EQUIV="refresh" CONTENT="0; URL=notallowed.html">'); I've gotten the page-level surrogate script to run, but haven't been able to figure out a good way to cancel this out. I've tried removing the element, but when the surrogate runs the script element doesn't seem to even exist in DOM yet. I've tried overriding the document.write function so it doesn't do anything, but that doesn't seem to carry over into the page scripts. Since the browser begins the redirect as soon as the <script> element is parsed, so the only way I can think to accomplish this is with NoScript's surrogates (since they happen early enough) but I'm wondering if maybe they happen *too* early? Any tips would be great! Good grief, third try is the charm I hope:

I have a specific issue I think NoScript surrogates can help with but I’m having a hard time getting it to work. If you have any ideas I’d love to hear them.

There is a page which does a check to see if it has been opened in a new window. It does this in a page-level <script> element located in the <head> of the page. Inside this script element it does a check and then runs

document.write(’<META HTTP-EQUIV="refresh" CONTENT="0; URL=notallowed.html">’);

I’ve gotten the page-level surrogate script to run, but haven’t been able to figure out a good way to cancel this out. I’ve tried removing the element, but when the surrogate runs the script element doesn’t seem to even exist in DOM yet. I’ve tried overriding the document.write function so it doesn’t do anything, but that doesn’t seem to carry over into the page scripts.

Since the browser begins the redirect as soon as the <script> element is parsed, so the only way I can think to accomplish this is with NoScript’s surrogates (since they happen early enough) but I’m wondering if maybe they happen *too* early?

Any tips would be great!

]]> By: hackademix.net » NoScript against Pop-unders http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-18913 hackademix.net » NoScript against Pop-unders Wed, 06 Jan 2010 21:36:05 +0000 http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-18913 [...] some time now NoScript has been providing a page-level script surrogate to kill imagefap.com’s pop-unders. Actually, since most recent NoScript versions execute [...] […] some time now NoScript has been providing a page-level script surrogate to kill imagefap.com’s pop-unders. Actually, since most recent NoScript versions execute […]

]]> By: Matt http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-17215 Matt Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:29:56 +0000 http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-17215 For people who find CS Lite under powered and want something that works more like No Script, you might try <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/4703" rel="nofollow">Cookie Monster</a>. I've found that Cookie Monster better handles the issues that caused trouble for me with CS Lite. YMMV. I vaguely recall fooling with the options to get it to work the way that I wanted (e.g. with second level domain names on). For people who find CS Lite under powered and want something that works more like No Script, you might try Cookie Monster. I’ve found that Cookie Monster better handles the issues that caused trouble for me with CS Lite. YMMV. I vaguely recall fooling with the options to get it to work the way that I wanted (e.g. with second level domain names on).

]]> By: Giorgio http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-16453 Giorgio Tue, 01 Dec 2009 23:13:00 +0000 http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-16453 @<a href="http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-16452" rel="nofollow">khopesh</a>: Likely. Just whitelist it in ABP. @khopesh:
Likely. Just whitelist it in ABP.

]]> By: khopesh http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-16452 khopesh Tue, 01 Dec 2009 22:06:59 +0000 http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-16452 It looks like NoScript (1.9.9.14) has this code by default, plus a little extra. However, it doesn't work for me. I presume that's because AdBlock Plus is nabbing it first? It looks like NoScript (1.9.9.14) has this code by default, plus a little extra. However, it doesn’t work for me. I presume that’s because AdBlock Plus is nabbing it first?

]]> By: jj http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-16147 jj Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:36:06 +0000 http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-16147 great tool! im always happy to read the changelogs^^ thx from your swiss fans great tool!
im always happy to read the changelogs^^

thx from your swiss fans

]]> By: JP http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-16143 JP Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:32:34 +0000 http://hackademix.net/2009/01/25/surrogate-scripts-vs-google-analytics/#comment-16143 In case you're looking for "new challenges", the following site goes into an endless update loop if I don't allow GA: http://traffic.511.org/traffic_map.asp I let them know what was causing the issue, but they don't seem to be inclined to fix it. thanks... In case you’re looking for "new challenges", the following site goes into an endless update loop if I don’t allow GA:

http://traffic.511.org/traffic_map.asp

I let them know what was causing the issue, but they don’t seem to be inclined to fix it.

thanks…

]]>