Thrawn wrote:I did like Guest's idea, though, of automatically marking sites as untrusted if they're blocked in Hosts, so that they don't clutter the menu.
It seems that this would require either NS loading the 16,000-entry Hosts file at launch, or searching it for a match whenever a not-untrusted script appears in the menu. Both seem extremely resource-intensive. Also a waste for the vast majority of users who have the default single-entry Hosts file.
Also, my hosts file contains entries ranging from base 2LD to even 4LD sub.sub.domains.com. Often, there are multiple subdomains of a single domain.
Probably accumulated over years of contributions, but in any case, how would NS handle this, given that users may choose to show, block, or allow, base 2LD, full domain, full address?
I've taken a great deal of time to compile a list of 100+ of the most-frequently-seen offenders in the sticky derided by OP, SOME SITES YOU MIGHT NOT WANT TO ALLOW.
Marking those as Untrusted shrinks menus considerably.
Actually looks like it might be time to update that, as the source, http://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/thirdparties/, seems to have added a few more. I'll try to find time to do that, or if you have the time and are willing, please feel free.
98% of the sites in my Hosts are unlikely to be encountered by me (foreign sites, malware sites, etc.) or are dupes of a base 2LD, which in some cases is already blacklisted.
IMHO, this RFE is unnecessary, has an unfavorable workload/reward benefit, and a very unfavorable resource cost/benefit ratio.