Well, I've dug around a bit more and found out why things aren't 
working... now I just want to know how to work around this. I'm thinking 
of .NET's concept of being able to validate and elevate a caller's 
privileges -- a trusted agent, as it were. I guess userscripts aren't 
trusted /that/ much? Maybe that's sensible, really.

cc wrote:
> Still has the problem with GM_functions being disallowed (is 
> this a deliberate security choice?)
Digging into the GM source code, it sure looks like it was a deliberate 
choice (which I'd rather like to hear the reasoning behind; I can't 
myself quite figure it out). It's possible that it was originally 
designed to allow this kind of thing but Firefox's stack-walk code 
changed under GM_apiLeakCheck; I very much doubt this, though, as it'd 
take quite a bit of changes to make this much of a difference. (Right 
now, the stack starts in a javascript: URI for the location hack, which 
makes perfect sense; therefore, because the root is untrusted, the whole 
tree is untrusted.)

So I guess I'll have to fall back to a polling design.... On the upside, 
if I get some good code working, maybe I can work it into a generalized 
library for this kind of thing. Before I do that, though, anyone know of 
a library that already exists for that? ;-)


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"greasemonkey-users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/greasemonkey-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to