207763 - [RFE] Safe Browsing Button.

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(SeaMonkey :: UI Design, enhancement)

Description

[Andrew]

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030529 WebWasher 3.3
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030529 WebWasher 3.3

My idea is to have a "Safe-Browsing" button on the Navigation or Status bar,
that, when clicked, disables all things that could harm you (including
Javascripts and Cookies, Java, and generally everything exept static html). This
would be a great feature for when you are going to some site you've never been
to before, or doing something like clicking on a link in a spam messege, to see
if it is legitimate. You could also possibly integrate it with a service like
JAP's (http://anon.inf.tu-dresden.de/index_en.html) for total anonymity. And, of
course, when clicked again the "Safe-Browsing" mode would be switched off, and
everything would be back to the way it was set before.

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.

Comment 1

[Boris Zbarsky [:bzbarsky]]

Sounds like an excellent idea for an extension....

Comment 2

[Shark Daddy (Jonathan L.)]

I Like. Ideally it could be bottom-right beside the security prefs on the Status
Bar and click on/off. There may not even be a need for a seperate prefs section
or a dialogue for something like this. 

Comment 3

[Mitchell Stoltz (not reading bugmail)]

I'm in favor of this idea, although I won't have time to implement it anytime
soon. Anyone who's interested, please go ahead and work in this with my thanks.
This pay be a dupe; I seem to remember another "paranoid mode" bug but can't
find it now.

Comment 4

[Robert Kaiser]

MASS-CHANGE:
This bug report is registered in the SeaMonkey product, but has been without a comment since the inception of the SeaMonkey project. This means that it was logged against the old Mozilla suite and we cannot determine that it's still valid for the current SeaMonkey suite. Because of this, we are setting it to an UNCONFIRMED state.

If you can confirm that this report still applies to current SeaMonkey 2.x nightly builds, please set it back to the NEW state along with a comment on how you reproduced it on what Build ID, or if it's an enhancement request, why it's still worth implementing and in what way.
If you can confirm that the report doesn't apply to current SeaMonkey 2.x nightly builds, please set it to the appropriate RESOLVED state (WORKSFORME, INVALID, WONTFIX, or similar).
If no action happens within the next few months, we move this bug report to an EXPIRED state.

Query tag for this change: mass-UNCONFIRM-20090614

Comment 5

[Tony Mechelynck [:tonymec]]

moving to UI design (but maybe another component would be better?) -- hasn't Firefox implemented something like this recently?

Comment 6

[[:Aleksej]]

See also the Torbutton extension (currently Firefox-only):
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2275

Comment 7

[Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie)]

Adding 4 dependent bugs, as a minimal "triage".

Comment 8

[Philip Chee]

Serge, can you explain why you added a dependency on Bug 546356?

Comment 9

[Robert Kaiser]

I don't see this as coming as a built-in feature to SeaMonkey, this is something that should be done as an add-on if possible.

Also, almost all dependencies are not actually for what is being requested here and the request itself is WONTFIX anyhow, so removing them (sorry for the bugmail).

Comment 10

[Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie)]

(In reply to comment #4)
> This bug report is registered in the SeaMonkey product

Ftr, this is one of the requests that used to apply to both FF and SM (and maybe TB).


(In reply to comment #6)
> See also the Torbutton extension (currently Firefox-only):
> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2275

https://www.torproject.org/about/overview.html.en
"Tor is a network of virtual tunnels that allows people and groups to improve their privacy and security on the Internet."

Ftr, that is an interesting (network level) feature but not this bug (application level) feature.


(In reply to comment #9)
> almost all dependencies are not actually for what is being requested here

Sorry, I misunderstood different "feature" requests :-(