Hi all,

I've read a few topics on non-free JS on the web, as well as a page from
the FSF
(https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/take-action-for-free-javascript),
so I thought I'd start a topic for the harmful effects of non-free
JavaScript. The main problem at the moment is that many users (e.g.
Slashdot users) aren't convinced of the harmful effects of non-free JS.
I've listed a few of them below, and hopefully others here can add and
contribute to the list. :-)



 Tracking

JavaScript can be used to enable some tracking mechanisms, like plugin
and browser feature detection to determine browser uniqueness. Google
and Facebook use non-free JS to do URL switching on some of their
webpages, so that the JS onclick event sends the user to one of their
redirector/tracker URL before going to the real URL (see
http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/The-trick-behind-camouflaged-links-1828927.html).

Facebook has a "hovercard" feature which uses non-free JS to send an
AJAX notification to Facebook every time a user hovers over someone
else's profile picture. They also have a read receipt feature which
tells Facebook and other users when you have read a private message on
Facebook, based on whether your browser has scrolled to a certain place
in the conversation.

It's possible for a malicious non-free JavaScript to do keylogging (see
http://arstechnica.com/security/2012/12/how-script-kiddies-can-hijack-your-browser-to-steal-your-password/).



 Freedom to control your computer (and free culture)

Some websites like YouTube require the use of non-free JavaScript for
accessing videos by default. Many lyrics websites use non-free
JavaScript to stop users from making a private copy of the lyrics of a
song onto their computer. This tramples the right to fair use (or fair
dealing, depending on your country) and opposes the principles of free
culture.



 Advertising and annoying/intrusive JavaScripts

Some websites use non-free JavaScript to display intrusive ads on user's
computers when they are browsing the web. Some annoying websites use JS
to break the normal back button behaviour, sometimes by displaying a
message box asking if the user really wants to leave the page. Comcast
uses non-free JavaScript to display copyright alerts to users suspected
of file sharing (see
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/02/heres-what-an-actual-six-strikes-copyright-alert-looks-like/).
At least a few of the non-free JavaScript notifications in this news
story prevent users from using webpages until they sign in to confirm
they read the notification (or use HTTPS, to prevent the script from
being injected in the first place).



 Accessibility

It would be great if any users with disabilities could comment on
whether non-free JavaScript can prevent them from reading a webpage, and
whether it is possible to write free JavaScripts which have equivalent
functionality can be accessible.



Does anyone have any comments, additions, criticisms, further discussion?

-- 
Andrew Roffey
OpenPGP fingerprint: F9E6 E6C4 0080 85F4 0E30 B0D9 7F7B DC7F 9657 B073

Reply via email to