<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Cookie Revealer: One Reason Greasemonkey Should Allow Its Scripts Access to Cookies</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jake.kasprzak.ca/2008/05/09/cookie-revealer-one-reason-greasemonkey-should-allow-its-scripts-access-to-cookies/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jake.kasprzak.ca/2008/05/09/cookie-revealer-one-reason-greasemonkey-should-allow-its-scripts-access-to-cookies/</link>
	<description>Software > Open Source Development > Mozilla > Firefox > Greasemonkey > Scripting/Coding</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 02:33:15 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: jkasprzak</title>
		<link>http://jake.kasprzak.ca/2008/05/09/cookie-revealer-one-reason-greasemonkey-should-allow-its-scripts-access-to-cookies/comment-page-1/#comment-5762</link>
		<dc:creator>jkasprzak</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 03:18:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jake.kasprzak.ca/?p=53#comment-5762</guid>
		<description>Hello, and thank you for complimenting me on what I have written. I would also like to thank you for commenting on this topic. You have made interesting points, and I would like to comment on them.

I understand the importance of taking measures to prevent Greasemonkey scripts from performing anything malicious with data stored in cookies. However, I believe that malicious cookie-related activity on the part of Greasemonkey scripts can be prevented without the need for Greasemonkey to deny its scripts access to cookies. It should also be noted that some users may not be able to tell which scripts perform malicious activity with cookies. A number of users would not know which scripts should be granted or denied access to cookies. Therefore, features in which users are asked to select security preferences might not be effective. Still, there may not be any easy solutions to this issue, and I consider your idea worth considering.

Thanks again,

J.K.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello, and thank you for complimenting me on what I have written. I would also like to thank you for commenting on this topic. You have made interesting points, and I would like to comment on them.</p>
<p>I understand the importance of taking measures to prevent Greasemonkey scripts from performing anything malicious with data stored in cookies. However, I believe that malicious cookie-related activity on the part of Greasemonkey scripts can be prevented without the need for Greasemonkey to deny its scripts access to cookies. It should also be noted that some users may not be able to tell which scripts perform malicious activity with cookies. A number of users would not know which scripts should be granted or denied access to cookies. Therefore, features in which users are asked to select security preferences might not be effective. Still, there may not be any easy solutions to this issue, and I consider your idea worth considering.</p>
<p>Thanks again,</p>
<p>J.K.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jerone</title>
		<link>http://jake.kasprzak.ca/2008/05/09/cookie-revealer-one-reason-greasemonkey-should-allow-its-scripts-access-to-cookies/comment-page-1/#comment-5737</link>
		<dc:creator>Jerone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 May 2008 15:04:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jake.kasprzak.ca/?p=53#comment-5737</guid>
		<description>I have to say, great article.

It&#039;s an issue for GreaseMonkey users that userscripts can contain code for retrieving some persons cookie data.
My suggestion about this problem is that the maker of GreaseMonkey should disable all access to cookies. Aldo I really don&#039;t like this, this is the best and secure way. 
BUT, there should be an option made that allows the users self to choose to give a particular script access to cookies. This can be nicely done in the same way as includes and excludes for every script apart is done.
This way all scripts are prevented from access to cookies and only trusted scripts are allowed.

Please check my scripts for a nice set off userscripts framework: http://userscripts.org/users/31497/scripts

gr J</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to say, great article.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s an issue for GreaseMonkey users that userscripts can contain code for retrieving some persons cookie data.<br />
My suggestion about this problem is that the maker of GreaseMonkey should disable all access to cookies. Aldo I really don&#8217;t like this, this is the best and secure way.<br />
BUT, there should be an option made that allows the users self to choose to give a particular script access to cookies. This can be nicely done in the same way as includes and excludes for every script apart is done.<br />
This way all scripts are prevented from access to cookies and only trusted scripts are allowed.</p>
<p>Please check my scripts for a nice set off userscripts framework: <a href="http://userscripts.org/users/31497/scripts" rel="nofollow">http://userscripts.org/users/31497/scripts</a></p>
<p>gr J</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
