/tech/ - Technology★

JavaScript can certainly hook into copy&paste to a degree. I'm sure you've copied text from a website and pasted it only to see that the website added some "THIS QUOTE TAKEN FROM BLAH.COM CHECK IT OUT MY DUDES" text.

I believe the actual webdev reason for the plugin is that JavaScript can't distinguish a paste from separate input, and if google docs treated user input the same as 35MB of pasted CSV, it'd probably lag to shit with all of the fancy UX they want to normally do.

>I'm sure you've copied text from a website and pasted it only to see that the website added some "THIS QUOTE TAKEN FROM BLAH.COM CHECK IT OUT MY DUDES" text.

wrong

>>1010541

what part of it's wrong? my surety?

>>1010534 (OP)

Websites can't read from your clipboard. That would be fucktarded. But like >>1010540 said, when you CTRL+C something from a website it can be something completely different than some text you highlighted.

Modern javascript interpreters!

Almost everything in a modern web browser can be interacted with using javascript.

Like browser history as an example.

There is a very clear reason why good security on the web includes disabling all any any javascript that could run.

>Current year

>Not using FF + Noscript

>>>/pol/

>>1010534 (OP)

Half true, Javascript has several apis for accessing the clipboard (navigator.clipboard) however for some reason google has decided to be special and not use them.

>>1010559

Fuck off nigger

>>1010547

What about those "click to copy" buttons like on lastpass and code snippet sites?

>>1010559

>Current year

>Not using FF + Noscript

>Current year

>Not using TorBrowser with high security settings, run on Whonix Virtual Machine, run on ancient hardware (pre-ME, pre-UEFI), run on UPS battery, using parabolic antenna to access wifi from 50 miles

dom.clipboardevents true

>>1010534 (OP)

it does not matter if it is more secure or not. it can be bypassed with control + c, control + v.

>>1010961

Writing to the clipboard isn't the same as reading.