[Greasemonkey] Locked out of Gmail

Jeremy Dunck jdunck at gmail.com
Mon Apr 25 11:41:19 EDT 2005

On 4/25/05, Matthew Weymar <matthew.weymar at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/25/05, Adrian Holovaty <greasemonkey at holovaty.com> wrote:
> > Brady Joslin wrote:
> > > This morning I got a message saying my Gmail account was locked due to
> > > a third party script interacting with their site.  Here is a
> > > screenshot of the message I got when logging in to my account:
> > >
> > > http://photos7.flickr.com/10856642_1720f0035e_o.jpg
> >
> > This is a bad, bad sign. Keep us posted on their response...

I've been using Persistent Searches since it came out, and have had no
trouble.  ... And I think that is a far more abusive script, in terms
of server load.

> (For example, couldn't you write a
> script that would display Google's sponsored links in such a way that
> Google wouldn't get paid for 'click throughs'?...)

Sure, but why would you want to? :)

> I guess they can still disable all scripts, can't
> they?... 

For now, yes.

> I wouldn't be surprised to see this happen if and when GM
> really starts to spread.

It's been happening.  GMail is just the first large site I know of to
have this position.  Of course, we're assuming the block is indeed
associated with Brady's use of the delete script.  I'm interested in
hearing their feedback.

> Question: Would it be possible for site owners to trust the use of
> certain, specified scripts? 

Yes, but we don't want GM to be at the mercy of site owners; that sort
of takes the point out of it.  It'd make a permission culture, and
we've seen how well that works for movies and such.

> I'm just trying to imagine a kind of compromise betw.
> site owners and users.

There's been a lot of discussion on this point.
See "Greasemonkey: an Historical Perspective" in the archives, for example:

I think the consensus was, let GM be a user's tool, and let site
owners disagree if they like.

Of course, this list is heavily skewed towards people who are
enthusiastic about GM, and screw all you ad pushers, ya hear?

(Matt, did you decide writing here wasn't useful?)

There will, of course, be an arms race, with sites wishing to protect
their business models (or servers, given the DDOS of
GM_xmlhttpRequest) will do things like block accounts or obfuscate
DOMs, assuming they're clueful enough to actually notice GM usage.

These companies will be noted as "uncool", and people will write
workaround scripts or google bomb.. err, "gmail sucks"?

But generally, I think user scripts are useful and good, and tilt the
web balance away from the publisher a bit, which I think makes the web
more useful to more people.

Anyone seen Book Burro yet?  I thought that was pretty neat (since
I've been meaning to do something like that since I first saw GM...):

More information about the Greasemonkey mailing list