Everybody wants a GO TO URL block, but it is kinda dangerous (the “go to URL virus url” problem)

Here is some restrictions that would make it better

Only allow links on scratch.mit.edu domains (beta, normal, wiki, info, and resources)

if you type in another domain the block would turn red like an error

whenever a link block runs a box shows up

————————————————–
Confirm
————————————————–
|This project wants to go to the url |
|scratch.mit.edu |
|Title: Scratch | Home |
| |
|Are you sure? Yes No |
| |
| | | disable links in this project |
| | | always say yes for this session|
————————————————-

You can confirm if you want to go to the page.

If you check “disable links in this project” the URL blocks will be disabled for your current session in the project

if “always say yes for this session” is checked links will not ask you for confirm until you close the browser window

And, even limiting to Scratch websites, the block will still allow Clutter-like projects and more!

-iTweak0r

Wouldn't a confirmation box do the job?

bobbysq wrote:

Wouldn't a confirmation box do the job?

I think it would.

iTweak0r wrote:

Everybody wants a GO TO URL block, but it is kinda dangerous (the “go to URL virus url” problem)

Here is some restrictions that would make it better

Only allow links on scratch.mit.edu domains (beta, normal, wiki, info, and resources)

if you type in another domain the block would turn red like an error

whenever a link block runs a box shows up

————————————————–
Confirm
————————————————–
|This project wants to go to the url |
|scratch.mit.edu |
|Title: Scratch | Home |
| |
|Are you sure? Yes No |
| |
| | | disable links in this project |
| | | always say yes for this session|
————————————————-

You can confirm if you want to go to the page.

If you check “disable links in this project” the URL blocks will be disabled for your current session in the project

if “always say yes for this session” is checked links will not ask you for confirm until you close the browser window

And, even limiting to Scratch websites, the block will still allow Clutter-like projects and more!

-iTweak0r

I support.

This is a very reasonable solution.
It prevents virus sites, and the confirmation dialog also prevents crashing browsers by opening a page thousands of times.

I support.

I + su + ppo + rt = I support

I definitely support!

jvvg wrote:

and the confirmation dialog also prevents crashing browsers by opening a page thousands of times.

unless you press “always allow links from this project”.

Also the url of the site does not always give you a good impression of what the site is about. Anyone can create an inappropriate site with a cute name.

I support! If you could find a way to integrate this with some sort of reputation-based web page safety service like WOT, and display the rating in the confirmation box, that would be handy!

the problem is that a url that looks innocent (like www.rainbowdashlolfakelinkidkwhatiamdoing.com) can be bad stuff! like swearing! isn't that horrible for 4 year olds?!?

Oh yes, reputation based web pages are bad because for example, a group of people that swear go to that innocent looking link, and rate the website reputation good, cause it has a lot of good swears (o.o) Reputation rating are usually people's input.

Word check sometimes does not work, cause of dreaded images…

www.rainbowdashlolfakelinkidkwhatiamdoing.com can house viruses that some reputation based programs can't see or taste (again, innocent looking link, or maybe a link where typos (like google.com typos) link to giveaways and VIRUSES! LOTS OF THEM!)…

even the best antivirus can bring up a red flag if a sample of the virus is in the antivirus's database. so new viruses are no match for the mighty antivirus!!!

KrIsMa wrote:

the problem is that a url that looks innocent (like www.rainbowdashlolfakelinkidkwhatiamdoing.com) can be bad stuff! like swearing! isn't that horrible for 4 year olds?!?

Oh yes, reputation based web pages are bad because for example, a group of people that swear go to that innocent looking link, and rate the website reputation good, cause it has a lot of good swears (o.o) Reputation rating are usually people's input.

Word check sometimes does not work, cause of dreaded images…

www.rainbowdashlolfakelinkidkwhatiamdoing.com can house viruses that some reputation based programs can't see or taste (again, innocent looking link, or maybe a link where typos (like google.com typos) link to giveaways and VIRUSES! LOTS OF THEM!)…

even the best antivirus can bring up a red flag if a sample of the virus is in the antivirus's database. so new viruses are no match for the mighty antivirus!!!

But the trick here is that you can only link to Scratch sites.

jvvg wrote:

KrIsMa wrote:

the problem is that a url that looks innocent (like www.rainbowdashlolfakelinkidkwhatiamdoing.com) can be bad stuff! like swearing! isn't that horrible for 4 year olds?!?

Oh yes, reputation based web pages are bad because for example, a group of people that swear go to that innocent looking link, and rate the website reputation good, cause it has a lot of good swears (o.o) Reputation rating are usually people's input.

Word check sometimes does not work, cause of dreaded images…

www.rainbowdashlolfakelinkidkwhatiamdoing.com can house viruses that some reputation based programs can't see or taste (again, innocent looking link, or maybe a link where typos (like google.com typos) link to giveaways and VIRUSES! LOTS OF THEM!)…

even the best antivirus can bring up a red flag if a sample of the virus is in the antivirus's database. so new viruses are no match for the mighty antivirus!!!

But the trick here is that you can only link to Scratch sites.

Oh, I need to read more XD

Thanks!

Good idea! Then we could use clutter!

Edited since I didn't notice the only scratch.mit.edu part.

KrIsMa wrote:

the problem is that a url that looks innocent (like www.rainbowdashlolfakelinkidkwhatiamdoing.com) can be bad stuff! like swearing! isn't that horrible for 4 year olds?!?

Oh yes, reputation based web pages are bad because for example, a group of people that swear go to that innocent looking link, and rate the website reputation good, cause it has a lot of good swears (o.o) Reputation rating are usually people's input.

Word check sometimes does not work, cause of dreaded images…

www.rainbowdashlolfakelinkidkwhatiamdoing.com can house viruses that some reputation based programs can't see or taste (again, innocent looking link, or maybe a link where typos (like google.com typos) link to giveaways and VIRUSES! LOTS OF THEM!)…

even the best antivirus can bring up a red flag if a sample of the virus is in the antivirus's database. so new viruses are no match for the mighty antivirus!!!

I said Only allow links from scratch.mit.edu domains

KrIsMa wrote:

jvvg wrote:

KrIsMa wrote:

the problem is that a url that looks innocent (like www.rainbowdashlolfakelinkidkwhatiamdoing.com) can be bad stuff! like swearing! isn't that horrible for 4 year olds?!?

Oh yes, reputation based web pages are bad because for example, a group of people that swear go to that innocent looking link, and rate the website reputation good, cause it has a lot of good swears (o.o) Reputation rating are usually people's input.

Word check sometimes does not work, cause of dreaded images…

www.rainbowdashlolfakelinkidkwhatiamdoing.com can house viruses that some reputation based programs can't see or taste (again, innocent looking link, or maybe a link where typos (like google.com typos) link to giveaways and VIRUSES! LOTS OF THEM!)…

even the best antivirus can bring up a red flag if a sample of the virus is in the antivirus's database. so new viruses are no match for the mighty antivirus!!!

But the trick here is that you can only link to Scratch sites.

Oh, I need to read more XD

Thanks!

iTweak0r wrote:

KrIsMa wrote:

the problem is that a url that looks innocent (like www.rainbowdashlolfakelinkidkwhatiamdoing.com) can be bad stuff! like swearing! isn't that horrible for 4 year olds?!?

Oh yes, reputation based web pages are bad because for example, a group of people that swear go to that innocent looking link, and rate the website reputation good, cause it has a lot of good swears (o.o) Reputation rating are usually people's input.

Word check sometimes does not work, cause of dreaded images…

www.rainbowdashlolfakelinkidkwhatiamdoing.com can house viruses that some reputation based programs can't see or taste (again, innocent looking link, or maybe a link where typos (like google.com typos) link to giveaways and VIRUSES! LOTS OF THEM!)…

even the best antivirus can bring up a red flag if a sample of the virus is in the antivirus's database. so new viruses are no match for the mighty antivirus!!!

I said Only allow links from scratch.mit.edu domains

i know already, jvvg nicely told me that it is only scratch domains.

thanks jvvg! you are very helpful

Strongly support.

Hmmm, why not?

iTweak0r wrote:

Everybody wants a GO TO URL block, but it is kinda dangerous (the “go to URL virus url” problem)

Here is some restrictions that would make it better

Only allow links on scratch.mit.edu domains (beta, normal, wiki, info, and resources)

if you type in another domain the block would turn red like an error

whenever a link block runs a box shows up

————————————————–
Confirm
————————————————–
|This project wants to go to the url |
|scratch.mit.edu |
|Title: Scratch | Home |
| |
|Are you sure? Yes No |
| |
| | | disable links in this project |
| | | always say yes for this session|
————————————————-

You can confirm if you want to go to the page.

If you check “disable links in this project” the URL blocks will be disabled for your current session in the project

if “always say yes for this session” is checked links will not ask you for confirm until you close the browser window

And, even limiting to Scratch websites, the block will still allow Clutter-like projects and more!

-iTweak0r

Awesome idea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ; )

Maybe you could post links to outside the Scratch website, unless you're a New Scratcher. After all, you can post the same links in the project notes, so why not in the project itself?

Wow, this is perhaps the most balanced solution ever!